Home | Features | Opinion | Get on Board...

Get on Board...

By

Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font
Rod very much 'on board' and doing what he loves urges all anglers to get real, get organised, and get properly heard. Rod very much 'on board' and doing what he loves urges all anglers to get real, get organised, and get properly heard.

Rod Sturdy urges everyone to ‘get on board’…and to 'do it now' if they care about the future of fishing as much as he does.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Allow me to explain...

I know that I hammer on a lot about this subject and I was once accused of writing a piece which was a ‘thinly disguised’ (or some such phrase) promotion of the Angling Trust. All I can say is that I must have been having an off-day when I wrote that particular one: because usually I try to make my drum-banging in favour of the Trust as clear and as obvious as possible. I definitely do not do thinly disguised!


This piece was inspired by my happening to come across a short article in the ‘Times’ recently about the famous yachtsman Sir Robin Knox-Johnston’s comments on the BBC coverage of sport. It was, he said, ‘obsessed with football and cricket’, and promoted ‘elitist’ views of yachting. Well now, does that remind you of anything in connection with our own particular great sport? Sound familiar, by any chance!? A claim which many adherents of sports make –and it is obviously true - is that their chosen pastime is ‘a great leveller’. Well, there is no doubt that fishing is that alright! And a thing which I personally often delight in pointing out to followers of conventional sports and games is that anglers’ performances often improve with advancing age.  You certainly can’t say that about professional footballers!


The comments appeared even more relevant when I read that Sir Robin had described yachting as ‘one of the largest and most successful sports in the country…open to all, whether a bricklayer or a duke’, of which the BBC ‘consistently refuse(s) to provide coverage’.  Again, does this sound familiar at all?


I have never felt myself to be in any way shape or form an ally of yachtsmen, but after I had read this, I was beginning to see that they have a lot in common with us. It may be that some of you reading this are also yachtsmen. Without a doubt very, very many of you will be football fans and followers of cricket. And it is even more certain that many of you will never have thought particularly that angling is worthy of at least some TV coverage. Well, if that is the case, my advice is to give the question some real thought: angling is without a doubt also ‘one of the largest and most successful sports in the country’, to use Sir Robin’s words with reference to yachting. So perhaps angling deserves at least a modest amount of coverage. Especially as (and I think this is beyond doubt) that yachting (in the shape of solo round-the-world endurance feats and competitive events) does in fact receive some coverage – much more than angling does in fact, an activity in which many more people participate…


And if we take angling as a competitive sport, there is plenty for British anglers to boast about. In the last couple of weeks we have seen outstanding performances by British fly-fishing and coarse fishing teams, including quite a significant input from the disabled. The British coarse fisherman, and not just the competitive variety, has long been regarded as one of the best, if not the best, in the world. Coarse fishing teams have won numerous international victories. And as I write this, I learn that the Team England ladies’ team has won gold at the World Championships in Slovenia. And yet none of this success has rated even the slightest mention in the mainstream media. So what is wrong?


It is very easy, isn’t it, to dream up a conspiracy against anglers If we watch television, we the anglers are forced, just like everybody else, to fund the BBC through our licence fees and taxes. Just as we are obliged to pay money to the EA just to have the right to use rod and line. And in both instances it is quite on the cards that the money we contribute will be used against us: either to promote fish- and angler-unfriendly hydropower schemes, or to finance sports coverage which neglects our sport totally. But what many anglers fail to appreciate is that other so-called ‘minority’ or ‘specialised interest’ sports and activities also feel equally aggrieved. They are also liable to fall into the ‘victim mentality’ trap, and to think that they are the only ones being ignored.


But I can assure you that no such problem of victimisation exists. The only real problem is in the heads of those (like anglers) who think they are being victimised, and very quickly get used to the idea. The participants in our ‘minority’ activity have failed to stick together to protect and promote their own interests. So they get sidelined. Their complaints are largely ignored, because there is very little weight behind them. They have failed to make the general public aware of their merits and achievements. You might say they have developed victimhood into a fine art. No doubt, to see the other side of the story, there are anti-angling elements within the BBC or other sections of the media. All too often, they are the ones who get blamed. But this is much more likely on balance to be yet another case of anglers failing to make their voice heard to promote their favourite sport, and getting what they deserve as a result.


 For the benefit of those of you reading this who have not really thought about it yet, I can state categorically that angling:


a. is very environmentally friendly

b. is virtually self-funding

c. does not (by contrast to many other sporting activities) require any police presence whatsoever, or need emergency services to be on hand

d. is totally participant

e. caters widely for the disabled, and

f. has given the UK (if only the UK knew it) a wealth of kudos and trophies


In fact, every single angler worth his salt should be aware of the above little list, and be able to run through the points to defend his pastime to those people we meet casually every day whose only view of angling has been shaped by their own imagination, or even worse, by the twisted propaganda of the antis and of course by the general image promoted by the media.


And every single angler worth his salt should join the single organisation which now fights on his behalf at a political level for the future of fishing, promotes angling among the young, takes legal action and lobbies government on anglers’ behalf, sends teams abroad to compete, deals with the media on anglers’ behalf, and a whole lot more besides. Yet individual membership of the Angling Trust, although it has been slowly but steadily, remains sadly at a measly 1.3 % of the total number of known individual anglers in the UK.


So if you haven’t yet done so, get on board, as they say in the yachting world, do it HERE and do it now. And add your voice to the growing number out there.


Get real, get organised, and get properly heard.







By the Same Author



Rate this article

0




Comments (138 posted):

