ANGLING UNITY, IS IT POSSIBLE ?

[Guest richard]

hi all

after reading and digesting all that has been said on this topic my thoughts for what their worth it is a bit like a discusion in a pub over a couple of beers lots get said and nothing gets done so we want a body to cover every thing angling in which every one must subscribe to [the federation of european rod anglers]being european we would have more clout over the anties as long as we do not start crying "were giveing away our soverenty" like over the euro.so we ither talk areselves arround in circles or do something about it if somthing on theses lines could be done it would enshure the future of angling for a long time to come so how do we start the ball roling? it would be nice to say it started at anglers net.

all best

richard

[Guest richard]

hi all

after reading and digesting all that has been said on this topic my thoughts for what their worth it is a bit like a discusion in a pub over a couple of beers lots get said and nothing gets done so we want a body to cover every thing angling in which every one must subscribe to [the federation of european rod anglers]being european we would have more clout over the anties as long as we do not start crying "were giveing away our soverenty" like over the euro.so we ither talk areselves arround in circles or do something about it if somthing on theses lines could be done it would enshure the future of angling for a long time to come so how do we start the ball roling? it would be nice to say it started at anglers net.

all best

richard

[Guest Steve Burke]

I'm surprised noboby's commented on Ray Farrell's recent piece on this topic in the article section. Have you all, or indeed any of you, read it?

 

I found Ray's article rather disturbing as I assumed there would naturally be a pyramid structure to the proposed umbella group. If the situation remains the same, specialist anglers are in danger of not having a voice. There are conflicting differences between the two styles of fishing, which is why I run my 2 lakes at Wingham as separate waters to accomodate the different requirements.

 

Alan, Mike, has the situation changed recently or is it still the same as Ray wrote?

 

Unfortunately specialist anglers aren't sufficiented organised as this thread has demonstrated. By the very nature of things match anglers have to be organised otherwise competitions couldn't be run.

 

As previously mentioned I'd like to see an umbrella organisation made up of representatives of the NFA, SACG, NFSA & the STA.

 

As a second choice the NFA could be divided into two sections, one to deal with match fishing, the other to deal with specialist angling. Pleasure anglers would naturally lean towards one section or another - I suspect most towards match fishing. After all I'm sure specialist anglers wouldn't want to attend discussions on how many divisions the National Championships should be divided into! I'm sure matchman can think of a equivalent specialist angling topic that would bore them to death.

 

In whatever way this pyramid might work I can foresee disagreements as to the number of members each group would have in the umbrella organisation. Nevertheless I'm optimistic that this could be worked out by those involved.

 

Of course this suggestion may be totally impractical. I'm not a political animal and would wish my involvement to go no further than this Forum. I may therefore be talking utter rubbish!

[Guest Graham E]

Steve, one thing you could never be accused of is talking rubbish. Your additions are often the words of good sense in any discussion.

I have one area that I think we will not agree on.

I do not see the need to have a pyramid organisation within angling. Within the various groups, be it specimen /match etc. there will always be differences. Thank God.

Quite frankly a controlling, representative organisation tasked with putting anglings case over does not, nor should get involved with the minor issues. This will lead to loss of direction.

It needs to be involved with communication (up/down)core issues and direction. It also needs to be a marketing organisation to represent the large mass of anglers.

It needs to see beyond the minor issues and determine policy.

You are A1 correct in saying it needs to be funded, though this will come through the manufacturers as well as anglers.

Ray underestimates the feelings of many members of this sport. In all honesty if a few respected names were really interested in uniting angling it could be achieved faily easily, however, in many respects, he who pays the piper....and those names are not likely to give up lucrative manufacturers promotions for the risks involved.

One last request.

Can contributors please put in some paragraphs in postings. My eyes hurt!

[Guest Mystic]

Oh robbie..you still struck a liitle late.

You mentioned three organisations, two of which (sacg and nasa) had failed due to polotics/ egos. I mearly asked for an example and you respond by quoting single species groups......what sacg / nasa ego's are you refering to?

You mention that you have been a member of a few of the single species groups, are you no longer a member of any?

I also don't quite see where you are going by having a go at Little Ray and Steve etc. I have known both for quite a few years and can honestly say that i don't know of many others that are prepared to give up such vast amounts of their own time to support angling be it unified or otherwise.

[Guest Kevin Babij]

Hi Lads,

Well what a good thread this one is,it`s taken me about an hour to follow this.

A unified umbrella group such as the NFA or SACG is essential for dealing with Goverment Depts,approaches by a multitude of various individual "self-interested" groups (perhaps thats a bit strong!)is not going to wash with Whitehall when it comes to drawing up White papers on the future of angling in this country.Lets face it some of our specimen groups have/are struggled/struggling to hold a unified commitee together at times (re-PAC/Carp Society)

A license fee increase and perhaps a membership subs,water permit fee increase (with the aforementioned concessions) to fund a political angling organisation is urgently needed.

 

 

[This message has been edited by Kevin Babij (edited 14 August 2000).]

