Angling Trust Agreement Signed

[Elton]

The document was signed by the chairmen of the 6 organisations involved:

Jim Glasspool, Fisheries and Angling Conservation Trust (FACT)

Stephen Marsh-Smith, Anglers' Conservation Association (ACA)

Martin Read, National Association of Fisheries and Angling Consultatives (NAFAC)

Terry Fell, National Federation of Anglers (NFA)

Richard Ferré, National Federation of Sea Anglers (NFSA)

Christopher Evans, Specialist Anglers' Alliance (SAA)

 

More details here:

 

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/News/angling-unity.html

[IanBass]

Sorry Elton, it will have 6-7000 members and the rest of the 1.4 million of us that dont give a toss about the political side of angling will say "What do I get for my £20, nothing" so they wont join. I can see the whole thing falling apart within a couple of years. All the factions that have come together today in 'unity' will still have there own adgendas and if the nfsa gets more than the aca or fact gets more than saa then the arguements will start. Yet again PAY, PAY, PAY, for what? nothing. People talk to other people and NOTHING ever gets done. Typical politicians

[Ryford]

Sorry Elton, it will have 6-7000 members and the rest of the 1.4 million of us that dont give a toss about the political side of angling will say "What do I get for my £20, nothing" so they wont join. I can see the whole thing falling apart within a couple of years. All the factions that have come together today in 'unity' will still have there own adgendas and if the nfsa gets more than the aca or fact gets more than saa then the arguements will start. Yet again PAY, PAY, PAY, for what? nothing. People talk to other people and NOTHING ever gets done. Typical politicians

 

Hello Ian,

 

In the Drew report into sea angling in England and Wales for Defra a few years ago, they reported that some 273,000 anglers went abroad to fish every year. I wonder what proportion of those are a member of the NFSA or another sea angling club or federation? It seems to me that since most of these trips will cost in the region of £1000, then it should not be too much of a hardship to join our national representative at the same time.

 

The potential monies gained by this part of our sport would make a significant difference and would allow RSA to represent itself better and more fully. Of course, there are anglers out there who are happy to do nothing. Its very much the same for the trade who seem content to maintain viability by either taking over the competition or getting costs down by outsourcing their product manufacturing overseas.

[Elton]

There are also those who feel that angling as a hobby and/or sport will be easier to control and manipulate if it is seen to be represented by one body.

 

There could be something to be said for having so many different factions.

 

There are also those who feel that, say, fishing 30 miles out at sea for cod in a choppy sea with a pound of lead and a 5/0 hook is about as far removed from sitting round a lake with a 10-metre pole and a size 24 as you can get.

 

There are also those who don't want to be 'represented'.

 

I'm not sure where this assumption that anglers are going to jump for joy at this news stems from, but I haven't seen it in action.

 

I suppose only time will tell.

[five bellies]

Ian I think you are right Im afraid,

 

I rairly post on this area, The politics depress me although I do know and acknowledge the amount of effort poeple do put in to our sport for all our benifit,

 

I think splinter groups will form in no time,

[oddity]

In all honesty, I can't see this doing much for the majority. I have not been affected by any of these organisations while I've been fishing. I think the majority of pleasure anglers never see much from the political wing.

[Dunk Fairley]

OK, I'll grant that the "Majority" of Anglers aren't members of the organisations concerned. However, that same majority frequently does better, because of the work of the minority of those who ARE members, to a greater or lesser degree. The only difference is, those who aren't members, get the benefits for free, while those who are members, pay to be members, and then leave themselves open to snide comments and verbal attacks, for TRYING to do something.

 

I'm very happy to be a (permanent) life member of more than one of the organisations, and fully support the efforts put in by my representatives within those bodies.

Edited October 21, 2008 by Dunk Fairley

[Norm B]

More details here:

 

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/News/angling-unity.html

I recieved a press release from FACT on Friday and I was at the T&G show on Sunday when it was signed but I've not heard a squeak from the NFSA about it, no press release or even a mention on their website, it's as if they want to keep it a secret. I think it's a step in the right direction but a lot of the old guard at the NFSA are/were against it.

[H.A.]

I have flirted with the NFSA despite my one-time reference to them as the Dead Bodies of Buckfastleigh.

I received a warning from their lawyers and immediately retracted and joined.

 

That must have been a good few years ago!

 

Then I asked to be considered as a candidate as an NFSA Sea Angling Coach and my request was rejected.

I then qualified via PAA and UKSportEngland/Trout and Salmon etc .... mostly at my own expense (£750).

 

Further to that I became involved involved in the Whitehall con-job ... thank you Mr Bradshaw etc.

 

I soon saw the light, when I asked NFSA to help with my travelling and other expenses (£30) to represent them. I didn't receive an answer to my applications.

 

I have not renewed my NFSA membership and await, with baited hooks, the outcomes of this new adventure ....

 

ever optimistic

 

[Steve Coppolo]

Hello Ian,

 

In the Drew report into sea angling in England and Wales for Defra a few years ago, they reported that some 273,000 anglers went abroad to fish every year. I wonder what proportion of those are a member of the NFSA or another sea angling club or federation? It seems to me that since most of these trips will cost in the region of £1000, then it should not be too much of a hardship to join our national representative at the same time.

 

The potential monies gained by this part of our sport would make a significant difference and would allow RSA to represent itself better and more fully. Of course, there are anglers out there who are happy to do nothing. Its very much the same for the trade who seem content to maintain viability by either taking over the competition or getting costs down by outsourcing their product manufacturing overseas.

 

From a sea angling perspective, I think those figures are a bit dubious. Maybe 273,000 people fish whilst abroad each year, but I doubt whether 273,000 go abroad specifically to fish. Certainly not sea anglers, anyway. I don't know how many carp anglers go to France, or how many anglers go fishing for cats in Spain, but 273,000 seems a lot.

 

I don't think many anglers would question how much membership was, if they thought they were getting something worthwhile for it. The way things have gone recently, there is little or no chance of anything being achieved that would benefit sea anglers. In fact, more of the same kind of representation would be damaging to the sport, in my opinion.