Peter Jacobs on 30/08/2013 10:04:37
avatar
I quite enjoyed this article and some of the comparisons that it made. However, when closing the argument for joining the Angling Trust I truly wish that authors could refrain from using the Moral High Ground Fallacious Argument, such as . . . . "And every single angler worth his salt should join" I myself am a member of the Angling Trust, and a voluntary contributor as well, but I know a great many excellent anglers, all "worth their salt", or "thinking anglers" or even "caring anglers" who have chosen not to join for a whatever reason. The Angling Trust, and its supporters, in my opinon should simply stick to listing the benfits of joining; both to the individual in particular and to the sport in general and to please try to avoid the fallacious arguments that are bound to evoke a negative response from non-members.
Paul Boote on 30/08/2013 10:20:03
avatar
Convince by exemplary conduct and by example set, not castigate and cajole.
bennygesserit on 30/08/2013 11:09:13
avatar
I sense a disturbance in the matrix
Peter Jacobs on 30/08/2013 11:33:34
avatar
I sense a disturbance in the matrix . . . . not really benny, I just feel that it is far better to take a positive approach than to try to make a non member feel guilty, that's all. As I said, I know dozens of really good anglers who are worth their salt who are not (yet) members of the Angling Trust who would resist such a negative approach . . . . . . . . . Personally, I would have used something like; Welcome Aboard instead of Get on Board as that sounds too much like an instruction . . . . as in, do it! Remember the old joke about, Give me your hand, versus Take my hand?
bennygesserit on 30/08/2013 11:43:00
avatar
. . . . not really benny, I just feel that it is far better to take a positive approach than to try to make a non member feel guilty, that's all. As I said, I know dozens of really good anglers who are worth their salt who are not (yet) members of the Angling Trust who would resist such a negative approach . . . . . . . . . Peter honestly I respect your opinion and I agree with your sentiments. A disturbance in the matrix refers to Deja - vu i.e. another spam like AT article. Oh for something different - different is good.
Paul Boote on 30/08/2013 12:21:03
avatar
"What are you, boy?!" "An 'orrible little man who didn't pull 'is weight, Sergeant Major!" It Ain't Half Hot Mum: S1E3 - Mutiny Of The Punka Wallahs - YouTube
geoffmaynard on 30/08/2013 22:22:32
avatar
Another excellent opinion piece from Rod. I'm glad he puts his opinions in articles, where they seem to carry more weight than those of someone writing on a forum (?). I'm also glad he doesn't water those opinions down or pander to those who thinks he should. But that's just my opinion :) "I try to make my drum-banging in favour of the Trust as clear and as obvious as possible. I definitely do not do thinly disguised!" Like!
Paul Boote on 30/08/2013 22:40:52
avatar
No, Geoff, Far too "I'm in with the In Crowd" and am speaking for it now and trying to talk to you (actually down to you) lot out there and far too in-yer-face for a now very sussed, very cynical (as result of being very well-bitten in the past), less-accepting public. This from a MASTER at pressing people's buttons, verbally and in print, but who chose never to abuse and profit from that gift /talent. Politicians, huh? Show business for the thick, the unprincipled, the manipulating and the ugly.
geoffmaynard on 30/08/2013 22:48:45
avatar
Disagree Paul. Not everyone has that agenda. Rod has passion, that's all. All his previous pieces will bear that out
Paul Boote on 30/08/2013 22:56:46
avatar
Good. We'll disagree, then. Be aware that I will always go at people with strong, well-disguised as "This is how it really is for 'grown-ups' ", actually non-Angling-, -Angler, -people in the round, -friendly opinions: their way leads them to the latest most desirable bit of water or syndicate or clique and the rest ("Join us or die") to some commercial watery hellhole and very soon the end of our pastime. Think about it.
nicepix on 31/08/2013 06:37:20
avatar
No, Geoff, Far too "I'm in with the In Crowd" and am speaking for it now and trying to talk to you (actually down to you) lot out there and far too in-yer-face for a now very sussed, very cynical (as result of being very well-bitten in the past), less-accepting public. This from a MASTER at pressing people's buttons, verbally and in print, but who chose never to abuse and profit from that gift /talent. Politicians, huh? Show business for the thick, the unprincipled, the manipulating and the ugly. The MASTER at being so out of touch with reality then so surprised when his opinions cause such adverse reactions. And as for not profiting from them; well that is only because you failed to. It was not for lack of trying. Good. We'll disagree, then. Be aware that I will always go at people with strong, well-disguised as "This is how it really is for 'grown-ups' ", actually non-Angling-, -Angler, -people in the round, -friendly opinions: their way leads them to the latest most desirable bit of water or syndicate or clique and the rest ("Join us or die") to some commercial watery hellhole and very soon the end of our pastime. Think about it. I've thought about it. And it is nonsense. Didn't they teach you how to write English at school?
bennygesserit on 31/08/2013 08:15:11
avatar
no, geoff, far too "i'm in with the in crowd" and am speaking for it now and trying to talk to you (actually down to you) lot out there and far too in-yer-face for a now very sussed, very cynical (as result of being very well-bitten in the past), less-accepting public. This from a master at pressing people's buttons, verbally and in print, but who chose never to abuse and profit from that gift /talent. Politicians, huh? Show business for the thick, the unprincipled, the manipulating and the ugly. Now that is just plain silly
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 09:07:13
avatar
"See how they dance, Master..." "Yes. It takes so little to set them off."
the blanker on 31/08/2013 09:44:10
avatar
"See how they dance, Master..." "Yes. It takes so little to set them off." Are you drunk or perhaps in need of some sort of help?
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 10:06:55
avatar
No, just enraging the serially cretinous. They know who they are.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 10:22:11
avatar
You for one......sometimes 2.A person deformed and mentally handicapped due to a congenital thyroid deficiency. Why mock the afflicted, Paul? You can do better, you really can.
bennygesserit on 31/08/2013 10:34:11
avatar
No, just enraging the serially cretinous. They know who they are. I don't feel enraged just a bit embarrassed for you
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 10:38:31
avatar
Paul, Not someone I know well but a friend of my Mum's - her daughter went from fit, healthy, squash playing geography teacher to Randall P McMurphy basket case in a very short time due to a thyroid related condition. PLEASE think about things before you launch them. Why not just be grateful that your own health is tickety boo?
the blanker on 31/08/2013 10:53:14
avatar
He doesn't think other than how he can insult others or promote his huge ego, I feel sorry for him as it must be awful thinking you are better than others but deep down knowing you are not.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 11:01:13
avatar
Mr Blanker, I love and treasure my anonymity and truly take comfort from the fact that the world will get by just fine when I'm dead and gone. Apart from the odd mileage and age twinge (touching wood), I have my health, a good mind, a top drawer pot of coffee on the go and the Daily Telegraph crossword done in under half an hour. The sun is shining and you know what? That's enough for me. I just don't understand the need to pull the wings off insects. The person I referred to is two years older than me and now has to be spoon fed like a two year old. It's tragic and painful to witness. Franklin was right, death and taxes are the only guarantees. All the best, Phil.
the blanker on 31/08/2013 11:11:45
avatar
Mr Blanker, I love and treasure my anonymity and truly take comfort from the fact that the world will get by just fine when I'm dead and gone. Apart from the odd mileage and age twinge (touching wood), I have my health, a good mind, a top drawer pot of coffee on the go and the Daily Telegraph crossword done in under half an hour. The sun is shining and you know what? That's enough for me. I just don't understand the need to pull the wings off insects. The person I referred to is two years older than me and now has to be spoon fed like a two year old. It's tragic and painful to witness. Franklin was right, death and taxes are the only guarantees. All the best, Phil. Although I am not in such a bad state as the unfortunate person you mention I am in poor health and struggle to go fishing but do manage it with the help of my wife, it really makes me angry when others more fortunate think its ok to go banding words like cretins about, just as bad is others "liking" such posts, perhaps they should remember that they don't know what is round the corner and nobody is immune from devastating illness.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 11:18:05