[Guest Alan Pearce]

Just to clarify a couple of points:

At the Angling Governing Bodies last meeting it was agreed that the SACG would align itself with the NFA and has been offered a seat on its executive commitee. The ACA and NAFAC have agreed to align with the S&TA whilst the NFSA stand alone, although I here that the Pro Bass Assn. have agreed to be represented by them. So you see we are getting there albeit slowly, and five or six times a year all the variouse bodies are sitting around the table discussing important issues concerning angling. I reckon that within one year we will see one Unified Body to represent the sport at a hifh level. However they will only be as good as the input they get from the likes of you and I through our own respective organisations. So for instance if your main interest is tench fishing you make your representations to the Tenchfishers, in turn they will input into the SACG (or SAA soon) and they will input into the NFA who will have a seat in the United Angling Governig Body. Individual anglers won't have to go via a single species group if they so wish but could input direct into one of the sub prime organisations like SACG, ACA or NAFAC or indeed they could input direct to a Governing Body like the NFA, S&TA or NFSA but may find that by doing this they will be a very small cog in a big wheel, and that the Governing Bodies Could find it difficult attending to, too mant individual representations. The important thing is for all anglers who care about their fishing to get involved where ever they think their interests will be served best. I hope this helps, any further ideas or questions, please post.

 

Funding: I have found it very interesting that many of you have suggested adding an extra charge to rod licences, something I have been trying to promote for some years. In fact three years ago at an SACG quarterly meeting with the then head of fisheries at the EA I made the proposal that £4 be added to the licence fee to help fund the management of angling as well as conservation at both a national and local level. This would raise around £2.5 million and be run as a seperate fund administered by an elected council. The EA told me that this wouls require an act of Parliment to impose this levy/tax but could be possible if all the governing bodies agreed to do this and be responsible to marketing it to there respective members. During the following three months I meet with all the Governing Bodies and explained the plan to them. They all said that there would be some flack in the short term but agreed that once anglers begun to see a direct benefit that this would soon die down. They all agreed to take part and even the sea anglers representative agree that some form of fishing licence should be possible for sea anglers. I feed this back to the EA and asked them to put the wheels in motion. Shortly thereafter Tony Owen left as head of Fisheries at the EA and the whole scheme got lost along the way. This I have to say was as much my fault for not keeping tabs on it but at the time I had so much on my plate blah blah blah! Last year I tried to get it resurected through the Salmon & Freshwaters Fisheries Reveiw Group but they seemed to think there were more important issues to attend to, strange because without proper finance everything else is just words. This year the angling world has woken up and realised it needs funding, hence the recent plea from the NFA to its membership, and guess what it fell on deaf ears, You see only a very very few anglers will give voluntary and unfortunatly it has to be compulsery, deducted at source hence my original idea to add this to rod licences. Everyone who fishes makes a positive contribution, simple and easy to collect. This year one of my plans is to get back behind this project and see if we can make it happen, so it was very pleasing to here some of you veiws on this and see that you came to the same logical conclusion.

 

Alan.

[Guest TONY HOWARD]

Hi all.

I am a new member and have been reading the mails on the subject, untill we all agree that no matter what branch of the sport were intrested in we have one thing in common, we are all ANGLERS.

Untill we stop bickering about each other we will get nothing done.

At least NASA and the SACG are trying unlike the majority of angling clubs or groups.

 

------------------

[Guest Ray Walton]

The bottom line is we are all anglers and the COMMON FACTOR IS THAT WE ALL, BAR NONE, USE HOOKS TO CATCH FISH. Forget the rest and UNITE! Support S.A.C.G and move forward!

 

------------------

[Guest robbie]

Originally posted by Ray Walton:

Robbie...How on earth do you assume that the ACA could solve our angling’s problems. They fight pollution court cases after venues have been wiped to gain compensation for riparian owners and make good financial losses to clubs who subscribe. I thought you knew that! Also, what is your problem with what you call ‘high profile’ anglers who basically have taught you everything you

would you do to unite angling???????????

know, and club trophy’s! come on robbie

 

Ray

5 things about you, 1 you used to run the barbel study group, 2 you were a member of the barbel catchers, 3 you played guitar with ACDC, 4 you followed other anglers to Adams Mill and fished it till you caught a record, were these the same anglers that taught me every thing I know????? 5 you have a holier than thou attitude. 6 you do me the injustice of thinking I am stupid no I don't know everything, as you seem to. 7 you appear to not have a life as most of your time seems to be spent waiting to see who you can knock next.8 you seem incable of answering a direct question, I repeat what

 

What I know about the two Steve's is unimportant, and yes I could be an anti and if I were it shows how easy it would be to infiltrate an forum angling related,

 

You may be right the SACG may be the only way forward and yes I do know that only 1 million anglers bought a licience but certian weeklies one of which you represent keep telling us that our number is 3 million but I thought you knew that.

 

So in answer to Steve Pope's question  

is angling unity posible or indeed is it necessary an imphatic YES in both case's, just how we achieve it is a good question,

 

I am quite willing to give up my spare time for good cause's and have done so in the past and will gladly do so in the future.

 

As for your remarks about me having problems with high profile, infact I don't have any problem as long as they don't try to fool others in to thinking they do what they do for the benifit of angling in general

 

These anglers certainly did not teach me anthing and it is rather arrogant of you to suggest that ordinary anglers like would know nothing without them  

 

There have been some good suggetions put forward in this thread let us all hpope that somebody takes them on board.

 

My last suggestion to you is you stop knocking me and I will stop knocking you.

 

At the start I just posted my observations maybe I was wrong if so I stand corrected.

 

Robbie