National Angling & Fisheries Organisations to Speak with One Voice

[Dave Lumb]

Hmmm.......

 

I've been involved in angling politcs for some years one way or another. I've served PAC, NASA, SAA and a local club committees. I have also been involved in the tackle trade since 1990 and angling publication. And I go fishing now and then.

 

Maybe I have a different perspective to you lot.

 

I see attitudes that are trying to avoid the way that angling really is. We have Paul the dreamy hippy, Peter the cantankerous old git who wishes it was still 1950....

 

I too hanker for the days of innocence when I had to make my own floats and bite alarms, when pike anglers were thin on the banks. But those days are gone forever. There is no point whatsoever trying to recreate an idyll of angling, or in railing against the ways that angling has been commercialised.

 

Angling has to face up to this and angling politicians have to find a way to use it to their advantage.

 

How many thousands of glossy tackle catalogues get given away each year? How many of these mention any of the angling organisations and their contacts? There must be away to get a mention in some of these. Unfortunately this, and other innitiatives, requires cash - lots of it - to pay for professional PR operatives.

 

Angling committees really do fail to get their message across to the average uncommitted angler. The majority who simply want to go fishing and catch fish. Again a PR person, or persons, could do this.

 

Given a day off would you rather go fishing or sit on a committee? Be honest. This alone is why we have bodies run by a limited pool of anglers who are prepared to give up their fishing time to do what they can for angling as a whole. Why the same faces appear 'everywhere' and give the impression that it is a clique of self-servers.

 

Angling politics needs to get professional (as in full time staff) - but unless funding can be found it will have to blunder along as it is.

 

Will FACT work? Dunno.

 

Will anyone ever hear if it does? I hope so.

 

Will the great angling public care? I doubt it.

[A Worm OOE]

Dave

I believe you are spot on.

 

"Angling politics needs to get professional (as in full time staff) - but unless funding can be found it will have to blunder along as it is."

 

For angling to succesfully fight its corner in this age it does not necisarily need good argument, although it would help. What is needed is a slick publicity machine that can influence opinion. The only way to do this is firstly to recognise this fact and secondly to get profesionals who know how to do this on board.

This will require lots of money but the industry of angling, and through them us, needs to pay for this. When we have this in place then we can protect the Sea not by angling spending money on conservation but by getting the Government to curb our exploitation of fish stocks. The Anti's have been wise to the use of the media for some time. To beat them we are going to have to fight them at there own game.

 

My hope is that this new body will realise that this is the way we need to go. Its sad to admit that we can't achieve our ends purely with reason but I am affraid that that is the age we live in.

[Paul Boote]

Double posted, somehow. See below.

 

[ 25. January 2005, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: Paul Boote ]

[Paul Boote]

David Lumb, above:

 

"We have Paul the dreamy hippy..."

 

LOL

 

Not at all, Dave. If I was, I would never have fished and broke new ground in some of the foreign hotspots (and not merely fishing h'spots) that I have over the years (or done the non-scene, non-zoo, non-glam fishing that I have done - and still do - here in Britain). No, if I was a dreamy hippy now, I would be wearing some nifty tweed-and-cane mix Y-fronts (these only, note, at all times, on the riverbank and in public; together, perhaps, with a jaunty straw boater), and, of course, writing Golden Age cobblers for Waterlog...

 

Agree with you about the need for angling's representatives to become more professional. though. Sometimes, however (not the case, I am certain, with the new FACT crew), there can be a very fine distinction between 'professional' and 'bought' or 'craven'...

 

[ 25. January 2005, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Paul Boote ]

[Peter Waller]

What, me a cantankerous old git? Less of the old you young upstart Lumb! And anyway its the 60's I hanker after!

 

Apart from telling Mr Fickling a few home truths about his column in P & P I am the very essence of jovial bonhomie to all men!

[Paul Boote]

I have just received a not-so 'happy slap' from someone in the new crew (by email):

 

"I am not looking for sympathy or congratulations but I would expect someone who is obviously a thinking angler to consider more carefully what

you say about people you do not know on bulletin boards."

 

Summat about levelling unfounded insults, too.

 

Hmm.

 

I most certainly wasn't levelling insults (be assured that if I had been, you would been left in NO doubt...), merely making fellow fishers aware of the possible perils of being led.

 

So, the above For Your Information, fellow fishers (it's best to be well informed).

 

 

PS -- what was that line of Corporal Jones's, in 'Dad's Army', that ancient BBC TV comedy?

 

Got it.

 

"They don't like it up 'em, Mr Mainwaring!"

 

(He was referring to cold British Imperial steel and its effect on revolting fuzzy-wuzzies. Some things here, you know, never change...)

 

[ 25. January 2005, 09:23 PM: Message edited by: Paul Boote ]

[DCB]

A personal reply to Paul Boote

This personal reply to Paul is as rare as rocking horse doo doos. So don't expect a repeat or answer.

Professioalism - is a state of mind - you don't have it or not. If you don't understand the premise, don't presume

Bought - Do you mean, paid for to represent a subjective point of view? No! My, and other's point of view is:

For the good of ALL angling. At no charge.

Craven - Don't hide behind the anonimity of AN for this ill-mannered, rude, discourteous and cowardly insult.

My SAA team and I are more brave and courageous for the protection and promotion of our sport than you could ever imagine.

Until you join SAA or similar and commit - don't play stupid, peurile word- games

[Paul Boote]

DCB:

A personal reply to Paul Boote

This personal reply to Paul is as rare as rocking horse doo doos. So don't expect a repeat or answer.

Professioalism - is a state of mind - you don't have it or not. If you don't understand the premise, don't presume

Bought - Do you mean, paid for to represent a subjective point of view? No! My, and other's point of view is:

For the good of ALL angling. At no charge.

Craven - Don't hide behind the anonimity of AN for this ill-mannered, rude, discourteous and cowardly insult.

My SAA team and I are more brave and courageous for the protection and promotion of our sport than you could ever imagine.

Until you join SAA or similar and commit - don't play stupid, peurile word- games

Ahh. The personal (abuse) ploy.

 

'Had this done to me on another fishing forum (one that considered itself somewhat posher than this), whoever you are.

 

You guys are going to have get MUCH MUCH CLEVERER, now. Not to take down the likes of "l'l' ol' me", but thousands who feel and think just the same, now: "I've had enough of these evasive*, shady, manipulative boogers..." (fill in your own words, lads)

 

Summat like that, anyway.

 

Regards (whoever you are -- 4 out of ten, for effort - who's paying yah? - could do better)

 

*Apologies - I forgot "nameless".

 

[ 25. January 2005, 10:52 PM: Message edited by: Paul Boote ]

[Cranfield]

Unless there has been a lot of things edited from the above posts, DCB's offering doesn't do much for democratic angling unity.

 

Dummies back in the prams,Gentlemen.

[Paul Boote]

It's a sign of these more than just slightly sad times (for some) that I tend to have this effect upon certain sorts, Cranfield. Don't worry for ME, or for THEM even, but, rather, for US...