avatar
Couldn't have put it better, mon ami. Nobody does know. I truly hope things improve for you and you can get out and fall in love with the world's greatest pastime all over again.....:) Take care. Phil
the blanker on 31/08/2013 11:25:40
avatar
Couldn't have put it better, mon ami. Nobody does know. I truly hope things improve for you and you can get out and fall in love with the world's greatest pastime all over again.....:) Take care. Phil Still in love with it Phil, just the Barbel that need to play the game as I have struggled this season while my lad has been catching doubles for fun, still he doesn't take the mickey.............. much :)
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 11:43:47
avatar
Any jury would call that culpable homicide.......:) My brother's exactly the same, will fish about once a decade and empties the place when he does. Do I deliberately chide my brother by winning the British Open.....? :) Not a chance, actually....:D
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 13:19:39
avatar
So back on subject! The MASTER at being so out of touch with reality then so surprised when his opinions cause such adverse reactions. And as for not profiting from them; well that is only because you failed to. It was not for lack of trying. I've thought about it. And it is nonsense. Didn't they teach you how to write English at school? But, still an opinion that doesn't call for such personal jibes, so what's your view. Mine goes without saying, and I agree with the writer in all respects I also disagree with your approach Peter. The writer refered to "a. is very environmentally friendly b. is virtually self-funding c. does not (by contrast to many other sporting activities) require any police presence whatsoever, or need emergency services to be on hand d. is totally participant e. caters widely for the disabled, and f. has given the UK (if only the UK knew it) a wealth of kudos and trophies In fact, every single angler worth his salt should be aware of the above little list, and be able to run through the points to defend his pastime to those people we meet casually every day whose only view of angling has been shaped by their own imagination, or even worse, by the twisted propaganda of the antis and of course by the general image promoted by the media." and "And every single angler worth his salt should join the single organisation which now fights on his behalf at a political level for the future of fishing, promotes angling among the young, takes legal action and lobbies government on anglers’ behalf, sends teams abroad to compete, deals with the media on anglers’ behalf, and a whole lot more besides. Yet individual membership of the Angling Trust, although it has been slowly but steadily, remains sadly at a measly 1.3 % of the total number of known individual anglers in the UK." There's no reason in my view that both have be mutually exclusive!
Peter Jacobs on 31/08/2013 13:29:05
avatar
Disagree all you like Fred, you are entitled to your point of view as much as I am to mine. How many times have we seen the reaction here on FM when pro Trust supporters try to bully, bludgeon, belittle, shame or otherwise coerce non-members into joining? It simply doesn't work! Lead and advertise by example and success, surely we have enough of those now, in my opinion, to make a proper case. Alternatively, take the author's view then that 98.7% of all license buying anglers are simply NOT WORTH THEIR SALT Very encouraging . . . . . . . NOT! If you read my original post, I said, quite clearly: "I quite enjoyed this article and some of the comparisons that it made" It was simply the "unnecessarily pushy" closing comments I thought were OTT
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 13:39:25
avatar
...and that was all I thought, and still disagree! Some anglers just can't get it into their heads how important it is, and any nice persuading just hasn't worked on those who really are only looking for excuse not to spend £25!
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 13:44:36
avatar
Unfortunately Fred, what else can be done? One cannot threaten or beat people into joining. What are the alternatives? ---------- Post added at 14:44 ---------- Previous post was at 14:42 ---------- You can bet those who would never dream of donating body parts will be the first to scream for them if their lives depend on it. Human beings are nothing if not apathetic, in the main. That - and self interested.
Peter Jacobs on 31/08/2013 13:49:06
avatar
Unfortunately Fred, what else can be done? One cannot threaten or beat people into joining. What are the alternatives? Oh, I know, let's have a hugely undemocratic . . . . . . . Levy system Let's simply add the £25 to the annual EA license fee - oh no, sorry, the EA have already poo-poo'd that idea . . . . . .
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 13:56:33
avatar
Levies never work.....look at New Orleans. Seriously, Peter - there are days on some river stretches where I feel I'm probably the only angler with a rod licence. A sizeable portion of participants have no interest in putting anything back into the sport. It's a purely one sided indulgence. Adding to licence prices would decrease sales as people know there's even less chance of being caught offending on the river bank than there is in the average high street - and there's very little chance of that!! I don't know what the answers are, I do my bit and pay my levy but it feels like I'm in a minority group which shrinks year on year. Hurts me to say it but I think most anglers would rather have the eight pints of beer or four packs of cigarettes they could buy with the payment. Bless you for the work you put in but, as the old Liverpool saying goes, you want loyalty? Buy a dog!!
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 14:03:32
avatar
Phil, My view is on the basis that when it keeps being said, that something is wrong to do, or say, before very long it becomes fact that it is wrong to do or say, because it's said so many times, and passed on by some people. It becomes The Gospel According to the Negative Thinker or the Loud Shouter So if we keep saying something is right to do, before long with some luck, it will turn into being the right thing to do. It then becomes The Gospel According to the Positive Thinker. I think though that lately I am becoming convinced that my simile only applies to the negative view on matters!! The right thing to do is there to be seen on the Angling Trust website,surely there shouldn't need to be any further justification ? ---------- Post added at 15:03 ---------- Previous post was at 15:00 ---------- Pay a levy to the EA? That becomes much the same paying the poacher not to poach! Or, roadtax being spent on roads!!
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 14:09:11
avatar
Fred, I've been a member for years, the ACA and now the Trust. I believe and trust we're trying to reach the same goal but I have to agree with what Peter's saying too - how to go about getting more people involved. I would think that, politically, the Trust has to remain a purely voluntary organisation and, like any voluntary organisation, overcoming apathy is the greatest challenge. Those who do not join and who withhold their monies are guilty of benefitting off the backs of those of us who do pay in, who do believe and who WANT angling to get better. I'm not trying to sound like a doom-monger but, in the sport nowadays, you have sizeable groups of people who evade licence fees and even barbecure the fish in situ. If the news coverage of these events achieves anything, it will be, sadly, not to reinforce the need for the Trust and its work but to make people ask themselves "What's the point?" I'm a believer in the old adage "all that is required for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing" and that, good Sir, is, I'm afraid, exactly what I see happening here.
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 14:11:46
avatar
I'm sorry to say Phil, you're not the only doom monger, I tend to agree with you. Something for nothing usually ends up as ......nothing!
the blanker on 31/08/2013 14:12:18
avatar
I think we have been through this before ( several times ) the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of anglers are not members, some have reasons not to be others have never heard of the angling trust others are not interested in joining preferring to just go their own way as they always have, its down to the trust to find out the reasons for low membership and do something about it if they want to increase membership. that can only be done by reaching a wider audience and persuading them that it can be of benefit to them, and that as I see it is the biggest problem facing the trust as far as membership goes, anglers being anglers just want to go fishing. one other thing, if while I am a member I am "worth my salt" what happens if I don't rejoin, do I become not "worth my salt"?
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 14:21:21
avatar
