Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest STEVE POPE

ANGLING UNITY, IS IT POSSIBLE ?

Recommended Posts

Guest Graham E

The postings from Alan Pearce and Our own Mike Waterman make really sensible, formative reading.

 

As a member of the BS and as regulars know, a staunch supporter I do agree that Steve should respond. I have always found him a genuine, approachable person.

 

The clever comments(RAY)don't help the situation.

 

Regarding, Alans comments on developing an overall body for fishing, this is encouraging and all fishermen will hope it succeeds. As I have said before it needs comitted and continuous effort that includes raising ther profile of the sport (professional teachers etc.)

 

STEVE, bite the bullet, if you believe that your views are correct and they represent your members why not test them through this format?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Randles

For angling unity, we need ALL anglers to be united, not just the leaders of a couple of organisations, although I agree it's a start.

 

Did anyone read page 3 of the angling times this week. Out of 200,000 NFA members only six where prepared to donate an extra £2 to help promote angling!

 

It surely follows then that anglers would not be willing to cough up extra cash to help fund (voluntarily)any future "ventures" into political endeavors.

 

A complete change in the licence fee would be the only way (that I can see) that such monies could be collected, and perhaps having paid these dues every angler could then have a say or a vote in his/her sport by means of an annual questionaire filled in at the time of purchaseing the rod licence.

 

I am a working angler and feel we pay a paltry ammount for our fishing, but appreciate that other less affluent people could not afford to do this. These points should also be changed.

 

Children,senior citizens and the unemployed should pay less, but at the same time they should have the same rights as the rest of us.

 

We need to talk and unify, but on a much larger scale than has so far been discussed.The merger of a couple of organisations at this speed will see angling unity by approximately the year 4000!

 

Steve Randles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ray Walton

Graham.. Do you or any of the Barbel Society membership,(bar the committee) know why your not supporting S.A.C.G. Are we talking about steve's views here or the more important membership's views. I don't think the members have ever been consulted on the matter. Correct me if i'm wrong please as i am fick! confused.gif

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest waterman1013

Steve Randles

 

Don't get too disheartened Steve. The problems between SACG and the BS go back a little way. In the meantime SACG and the other governing bodies are continuing to talk and move towards unity, all be it much too slowly for some of us.

 

The response to the NFA money plea unfortunately reflects funding throughout angling. We all operate on a shoe string and anglers cannot see the need for realistic funding levels for a national body or any representative body come to that.

 

The NFA may in time form the basis for representation of all coarse anglers but to be successful and to truly represent the needs of specialists, some changes will be required in how they operate at present and the long winded constant referral back to committee will have to go. Angling needs leaders who can take decisions on the hoof and react to Government and quangos immediately, or very soon thereafter.

 

The Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Review Group had the chance to touch on funding, via their proposals on the EA licence etc, but chose not to do so. That was a missed opportunity and if you are submitting responses to MAFF on that subject please consider raising the issue of centralised collection of funding via the EA for all anglers, coars, game and sea.

 

A sensible annual budget to promote the good which angling delivers to young and old alike and to combat the lies of the antis is what we need. At the moment we are in a chicken and egg situation and need some assistance from Government to get a national scheme off the ground.

 

Mike Heylin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest waterman1013

Steve Pope

 

Hi. I haven't heard from you since my offer of a meeting, so don't know if you have to go back to a committee for approval before moving forward. I wait hopefully.

 

On reading the ACA Review I see that Barry Norris, the BS Secretary, is floating the idea of another group to "co-ordinate, and work towards improving rivers across the Country." We already have the ACA, EA and all the angling bodies, would not the BS be better off getting involved with the other single specie groups and SACG, and pulling your weight within rather than starting yet another group, which in time will need to be subsumed into a national organisation of whatever form it finally takes?

 

I agree that we need action to save our rivers - see the posting from SACG on otter predation consequent to poor planning of re-introductions onto unsuitable waterways. There are plenty of us who fish rivers, almost exclusively, and the BS joining with us would make our voice all the stronger.

 

What say you?

 

Mike Heylin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Graham E

Iv'e be looking through my old BFisher Mags.

In No 9 Steve clearly says that he would report on Membership of other organisations incl SACG in issue 10 so it is right that he should report to members before any action is taken.

Heres one for Mike Babes. Do the SACG still strongly support the use of 4 rods at a time?

My views on this have not changed and on a personal note, I feel VERY strongly against it and managed to get a vote against at our last AGM for its introduction, even though it was only planned for 1 lake water.

 

I would not join any organisation that supported this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Burke

Graham, in my view the question of the number of rods permitted is purely a local issue and should be decided by the controller of the fishery.

 

The current national limit of 4 rods is purely a maximum. I agree with you that in some situations it's too many, in fact 3 too many!

 

However there are other situations where I believe 4 rods is the only sensible option, although I personally limit myself to 3 on stillwaters and pack 1 or 2 of these away if exceptional circumstances demand. On flowing water I'm much happier to use just 1 for most of my fishing but then I fish only small rivers.

 

You say that you would never join any organisation that supported 4 rods. If we all refused to join an organisation because we didn't agree with 1 small aspect there wouldn't be any organisations at all! There certainly wouldn't be any angling unity! Surely the good a united body of anglers can do far outweighs any possible objection to one, let's admit it, far less important issue?

 

Isn't is also far better, and far more likely to succeed, to seek change from within an organisation. Remember, united we stand, divided we fall!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Graham E

Steve, notice I said supported vv allowed.

Quite a difference.

As I have said before IMO those needing 4 rods might as well use a net. It is unsporting and disregards the whole basis that any angling organisation should be based upon. Fish Conservation and the future.

No fish no angling. Been Sea fishing lately?

Greed has devastated sea fishing. Selfishness and greed ie 4 rods ( Imagine if every fisherman took to bare hook rigs with 4 rods)it would devastate many fisheries. You are in the fortunate position of having a v large acreage of water. They are not all the same.

 

Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BUDGIE

That is why Steve is correct Graham ,it should be left to the discresion of individual fishery managers.

 

[This message has been edited by BUDGIE (edited 27 July 2000).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gaffer

Hi all, one thing all organisations can agree on is that us anglers use a hook and line to catch fish.

Isn't that a good enough reason alone to unify?

Can't the organisations forget their little differences and just pull together?

Gaffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...