Pike Fish For Britain

[Peter Waller]

As I have said, Mark, the secretary has a letter of resignation from me.

 

I have no real grouse with the PAC, other than that its high profile inevitably attracts more people into piking. It is a no win situation. We need the PAC to educate, we don't need the PAC to attract more would be pikers.

 

But is the PAC educating or researching as much as it should? It isn't cash strapped. I am not saying that I won't ever rejoin, just that at the moment I feel that I have nothing to offer the PAC.

 

Re Marie Curie, the PAC could have said no, it could then have raised money by other methods, and probably more money. Marie Curie deserves all the help it can get, & PAC, on a national basis, could probably have done far more than the match ever does. At the same time PAC could have made the point that pike matches are frowned upon. It was a missed opportunity.

[Dick Dastardly]

I think the "Regional comittees" had a lot to do with the issues that caused my disenchantment with the PAC.One or two good (?) men were selected from the region and they basicly co opted their mates in.I can only speak for 100% about one area where I had first hand dealings.However other comittees have given me that impression and people whose opinions I value have confirmed their suspicions that this is the case.Lets hope a new system will improve things.

 

Regardless of my veiws of recent year PAC there is no getting away from the fact that initially the club did a lot of excellent (and unselfish) work for both pike,pike angling and pike anglers alike.

 

In the days of the initial "Put back Pike alive" campaign it was easy for the club to be focused in a universally (to its members and piking in general) accepted way.They then started to lose their way as the search for a new "holy grail" seemed to take them in both strange directions and away from the still very important initial aims.

 

Chris if it is of interest to you I will gladly send you my reasons off thread.Some will be dificult for me to explain clearly but others will be quite straight forward! I will try to get some thing to you in the next few days if you wish. Im not just a knocker for knockings sake honest! I would dearly love to return to the fold if I thought it was worthwhile and some thing that I could be proud too.

[Peter Waller]

Budgie adds some very relevant points. The new holy grail, its not clear what it is. I can only, & truthfully say, that the PAC does not appear to be actively winning the battle on pike conservation, nor really doing much about it. A lot of effort seems to go into opening up 'new' piking opportunities. Perhaps the PAC has lost its direction? Do we ever see advice on handling pike on products in our local shops? Do we ever see items recommended by PAC? Okay, so by doing that PAC further hightens the profile of pike. But at the moment the PAC does not appear to be even attempting to reach morons like the one not actually visable in the enclosed thumbnail photo. By the way Mark, and maybe you have found this out already, by writing for, or being involved in PAC, can make you a marked man!

 

Scenes like this are still commonplace:-

Edited March 15, 2006 by Peter Waller

[Dick Dastardly]

But who is to say that the owner of those rods wasnt a PAC member,or even Comittee member?

[Peter Waller]

Heaven forbid that it wasn't!

 

Budgie, are you trying to make a point though? I can't believe that any PAC member, let alone committee member would behave like that. Unless someone else knows otherwise!

[Dick Dastardly]

Sadly I have seen some terrible behaviour from PAC members and PAC Committee men as well.

 

Now in all fairness this is the problem with any club that is open to any one.That said though the PAC need to remember this and if they want to remain a club that is open to all regardless of ability/experience etc should lose the superior attitude that they feel gives them the right to reserve fishing and advise fisheries to reserve fishing for PAC members only.Thus implying that all and only PAC members will act/fish responsibley.

 

I specificly base these remarks on what Ive seen whilst helping run the pike fishing on several trout waters.

[mark barrett]

Sadly I have seen some terrible behaviour from PAC members and PAC Committee men as well.

 

Now in all fairness this is the problem with any club that is open to any one.That said though the PAC need to remember this and if they want to remain a club that is open to all regardless of ability/experience etc should lose the superior attitude that they feel gives them the right to reserve fishing and advise fisheries to reserve fishing for PAC members only.Thus implying that all and only PAC members will act/fish responsibley.

 

I specificly base these remarks on what Ive seen whilst helping run the pike fishing on several trout waters.

 

 

some interesting points coming through here.

 

the one i find hardest to quantify though is your assercsion pete that the PAC should not be looking to attract more pike anglers to the sport.

surely the raison,d etre of any club is to promote itself and the sport it represents? furthermore without this fresh blood the club and the sport would cease to be. i go round the regions reasonably regularly and one of the things that i find a bit worrying is the demarcation of age in the piking world. its getting old quite frankly and thats a worry for the future.

just to give you an example, take a look at those "well known " as pike anglers, or writing regularly on pike angling. how many can you name or think of under 35? i cannot think of one.

contrast that to the rest of the sport and particularly carp fishing. the heroes (or villians!!!) of the angling world are what inspire many youngsters. many might not like to see photos of pike in the weeklies, particularly when its a water local to them, but pike fishing does need its figureheads and it does need to attract more pikers to maintain a healthy sport.