I totally agree with your take about education, Fred - but I guess my concern is that is, in this instance, a long term project. We need short term fixes too, don't we?? What are the alternatives to a purely voluntary organisation and would any other form of funding or subsidy weaken the Trust's position? I'd be the first to admit that the Trust isn't perfect but, then, what is? And it IS all we have. ---------- Post added at 15:21 ---------- Previous post was at 15:17 ---------- I think we have been through this before ( several times ) the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of anglers are not members, some have reasons not to be others have never heard of the angling trust others are not interested in joining preferring to just go their own way as they always have, its down to the trust to find out the reasons for low membership and do something about it if they want to increase membership. that can only be done by reaching a wider audience and persuading them that it can be of benefit to them, and that as I see it is the biggest problem facing the trust as far as membership goes, anglers being anglers just want to go fishing. one other thing, if while I am a member I am "worth my salt" what happens if I don't rejoin, do I become not "worth my salt"? You're right, spot on. As I said before though, if you're not evading your licence fees or raping our fisheries then, I guess, in the current climate, you probably can't be accused of not being worth your salt or anything else, can you?
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 14:26:00
avatar
If the Angling Trust gets it's membership figures up based on it's ideals and does nothing, I would say you won't be the only one to leave. All of the no sayers will then be able to say "I told you so, they were in it for themselves" because that will be proof positive. Give the Angling Trust a chance to prove them wrong.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 14:31:38
avatar
Sometimes, Fred - their good work goes unseen and unreported and those allegations are hellishly easy to make, aren't they? I'd never leave it but that's a personal choice. I guess it's a bit like the NHS now - people fall back on the "why pay if you don't have to?" argument. Sad, n'est ce pas?
cg74 on 31/08/2013 14:36:51
avatar
...and that was all I thought, and still disagree! Some anglers just can't get it into their heads how important it is, and any nice persuading just hasn't worked on those who really are only looking for excuse not to spend £25! "Looking for excuse not to spend £25!" Fred, as ever you're wrong because you miss the fundamental point - I don't need to justify my actions to anyone, only myself. And the facts still remain the same; the ATr needs to increase its membership and with the current head up your arses attitude displayed by the likes of you, the membership will just stagnate. Oh yeah Fred, I don't need to join as you being such a good chap, you've part paid for me anyway..... Peter, I'm sorry but putting a levy on rod licences, tackle purchases or whatever, will never and should never happen..... What next, a 10p per can of baked beans tax, proceeds to Friends of the Earth, or 15p/kg of rice to fund P3TA.....?
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 14:53:27
avatar
Colin, Surely revenues from taxes / subsidies / call it what you will would destroy those organisations? Their independence and political credibility would be dealt a crushing, likely lethal, blow. Such organisations, whatever their message or stance, have to remain voluntary and independent, don't they? And overcoming apathy or a willingness to part with monies is a key challenge for them all.
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 14:59:58
avatar
"Looking for excuse not to spend £25!" Fred, as ever you're wrong because you miss the fundamental point - I don't need to justify my actions to anyone, only myself. And the facts still remain the same; the ATr needs to increase its membership and with the current head up your arses attitude displayed by the likes of you, the membership will just stagnate. Oh yeah Fred, I don't need to join as you being such a good chap, you've part paid for me anyway..... Ah but Colin (it's not about you!)you keep coming on here,saying the same old thing, so in a sense you are justifying your actions, it's always the same old song/excuse.
nicepix on 31/08/2013 15:15:52
avatar
Ah but Colin (it's not about you!)you keep coming on here,saying the same old thing, so in a sense you are justifying your actions, it's always the same old song/excuse. That is exactly what Peter is talking about. People like you who seem to think that joining the Angling Trust is unquestionably the right thing to do and will not listen to any other point of view. No one has yet made an overwhelming case for all anglers to join the Angling Trust. No one. If they had more people including myself would join. Simply trying to bludgeon everyone into accepting your point of view has never worked. But you still keep on trying.
the blanker on 31/08/2013 15:16:46
avatar
Reason Capacity for consciously making sense of things, applying logic for establishing and verifying facts and changing or justifying practices. Excuse To explain in the hope of being forgiven or understood. Look like two different things to me.
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 15:29:02
avatar
That is exactly what Peter is talking about. People like you who seem to think that joining the Angling Trust is unquestionably the right thing to do and will not listen to any other point of view. No one has yet made an overwhelming case for all anglers to join the Angling Trust. No one. If they had more people including myself would join. Simply trying to bludgeon everyone into accepting your point of view has never worked. But you still keep on trying. As it stands it is the only unquestionable thing to do,there is no alternative available. It's working but needs support. If you were to give a point of view instead of having a knock,then perhaps some may be persuaded otherwise. The overwhelming case is on the ATr website and there for all to see...if they really want to! and Excuse: No reason to do something because somebody else will do it for you
nicepix on 31/08/2013 15:41:20
avatar
As it stands it is the only unquestionable thing to do,there is no alternative available. It's working but needs support. If you were to give a point of view instead of having a knock,then perhaps some may be persuaded otherwise. The overwhelming case is on the ATr website and there for all to see...if they really want to! and Excuse: No reason to do something because somebody else will do it for you Absolute bollox! The Environment Agency or whatever it is called this week is supposed to look after the water quality and has a mandate issued by an Act of Parliament to do so. Why not make that work properly instead of funding a 'jobs for the boys' agency that is shadowing their remit? If the state organisation isn't working right then use democratic means to make it work. There is no overwhelming case on the Angling Trust website. I have looked and discussed this with Jeff Woodhouse previously. Getting information about the Angling Trust is like getting blood out of a stone. It is all weasle words and nothing tangible. I have said many times before; there is no reason for the Angling Trust to exist. Clubs, associations, fishery and riparian owners have the Fish Legal facilities to call on. That should be paid for by club fees, etc. There is no reason for the individual angler to pay again which is exactly what is happening with the Angling Trust. They are wanting the cake and the bun. I have also said many times before that I would never subscribe to any organisation until I was able to view their accounts. That goes for donations to charities and my share dealing investments. The Angling Trust in its previous guise of the ACA was simply using their funds to keep themselves in a job. If the Angling Trust will not publish their accounts then I would argue that nobody should be stupid enough to put money their way.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 15:53:21
avatar
Clive, Does the sport not need a collective body, with a member driven mandate, to actually say to the EA (or whatever it's called this week....) "this isn't working, we're not happy" etc etc? Without that unity, surely a fragmented approach to central government is both worthless and easily ignored? I take your point about the EA being the water guardians - but who watches the watchmen? Surely we have to and surely a collective body is the only democratic way we can? Although, I do agree with you - the non-publishing of accounts is both a worry and a hint that all may not be ship shape and Bristol fashion. All the best, Phil.
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 16:02:31
avatar
The EA is a long term Government department and it'll do what the Government wants it to do as can be seen it's history and cost cutting. It's supposed to be on top of pollution but the water companies are allowed to get away with pollution. It has never represented the interests of angling and never will. As Phil quite rightly states who watches the watchmen?
chub_on_the_block on 31/08/2013 16:03:24
avatar
