National Angling & Fisheries Organisations to Speak with One Voice

[kleinboet]

Gentlemen - Before this thread gets locked (because we are becoming far to personal in our attacks!) everybody is looking for unity and are ignoring one quite important group - the disabled! Disabled anglers fish "in spite of" diabilities, which makes them a pretty dedicated bunch. Dont leave them out of it.

NFA has a "disabled" division and do absolutley

FA for the disabled and they are leaving in their droves for the BDAA (British Disabled Angling Association). They could possibly offer something of value.

 

[ 26. January 2005, 08:48 PM: Message edited by: kleinboet ]

[Peter Waller]

Thanks for the compliment Mr Mathew. I am just a very ordinary bloke that enjoys his angling. However there are those on AN for whome your comment is far more suited.

[Alan Stubbs]

I agree - but it is unacceptable for people to claim to be something and represent an angling organisation to offer personal abuse under a pseudonym at the same time claiming kudos for some perceived good that particular person may or may not have been involved in. It's demeaning to the organisation and more so when his criticisms smack of pots an black kettles.

[Peter Waller]

Alan, perhaps DCB thought he was sufficiently well known, atleast within political circles, to be able to post as he does. Have to say that whilst I agree with the vast majority of your posts I feel that you are being a tad unfair on him on this one. I do firmly believe that, despite his bedside manner, he has done a great deal for angling.

[Leon Roskilly]

I don't always agree with DCB and there might be a few in angling who have put in more time and effort than DCB, but I doubt that anyone has done more to effectively bring about positive change than him (with a little help from his friends!).

 

I thought that everyone knew who he was!

 

Tight Lines - leon

[Jim Gibbinson]

If an official of an organisation wishes to express personal views, I feel they should do so in their own name, and they should make it clear that the views they are expressing are not necessarily shared by the organisation.This might create difficulties within said organisation - but that's another matter entirely.

[kleinboet]

Well I think everyone knows who I am! If they dont my real name is John Sime. I use my kleinboet "facade" as there are an awful lot of Johns on line - and we even have a moderator named John S!!!

 

By the way, I'm not an official for BDAA!

 

[ 27. January 2005, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: kleinboet ]

[waterman1013]

John

 

In answer to your previous posting BDAA are more than welcome to apply for membership of FACT, as is any national organisation which feels it wants to be part of the new structure and is outside the existing structures within FACT.

 

That much is stated in the press release.

 

It is early days yet and these matters will be more easily dealt with once we have an office established and personnel manning it.

 

FACT is not an exclusive organisation, we seek to be as inclusive as we can be within our terms of reference and the Mem and Arts of the Company.

 

Mike

[Alan Stubbs]

DCB's comments, when allied to his inclusion of the SAA in his post, would demean the SAA if they accepted the way in which the points were put across. It was a bit rich to try and lecture someone about 'professionalism' when he posted in the way he did. That's why I took the time to address each of the points he made individually.

 

Jim Gibbinson's made the same point far more eloquently than I ever could, and I accept what Leon and Peter have said. However, I maintain that DCB's argument was promulgated in a way which was unprofessional, inconsistent, and therefore unworthy of the body of people he represents.

[poledark]

Alan Stubbs, I really think you should reread Paul Bootes remarks again

quote:

---

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'...

---

I think that is the phrase that DCB was uptight about.

 

I have to say that had it been aimed at me then I would have been far more blunt than DCB was...it is, and was , a disgraceful insinuation against all the persons involved in the setting up of FACT.

 

Leon once said to me (on this forum) that if I was not prepared to get involved then I had no right to criticise, advise which I hope I heeded.

 

Paul has chucked his dummy out of his pram, I for one would have been more impressed if he had apologised or withdrawn his quoted remarks.

 

For my own part, and before the insults start flying my way, I readily admit to taking no active part in any organisation, due to having a knowledge of my own inability to spend time and money (most of these guys do not get paid),

 

I for one really see FACT as a move in the right direction, and if it happens then it will not be down to the armchair critics on AN

 

 

Den