Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest STEVE POPE

ANGLING UNITY, IS IT POSSIBLE ?

Recommended Posts

Guest waterman1013

Hi Graham

 

Yes SACG did negotiate with the EA when the by-laws on rod numbers were up for review. SACG pushed the case for a national rod limit of four, with discretion being left to fishery owners and managers, because at that time lots of regions had a two rod limit, some had a three rod limit and a few have no rod limit at all. It was before my time but I think the view taken by SACG and its constituent groups was that three rods entailed buying a second rod licence anyway, which increased EA revenue and therefore fisheries support, but the value to the angler of the second licence was diminished by not being able to use it for two rods, which each licence covers. SACG and the member groups opted for four rods as a national by-law figure because this gave those who were used to fishing many more rods an option to continue with four each and satisified the EA need for a national by-law. The EA agreed with us.

 

At the time I don't think the BS was a member of SACG or if they were they were not attending the group meetings, so no representation from, probably, the keenest river anglers was made. The four rod limit was seen, I believe, as very much a still water issue, although I know many pikers will use multiple rods on drains to move along the water until fish are located.

 

Steve's right a single issue shouldn't prevent you or any other anglers supporting the other vital work SACG does in representing specialist angling to the EA and Government. Personally I don't like four rods and would never use that many in my fishing but I don't have a real problem, in some circumstances, with others using the number they feel they can control.

 

At the end of the day I felt my views on four rods did not prevent me working to support the other issues which SACG addresses and trying to get forward with unity in angling. So I joined.

 

Mike Heylin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Burke

I've been a supporter of the SACG for a long time, both personally and via Caliber Tackle when I ran the company. I had some input into the SACG Code of Practice plus Wingham Fisheries incorporates the Code into its rules. Anyone breaking the Code is deemed to have broken the fishery rules and is liable to expulsion.

 

There's been the odd point that I've disagreed with, but overall I'm 100% behind the good work the SACG does, both on behalf of the specialist angler and also fishing in general.

 

I'm not a political animal but to show my support publically Wingham Fisheries is going to join the SACG now that this is allowed. I've already contacted Alan Pearce over this and he's asked me to send a cheque to Mike Heylin. Mike, I haven't got your postal address so perhaps you can e-mail it to me.

 

Angling has got to unify otherwise our pastime will be banned, or at the very least be changed out of all recognition as it has in most of Germany, where all fish caught must be killed!

 

Quite apart from the antis there's the issue of cormorants and now, otters. If we're not united and prepared, another issue could arise tomorrow or at any time in the future and goodbye angling as we know it! The Germans were complacent and they've paid the price.

 

There are of course a number of other bodies apart from the SACG doing sterling work for angling as a whole. As I've posted here on another thread about the NFA, I believe we need an umbrella body over and above the SACG, the NFA and the various other game and sea fishing interests to which all these organisations would then be affiliated. This umbrella organisation would then represent angling as a whole to the government. I see this as the best and quickest way of presenting a united front. If we argue which of the existing bodies is going to represent angling it will go on for ages and it could well be too late.

 

The issue is much to great for personalities and power struggles to get in the way of saving angling. The sooner this problem is addressed the better!

 

[This message has been edited by Steve Burke (edited 28 July 2000).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stoney

Nice to see another fishery backing the SACG,(nice one Mr B ) about another 2000 to go. But also where are the companies who could lose millions of their money, well just ask Mike to reveal them, from what i remember from the SACG stand you could count them on two hands. Hopefully since i last saw the list, there are proberly hundreds, lol lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Alan Pearce

Re fishing with upto 4 rods, what you have to bear in mind is that the SACG didn't make the rule it only conveyed the decision of its membership which at that time consisted of all the single species groups which at that time included the Barbel Society. You also need to bear in mind that prior to the 4 Rod Limit in some parts of the country anglers could fish with as many rods as they liked. In Kent for example six rods were quite common. Has anyone run into any problems where three or four rods were being used by one angler? If so what did you do about it? Far better I believe to let the club, fishery manager or owner make the rules, rather than it come from central government. At the end of the day each angler must respect the wishes of his fellow fisherman and all work together for the benefit and enjoyment of our sport. Allow common sense to prevail and maintain self rule in angling. Failing that join the match fishing scene and fish where your told, when your told and to some extent how your told. Not for me Jose, nor come to that for tens of thousands of other anglers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest dave k

Steve;

I am in agreament with you they we need an umberella organization to look after our interests.

I am just a pleasue angler like many thousands out there, and the title SACG & NFA are ofputing for many of us.I am not a specialist or a match fisherman. I know that the above organisation do represent other factions as well, but it is the title that is offputing for many ordinary anglers,as well as our perception of what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest STEVE POPE

Dave K's posting is extremely important because he speaks as one of the vast army of anglers out there, I won't use the term pleasure angler because we all go fishing for pleasure.

Perhaps it's all about marketing, and the way you package and sell the idea of angling unity.

Going back to my original question, I asked " is it possible?, and bear in mind the fact that some organisations will fight their own battles". Notwithstanding the bigger picture,how would the members of these organisations benefit especially if they were to be levied? I'll add this thought,a major issue to one group may be a long way down the agenda and list of priorities of the umbrella organisation. This would certainly cause frustration and tension and the probable need for unilateral action.

I did say it might bore you !, anyway will we reach 100 postings?

 

Hope you all catch over the weekend. smile.gifsmile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Randles

"Is it possible" asks Steve Pope, short answer YES it is.But there are lots of hills to climb, boundaries to cross and relationships to form. We must move forward,united. We dont have to agree with every aspect of every angler, but we MUST come together.Stand or fall thats it!

 

Steve Randles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Burke
Originally posted by STEVE POPE:

I'll add this thought,a major issue to one group may be a long way down the agenda and list of priorities of the umbrella organisation. This would certainly cause frustration and tension and the probable need for unilateral action.

 

 

But should this disagreement lead to leaving the umbrella group? Like the Barbel Society leaving the SACG?

 

I've no idea why this has happened. Several people here have asked but we still don't have an answer.

 

Is it over policy, in which case surely it should be discussed amicably? As already mentioned the real issue is angling itself not some inter faction disagreement.

 

Or is it over egos? We just don't know! Steve, if you don't respond many of us will assume it is indeed an ego matter just to score points, which IMO is not what this Forum is for. And we may be wrong. So do please enlighten us!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Burke
Originally posted by STEVE POPE:

Notwithstanding the bigger picture,how would the members of these organisations benefit especially if they were to be levied? QUOTE]

 

Surely the question should be not what members can get out of it but what they can put into it to help protect angling? The issue of the bigger picture must always be given priority when angling is under so much threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest lyn

I am going to print this lot off to have a proper read. There is a lot of bitching going on which has got to STOP!!

 

At the end of the day we all want to keep angling going. Even though I don't go hunting or shooting these days (this is NOT a debate on hunting, before anyone starts!) I know how under threat ALL field sports are! & I know that if hunting goes, shooting & fishing will be next targeted. The 'League Against Cruel Sports' told me that nearly 20yrs ago! I didn't believe them, now look how close they are to getting hunting banned!

 

If the members of certain specialist groups don't like what it's commitee is doing, surely they have the right as members to vote & change the committee!

 

Look we all agree on one thing it seems, that we want to protect our right to go fishing, then lets put up or shut up, we have to do something positive, now!

 

I know the NSSA conference is in September & that they are fighting to keep angling or does anyone have any other dates when we can be heard with other anglers other than ourselves?

 

We can all go on & on as we all feel very strongly about this, so let's try & do something!

 

lyn

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...