I see the ATr as a pressure group. Yes the EA should be keeping the rivers etc marvellous or returning them to marvellous, but mostly they are about flood defence, promoting sustainable development or vacuous management speak, unfortunately. The RSPB is another pressure group that buys land that is of nature reserve quality or attempts to create reserves on land - mainly for birds but all wildlife probably benefits. Arguably there should be no need for the RSPB if Natural England was doing its job, but again it doesnt - it backs down when government tells it to and it doesnt aim too high (and is probably getting cut to death at the moment). I dont expect the ATr to buy up fishing rights for members or secure angling access in new areas, but just to promote angling and stand up for fishing interests is enougth for me. But as I write i am a recently lapsed member. Just like i am long-time lapsed RSPB member but a recently re-joined National Trust member. I like to support what i can when i feel like it and if i have the funds the hand.
Fred Bonney on 31/08/2013 16:09:05
avatar
Now I haven't read this page because i think I've seen it already, but can't recall the content off hand. All I needed to do is put in the search box Accounts!!! Angling Trust AGMs - The Angling Trust
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 16:11:44
avatar
Chub, You raise a very valid point there because some years back, a venue named Burton Mere (Cheshire) came up for sale. The owner claimed he couldn't sell it as a going concern and the RSPB couldn't wait to get their hands on it and kill the fishing stone dead - which they did. The EA (or whatever it's called this week....spot on there, Clive!) are NEVER going to leap to angling's defence in circumstances such as these as, you are right, these pressure groups have lobbyists as surely as multi national businesses. Surely we have to have a united professional body to represent our interests? How professional you currently perceive that body to be is, arguably, a separate argument?
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 16:20:13
avatar
Yes the EA should be keeping the rivers etc marvellous or returning them to marvellous, but mostly they are about flood defence, promoting sustainable development or vacuous management speak, unfortunately. Well, I have some excellent news for you (and particularly for me). I have just got back from a long long river-walk, revisiting, under cloudless skies and a gorgeous hottish sun, a piece of river that I wreaked Angling Mayhem on in the mid 2000s, until the EA went and cleared it and destroyed it. Well, pleased to say that, after today's walk, the EA gangs have not have been back since: it is a totally unfished jungle out there; I am going in. Expect non-reports from me in the coming weeks. If I start using smilies, however (which I loathe every bit as as much serial cretins), you will know that I have caught. Don't you just hate that? Benign neglect of a river. Wonderful.
the blanker on 31/08/2013 16:34:08
avatar
Is there any way of knowing what contributions if any are made to the trust by the tackle industry? If angling was ever to go t!ts up they would have the most to loose. ---------- Post added at 17:34 ---------- Previous post was at 17:30 ---------- Well, I have some excellent news for you (and particularly for me). I have just got back from a long long river-walk, revisiting, under cloudless skies and a gorgeous hottish sun, a piece of river that I wreaked Angling Mayhem on in the mid 2000s, until the EA went and cleared it and destroyed it. Well, pleased to say that, after today's walk, the EA gangs have not have been back since: it is a totally unfished jungle out there; I am going in. Expect non-reports from me in the coming weeks. If I start using smilies, however (which I loathe every bit as as much serial cretins), you will know that I have caught. Don't you just hate that? Benign neglect of a river. Wonderful. What I hate is your continued use of the word cretins when someone disagrees with you, its not on.
dorsetandchub on 31/08/2013 16:39:33
avatar
Residents and natives of Crete might not be too impressed either....:omg: Almost.....
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 17:08:51
avatar
My sincerest apologies. From now on I will call all serially, personally, unpleasant sorts "Princess". So pretty in pink, so permanently red in angry face.
the blanker on 31/08/2013 17:26:19
avatar
Whatever keeps you happy Paul, I read somewhere that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 17:43:27
avatar
Anything you say, Princess.
bennygesserit on 31/08/2013 18:08:04
avatar
As it stands it is the only unquestionable thing to do,there is no alternative available. And that is the nub of the whole thing - fishing existed for years without the Trust , it will carry on even if the Trust stopped tomorrow , the EA look after fishing so one could argue there is no need to join. Really members should resign themselves to the fact that the membership level will probably pretty much always stay at the level its at now , its role will almost always be as primarily an angling pressure group. I think , with its connections , it seems to pretty much punch above its weight on that , however my view might be skewed by the fact that I read angling web sites. On the other hand fish legal seems worthwhile , though how significant it work is in the grand scheme of things is difficult to judge - they have isolated victories yet are they "winning the war? ". Fish legal and fighting the green fight was the main reason I joined , the fruitless antagonistic attitude towards canoeists is why let it lapse. Its a real shame that some , like Fred , take the tack of trying to "shame" people into joining , its never going to happen , you are allowed your own opinion sure but people are always going to spend their money however they choose. Sometimes I am convinced people post the "what's your excuse" as a wind up. The trouble is it always gets personal and clutters what could otherwise be an interesting debate.
nicepix on 31/08/2013 19:01:38
avatar
Now I haven't read this page because i think I've seen it already, but can't recall the content off hand. All I needed to do is put in the search box Accounts!!! Angling Trust AGMs - The Angling Trust I've already tried that - nothing comes back. As for having a united front, who watches the watchers, etc, etc - read post 57 by bennygesserit. He answers it perfectly. Angling doesn't need the Angling Trust. The Angling Trust needs angling. ---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ---------- Well, I have some excellent news for you (and particularly for me). I have just got back from a long long river-walk, revisiting, under cloudless skies and a gorgeous hottish sun, a piece of river that I wreaked Angling Mayhem on in the mid 2000s, until the EA went and cleared it and destroyed it. Well, pleased to say that, after today's walk, the EA gangs have not have been back since: it is a totally unfished jungle out there; I am going in. Expect non-reports from me in the coming weeks. If I start using smilies, however (which I loathe every bit as as much serial cretins), you will know that I have caught. Don't you just hate that? Benign neglect of a river. Wonderful. Once again your modesty knows no bounds. But I'll forgive that if you actually post a catch report - from this millennium, not the last one.
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 19:43:49
avatar
I've already tried that - nothing comes back. As for having a united front, who watches the watchers, etc, etc - read post 57 by bennygesserit. He answers it perfectly. Angling doesn't need the Angling Trust. The Angling Trust needs angling. ---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ---------- Once again your modesty knows no bounds. But I'll forgive that if you actually post a catch report - from this millennium, not the last one. The last time I wrote anything detailed about my fishing activities, on another site, five or six years ago, I had some gent in Yorkshire (you might know him; I believe that he lives in your neck of the French backwoods nowadays) joining a website merely to howl about me being a benefit cheat for being able to fish so often, a non-car owner and frequent bus-user, a drug-taker, a fantasist, a liar and heaven knows what else. Amazing the effect that The Master can have on some folk. PS - Hope you liked the Fairy Cakes we sent you in the food parcel. Nothing is too good for Our Little Princess.
cg74 on 31/08/2013 21:08:38
avatar
Colin, Surely revenues from taxes / subsidies / call it what you will would destroy those organisations? Their independence and political credibility would be dealt a crushing, likely lethal, blow. Such organisations, whatever their message or stance, have to remain voluntary and independent, don't they? And overcoming apathy or a willingness to part with monies is a key challenge for them all. Phil, that's the point I was alluding to. ---------- Post added at 22:08 ---------- Previous post was at 21:44 ---------- Ah but Colin (it's not about you!)you keep coming on here,saying the same old thing, so in a sense you are justifying your actions, it's always the same old song/excuse. "It's not about you!" Actually Fred when it's my opinion, it is about me. "You keep coming on here,saying the same old thing" Well Fred seeing as I was responding to your same old, same old, retort. Why would you expect any change in my response? Are you a sly member of PETA, as you seem hell bent on scuppering the ATr and as this thread shows; I am definitely not alone in thinking that your (and the article author) oh so superior attitudes are a real membership repellent.