 

if the PAC was to stop promoting itself and pike fishing and the numbers drop, then the value for many fishery owners in the pike themselves will drop. as pikers we know the true cvalue in pike in retainig a healthy fishery, but to match dominated clubs, or the commercial put and take trout water or carp puddle, they are just an another way that they lose fish. if there is a revenue to be had from selling winter tickets to pike anglers, then its bearable, but if there isnt, what do you suppose is going to happen to the pike then?

 

perhaps the emphasis on conservation has been dulled of late, i would grudgingly agree to that, however if the PAC has taken its eye off the ball on that one, i think it could be forgiven for that one. after all the prevailing attitude toward pike from most anglers these days is to return alive, ork that the PAC has and does still do. to give you an example the PAC is at every major angling show, and country fair or ganme show. it hands out advice and demonstrates safe handling and unhooking, with the aid of a material pike.

 

as for the fact that the PAC attempts to obtain exclusive fishing for its members, well again most clubs do that too, under the guise of fish ins.having never attended any of these events, i cant comment upon the goings on at them, but i will defend the need for them. when i attempt to get anglers to join the PAC, almost without fail, the first thing that i get asked is "what do i get for the membership fee"? it would be lovely to think that there would be a lot more ppeople out there with the alturism to see the bigger picture, but the harsh reality is that people do want a return on their subs, be that via the excellent magazine, or through the opportunity to fish a water that by any other means they would not be able to.

 

i honestly think that there are good times ahead for piking and the PAC, different times, sometimes challenging, but ultimatly i think good.

 

finally pete i can honestly say that i havent had anything but good experiences through coming into the PAC. that may very well change in the next three years, but as those that know me well will testify, i have broad shoulders and am not a natural worrier, so marked i may become but not as yet!!!!!!

[Brian Carragher]

I understand that yourself Mark and Chris Hammond may be part of the PAC hierarcy for the next three years. If thats so then I wish you good luck to the pair of you.

 

Knowing Rob Murray(sec) and Chas White(asst sec) personally I can vouch for the vast amount of work that they do and have done over the last three years , work that you will also have to do and which the vast majority of members will expect of you as a right without stopping to think that you also have a personal life to attend to as well.

 

Expect some flak, it goes with the job, just remember that when the brown stuff is hitting the fan, the majority of members will give you their full backing

[Peter Waller]

Mark, re drawing extra pikers into the fold, it is inevitable, the Catch 22 that the PAC is in. Without going into great detail I can say that various members of the Welsh committee, with whome I had dealings, made that very point. A lady PAC member of many years ago also made the same point, I can't remember her name now, but I thought them all wrong at the time. Now, I'm not so sure.

 

You make the point that the club should be promoting itself, gaining more reserved access for its members, its what clubs do. Well, I suppose that's right, but, as I saw it, the core reason for the existance of the PAC was for the protection of pike and pike angling. I don't doubt that that is still the case, to a degree. But 'to a degree' is the problem, it is only that.

[mark barrett]

Mark, re drawing extra pikers into the fold, it is inevitable, the Catch 22 that the PAC is in. Without going into great detail I can say that various members of the Welsh committee, with whome I had dealings, made that very point. A lady PAC member of many years ago also made the same point, I can't remember her name now, but I thought them all wrong at the time. Now, I'm not so sure.

 

You make the point that the club should be promoting itself, gaining more reserved access for its members, its what clubs do. Well, I suppose that's right, but, as I saw it, the core reason for the existance of the PAC was for the protection of pike and pike angling. I don't doubt that that is still the case, to a degree. But 'to a degree' is the problem, it is only that.

 

 

Brian,

 

thanks for that mate, certainly under no iluusions as to what the job is going to entail, rob has put me straight on that one!

 

Pete,

 

i dont think that i said that the PAC should be increasing its priviledged access events, personally i dont see any real need to do so, unless that is what the membership wants.

personally unless there is the case where a water will be removing pike unless pike events are staged, then i see no reason to look to increasse them.

 

as regards the PAC being founded upon conservation, of course you are right and i am sure that there will always be that underlying ethos, but to an extent that battle is over. there is no institutional need or desire now to kill pike in general coasre angling. there are of course always the odd idiot, or just as likely those that are ignorant of the sport, having not had a grounding of any sorts within pike fishing, maybe coming over to it from carp angling etc. one of the things that i would like to foster within the PAC isd close links with the other single species groups, ECHO, the carp society etc to try and get the conservation/ good practice message over to those anglers that wont seek out the PAC, we need to seek out them.