bennygesserit on 31/08/2013 21:46:18
avatar
Colin - I am sure I have asked this before but what can you "do for Angling" without being in the Trust? ---------- Post added at 22:46 ---------- Previous post was at 22:23 ---------- REGISTERED NUMBER: 05320350 (England and Wales) Abbreviated Audited Accounts for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 for Angling Trust LimitedAngling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Contents of the Abbreviated Accounts for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 Page Company Information 1 Report of the Independent Auditors on the Abbreviated Accounts 2 Abbreviated Balance Sheet 3 Notes to the Abbreviated Accounts 5Angling Trust Limited Company Information for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 DIRECTORS: T W Fell M R Heylin D Moore J G Glasspool R Dyer D Kent R J Vincent G W Mawle Mrs J J Hyde C R Collier K A Naish J Baldwin SECRETARY: S R Sharp REGISTERED OFFICE: Eastwood House 6 Rainbow Street Leominster Herefordshire HR6 8DQ REGISTERED NUMBER: 05320350 (England and Wales) AUDITORS: bostockwhite Limited Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors Cabourn House Station Street Bingham Nottinghamshire NG13 8AQ BANKERS: Unity Trust Bank plc Nine Brindleyplace Birmingham B1 2HB Page 1Report of the Independent Auditors to Angling Trust Limited Under Section 449 of the Companies Act 2006 We have examined the abbreviated accounts set out on pages three to seven, together with the full financial statements of Angling Trust Limited for the year ended 31 December 2012 prepared under Section 396 of the Companies Act 2006. This report is made solely to the company, in accordance with Section 449 of the Companies Act 2006. Our work has been undertaken so that we might state to the company those matters we are required to state to it in a special auditors' report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the company, for our work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed. Respective responsibilities of directors and auditors The directors are responsible for preparing the abbreviated accounts in accordance with Section 444 of the Companies Act 2006. It is our responsibility to form an independent opinion as to whether the company is entitled to deliver abbreviated accounts to the Registrar of Companies and whether the abbreviated accounts have been properly prepared in accordance with the Regulations made under that Section and to report our opinion to you. Basis of opinion We conducted our work in accordance with Bulletin 2008/4 issued by the Auditing Practices Board. In accordance with that Bulletin we have carried out the procedures we consider necessary to confirm, by reference to the financial statements, that the company is entitled to deliver abbreviated accounts and that the abbreviated accounts to be delivered are properly prepared. Opinion In our opinion the company is entitled to deliver abbreviated accounts prepared in accordance with Section 444(3) of the Companies Act 2006, and the abbreviated accounts have been properly prepared in accordance with the Regulations made under that Section. Samantha White FCA CTA (Senior Statutory Auditor) for and on behalf of bostockwhite Limited Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors Cabourn House Station Street Bingham Nottinghamshire NG13 8AQ Date: ............................................. Page 2Angling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Abbreviated Balance Sheet 31 December 2012 31.12.12 31.12.11 Notes £ £ £ £ FIXED ASSETS Intangible assets 2 (31,978) - Tangible assets 3 107,612 101,749 75,634 101,749 CURRENT ASSETS Stocks - 1,250 Debtors 21,089 14,936 Cash at bank and in hand 468,925 156,569 490,014 172,755 CREDITORS Amounts falling due within one year 411,464 131,482 NET CURRENT ASSETS 78,550 41,273 TOTAL ASSETS LESS CURRENT LIABILITIES 154,184 143,022 CREDITORS Amounts falling due after more than one year 21,310 22,837 NET ASSETS 132,874 120,185 RESERVES Revaluation reserve 81,420 81,420 Income and expenditure account 51,454 38,765 132,874 120,185 The notes form part of these abbreviated accounts Page 3 continued...Angling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Abbreviated Balance Sheet - continued 31 December 2012 The abbreviated accounts have been prepared in accordance with the special provisions of Part 15 of the Companies Act 2006 relating to small companies. The financial statements were approved by the Board of Directors on ............................................. and were signed on its behalf by: .................................................................................... M R Heylin - Director The notes form part of these abbreviated accounts Page 4Angling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Notes to the Abbreviated Accounts for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 1. ACCOUNTING POLICIES Accounting convention The financial statements have been prepared under the historical cost convention as modified by the revaluation of certain assets and in accordance with the Financial Reporting Standard for Smaller Entities (effective April 2008). Income Income represents subscriptions, competition entry fees, coaching, contributions from members and grant income from partner funding bodies, excluding value added tax. Goodwill The negative goodwill arising on the acquisition of a business on 1 April 2012 is to be amortised over one year, being nine months in the year ended 31 December 2012 with the further three months being amortised in the year ended 31 December 2013. Tangible fixed assets Depreciation is provided at the following annual rates in order to write off each asset over its estimated useful life. Plant and machinery - 50% on cost Trophies - 5% on revaluation less residual value Computer equipment - 33% on cost All assets purchased for under £1,000 will not be capitalised and will be written off in the year of purchase. The trophy collection has been revalued by Cumberland Galleries, Lincoln. The valuation was performed in 2010 and has been confirmed in writing in February 2011. In the light of the valuers report the board has decided to adopt a policy of revaluation for this class of asset in the year ended 31 December 2010. A rolling policy of maintenance is to be implemented and included within future budgets. The useful economic life for this class of asset is 20 years straight line on the revalued amount less estimated residual value. Residual value is deemed to be the current value of those trophies which are hallmarked silver and are not identified as being in need of renovation. Stocks Stocks are valued at the lower of cost and net realisable value, after making due allowance for obsolete and slow moving items. Operating lease commitments Rentals paid under operating leases are charged to the profit and loss account on a straight line basis over the period of the lease. Life membership Members have the option to become a life member of the organisation. The related subscription amount is released to the profit and loss account on a straight line basis over a 10 year period. Membership The subscriptions of all members, excluding life members, are written off to the profit and loss account in the year of receipt. Page 5 continued...Angling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Notes to the Abbreviated Accounts - continued for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 1. ACCOUNTING POLICIES - continued Pension The company operates a defined contribution pension scheme. Contributions payable to the company's pension scheme are charged to the profit and loss account in the period to which they relate. 2. INTANGIBLE FIXED ASSETS Total £ COST Additions (127,912 ) At 31 December 2012 (127,912 ) AMORTISATION Amortisation for year (95,934) At 31 December 2012 (95,934) NET BOOK VALUE At 31 December 2012 (31,978) 3. TANGIBLE FIXED ASSETS Total £ COST OR VALUATION At 1 January 2012 110,840 Additions 21,293 At 31 December 2012 132,133 DEPRECIATION At 1 January 2012 9,091 Charge for year 15,430 At 31 December 2012 24,521 NET BOOK VALUE At 31 December 2012 107,612 At 31 December 2011 101,749 Page 6 continued...Angling Trust Limited (Registered number: 05320350) Notes to the Abbreviated Accounts - continued for the Year Ended 31 December 2012 4. SHARE CAPITAL The company has no share capital as it is a company limited by guarantee. Under the terms of the Memorandum and Articles of Association the Directors are each liable to contribute to the company the maximum sum of £1 in the event of the company winding up during their period of office or within the 12 months following their resignation. Page 7
Paul Boote on 31/08/2013 23:02:04
avatar
In short: much less witch-hunting, far less networking ("Thanks for the freebie") and Cosy Nostra politicking, and a lot more fishing. For all concerned, for both the AT and for its high-horse knockers. Shorter still: back to no-frills basics.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 05:15:13
avatar
Colin, Yes, I thought and was hoping so. Obviously, I'm in total agreement. All the best, Phil. ---------- Post added at 06:15 ---------- Previous post was at 06:12 ---------- My sincerest apologies. From now on I will call all serially, personally, unpleasant sorts "Princess". So pretty in pink, so permanently red in angry face. Thanks. The Peoples' Republic and myself are both most grateful. Seriously, I don't know her all that well but it's an afront what happened to that lass. Look forward to reading your Jungle-River reports, Ho-Chi Boote :)
nicepix on 01/09/2013 06:33:00
avatar
The last time I wrote anything detailed about my fishing activities, on another site, five or six years ago, I had some gent in Yorkshire (you might know him; I believe that he lives in your neck of the French backwoods nowadays) joining a website merely to howl about me being a benefit cheat for being able to fish so often, a non-car owner and frequent bus-user, a drug-taker, a fantasist, a liar and heaven knows what else. Amazing the effect that The Master can have on some folk. PS - Hope you liked the Fairy Cakes we sent you in the food parcel. Nothing is too good for Our Little Princess. Yes, I seem to recall it is a long, long time since you last went fishing. Despite the tales of your river walks and all the eye watering fish you find I can't see you lugging the tackle on the Uxbridge Circular to actually go fishing. So we'll just have to settle for hearing (again ad again) the somewhat implausible stories from the last millennium when you were almost nearly famous. Bennygesserit, sorry but that info' from the Angling Trust accounts isn't nearly comprehensive enough. Before I would consider subscribing I'd need to know the income, expenditure broken down into salaries, office expenses, etc and other details. I can find it for companies I invest in and charities I donate to before I part with my money. But it seems you have to pay the Angling trust before they let you see where your money goes. Not good. I've stated my case for not joining and nothing that has been posted has changed that opinion. Fred Bonney's typically boorish manner does the Trust no favours and the argument that we should all contribute because it is the only thing we have is frankly laughable when you examine it. Angling has been getting along nicely without the Angling Trust and while I have nothing against Fish Legal I think there is no purpose of benefit for an individual joining the Angling Trust. In 2006 in a similar debate over the ACA I suggested that the ACA should take the form of Fish Legal and dispense with the individual memberships. I stand by that comment. As they might say in Dragon's Den: You haven't made a convincing case for my investment so I'm out!
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 07:29:23
avatar
Clive, Although your views differ slightly from mine in that I still think some form of EA watchdog must be required, I appreciate your candour and committment. The worst are those who don't even and would never consider the question of a need. You have, at least, addressed the question and made a decision and I, for one, appreciate that. As Monsieur Voltaire said, "I may not agree with everything you say, but I defend, to the last, your right to say it." All the best, Phil. ---------- Post added at 08:29 ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 ---------- Clive, What is the corresponding situation in France? Do the French have something similar to the A Tr? As I understand it, licences are the responsibility of local government? Do they have a national EA type organisation or is everything administered on a local basis? Phil.
nicepix on 01/09/2013 07:41:05
avatar
Regards watching the watchers - where does that end? Do we watch the watchers of the original watchers and if so who watches them? :confused: Do we also pay for someone to watch the police, the fire service, the military, etc, etc in case they aren't watching properly? :confused: Another problem with single issue pressure groups is that they don't necessarily accept the view of doing good for the wider audience. Whilst the EA (or whatever they are called this week) might not always do what is right for angling they should do what it right taking other issues into account. And if that affects anglers then the fishery owners have a vested interest to lobby. Regards your second point; in France each department has a committee who regulate the local fishery by-laws and act as intermediaries with the government agencies. They are in effect the Angling Trust on a local level and are volunteers, not paid officials. There are also police officers tasked to deal specifically with angling matters. Imagine having your licence and bait checked in the early hours by armed officers? It happens over here.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 07:49:26
avatar
I do take that point but, trying to avoid going round in circles, surely the watchdog would be monitored by a voluntary, paying membership who would withhold both if the organisation or its leadership failed. The French system sounds ok, armed police perhaps a little extreme but on some of the fisheries over here now, it might actually prove the deterrent needed. Might deter the fish theft, poaching and barbecuing. Honestly, those people should be horsewhipped (oops, did I say that out loud....? :omg:) All the best, mon ami.
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 08:25:57
avatar
Phil, I'm sure, like myself, the majority of people don't realise the word 'cretin' has medical connotations. Let's be honest here it is a word that has become commonplace in use and simply means, at least in the Hammond Thesaurus, an idiot. Anyway, that aside: I joined the AT last year in the hope that my contribution may do some good for angling. I opted out of supporting our main lobbying body a few years back when a certain gentleman effectively furnished himself with a lavish life style with the previous action groups funds. And while I think I've already seen some performance for my money on pollution and the Cormorant issue, I do have serious concerns that those at the ship's wheel are doing the same. I probably worded that badly. It isn't meant to sound like an accusation of any kind, I'm just pointing out that without access to the more detailed minutae of the Trust's account (Not that I'd have any understanding of them.) my natural suspicion remains. If I thought for a moment that the Trust's top flight were making fat salaries from it I'd opt out immediately. As it stands I can't see any other viable option for those wishing to support the sport, but it is an entirely personal view and I can fully understand the reasoning from others who have thus far refrained from committing. I agree one hundred percent with Peter J's point in the first comment on this thread. Suggesting that anglers are not worthy because they are not members is not only quite obviously outright nonsense, but also quite clearly provocative and hence entirely counter-productive.
Fred Bonney on 01/09/2013 08:34:07
avatar
The problem with looking backwards all the time Nicepix is that you can't see what's coming up in front of you. There are things that may happen which if we're not careful, will stop us fishing. Pollution and water abstraction to name just two, when more funds are withdrawn from the EA. If you think that anglers as individuals have any chance of keeping an eye on the Government agencies whether they are the police or the EA, then I'm sorry to say your sojourn in France is masking all your reasoning capabilities..if you ever had any! If the Angling Trust fails to do what is expected, we just withdraw the funding, we can't as individuals do that with the Government agencies.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 08:45:00
avatar
Chris, Ref: medical condition - very true. I've used it myself but when I saw the results of a thyroid condition, it's a real eye opener - and extremely tragic. With regard to the ATr, I agree entirely with your take on it. If it's merely funding lifestyle/s then yes - it would never see a penny of my money but I do feel vulnerable about the sport not having an umbrella body to stand up to a dusty corner of central government and other non, often anti, angling groups. Can we afford not to be organised in this day and age? I'm perfectly prepared to believe I could be wrong. If you think I am, please tell me. All the best, Phil.
nicepix on 01/09/2013 08:47:02
avatar
The problem with looking backwards all the time Nicepix is that you can't see what's coming up in front of you. There are things that may happen which if we're not careful, will stop us fishing. Pollution and water abstraction to name just two, when more funds are withdrawn from the EA. If you think that anglers as individuals have any chance of keeping an eye on the Government agencies whether they are the police or the EA, then I'm sorry to say your sojourn in France is masking all your reasoning capabilities..if you ever had any! If the Angling Trust fails to do what is expected, we just withdraw the funding, we can't as individuals do that with the Government agencies. Ah! The bogeyman scare tactics. Things might happen :rolleyes: So at least now you accept that there is a reason for someone not to fund the Angling Trust. At least that is progress. Now you might be able to accept that not subscribing is a reason not an excuse? Or perhaps that might be a leap too far into your comprehension :omg:
bennygesserit on 01/09/2013 08:49:06
avatar
Fred a sensible answer but why say this "I'm sorry to say your sojourn in France is masking all your reasoning capabilities..if you ever had any!" no reason for it , debating on a forum is hard enough as it is , without deliberately trying to provoke people.
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 08:56:12
avatar
Chris, Ref: medical condition - very true. I've used it myself but when I saw the results of a thyroid condition, it's a real eye opener - and extremely tragic. With regard to the ATr, I agree entirely with your take on it. If it's merely funding lifestyle/s then yes - it would never see a penny of my money but I do feel vulnerable about the sport not having an umbrella body to stand up to a dusty corner of central government and other non, often anti, angling groups. Can we afford not to be organised in this day and age? I'm perfectly prepared to believe I could be wrong. If you think I am, please tell me. All the best, Phil. Cheers Phil. I'll not be using the word again. I honestly had no idea it referred to a medical condition and to continue using it would make me a hypocrite because man do I get the hump when people use the term 'retard' my poor nephew being a mentally handicapped teenager. Re the Trust. I'm with you all the way. I can't see any other option for us currently. However, as I said, if I find out the top brass are allotting themselves fat salaries that will be it for me.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 09:03:47
avatar
Chris, Honestly, mate - it was one of those situations where I arrived at my parents and was just about to complain about the traffic, saw Sheila and just thought my problems don't amount to a hill of beans..... It just made me take stock, evaluate and be darn grateful that I'm fit enough to get on the river bank and battle with the mahoosive barbel (yeah ok, dace and small roach) etc etc.... Ref - the ATr, it's a political world now isn't it? No taxation without representation - and all that. All the best to you and your family. Glad your nephew has you to look out for him. Phil.
the blanker on 01/09/2013 09:04:41
avatar
Cheers Phil. I'll not be using the word again. I honestly had no idea it referred to a medical condition and to continue using it would make me a hypocrite because man do I get the hump when people use the term 'retard' my poor nephew being a mentally handicapped teenager. Re the Trust. I'm with you all the way. I can't see any other option for us currently. However, as I said, if I find out the top brass are allotting themselves fat salaries that will be it for me. How can anyone find out? anyone know? anyone prepared to say?
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 09:08:10
avatar
How can anyone find out? anyone know? anyone prepared to say? I've no idea mate but I can tell you that this was the concern that prevented me from joining earlier. I've decided to take a chance and hope that the people involved are giving angling fair service for a reasonable cost.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 09:09:37
avatar
Mr Blanker, I'm with Chris on this. IF, and it is an if, the press or by other means is uncovered such a scandal, they'll have to make do without my monies too. I have no wish to subsidise would-be celebrities but IF my money is doing good and furthering angling for generations to come, then I'm in, first in the queue - cash in hand but IF that trust is abused - no more. All the best, Phil.
nicepix on 01/09/2013 09:14:28
avatar
Mr Blanker, I'm with Chris on this. IF, and it is an if, the press or by other means is uncovered such a scandal, they'll have to make do without my monies too. I have no wish to subsidise would-be celebrities but IF my money is doing good and furthering angling for generations to come, then I'm in, first in the queue - cash in hand but IF that trust is abused - no more. All the best, Phil. Phil & Chris, Just a point. But don't you think it better to ensure that the monies are being well spent before you chuck yours into the pot?
itsfishingnotcatching on 01/09/2013 09:15:27
avatar
How can anyone find out? anyone know? anyone prepared to say? Atr recently advertised for an "Angling Strategy Implementation Manager" in the Midlands Area, the advertised salary was circa £26,000 p.a. The funding was supposedly coming from Sport England with the emphasis on increasing participation in the sport. I have not yet seen any news relating to an appointment being made. ‏
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 09:24:44
avatar
Phil & Chris, Just a point. But don't you think it better to ensure that the monies are being well spent before you chuck yours into the pot? I can fully emphasize with your point, but being pretty much a simpleton when it comes to finance I would struggle to understand any accounts that might be published. I held the same stance myself for the first few years of the Trust's life. In the end I decided that better angling minds than mine had given their allegiance and that I would take my lead from them. I absolutely defend anyone else's right not to be a member though, especially if, like me, they were former subscribers to the ACA. Just mentioning the history of that body makes my blood BOIL. ---------- Post added at 09:24 ---------- Previous post was at 09:21 ---------- Atr recently advertised for an "Angling Strategy Implementation Manager" in the Midlands Area, the advertised salary was circa £26,000 p.a. The funding was supposedly coming from Sport England with the emphasis on increasing participation in the sport. I have not yet seen any news relating to an appointment being made. ‏ It's a tricky subject. I'm not sure what constitutes my previously described 'fair cost', but I certainly wouldn't expect any of the AT's salaried personnel to lose out by taking their position. That looks an entirely reasonable figure to me.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 09:25:35
avatar
Clive, To be honest, I approach it with the same caviat emptor approach that I do any other purchase. To an extent, it's a leap of faith. I've given them a chance because I believe in whaqt they're trying (or claim to be) to do. If they let me down, I shall vote with my feet. I struggle to shake the conviction that I feel we have to have a representative body and, at this present time, perfect or not, the ATr is what and all we have. You may be right and I wrong, I don't know, but that's my take on it.
cg74 on 01/09/2013 09:33:20
avatar
Colin - I am sure I have asked this before but what can you "do for Angling" without being in the Trust? Benny, in short, get yourself onto mailing lists involving the EA's works, studies, consultations etc and if you see something that doesn't seem right; complain, comment and generally make a nuisance of yourself. Also get on local authorities mailing lists re planning applications and do the same. A prime example was a year or so back, the EA compiled the Cherwell Area Catchment Plan and it stated good fish stocks including brown trout. To put that into context, I've fished the river for over 30 yrs and I'm yet to catch a trout. Add to that ALL EA fish censuses indicate poor fish stocks! So I wrote a response, as did several others and we're still awaiting a revised plan. If you recall a while ago there was uproar over the BBC's misrepresentation of facts when talking about health of our rivers. Now the ATr made a comment (if I remember correctly) which was basically ignored, but had a thousand individuals complained, the Beeb would not have been able to brush it under the proverbial carpet so easily. Some things are better served with large numbers of individual, others require the forceful clout of a large organisation. As an individual you just need to be a thorn in the side of anyone/everyone that is in anyway negative to angling.
bennygesserit on 01/09/2013 09:41:25
avatar
The points about salaries etc is another of those key things that many people mention as a barrier to them joining, and I think its something that the trust could sweep away any foreboding in an instant with a bit more transparency about where the money is going. I know Mike Heylin for instance claimed one of the lowest expense amounts of any MP and was not tainted by that scandal at all. I know the "tackle industry" ( which one I don't know ) funds , separately , some of the expenses of the board. it depends too on what the average angler ( and most anglers , like me , are working class guys ) would feel is acceptable in terms of salaries / expenses. In the IT industry consultancy rates of 700 - 2000 a day are common place for instance. ---------- Post added at 10:41 ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 ---------- Benny, in short, get yourself onto mailing lists involving the EA's works, studies, consultations etc and if you see something that doesn't seem right; complain, comment and generally make a nuisance of yourself. Also get on local authorities mailing lists re planning applications and do the same. A prime example was a year or so back, the EA compiled the Cherwell Area Catchment Plan and it stated good fish stocks including brown trout. To put that into context, I've fished the river for over 30 yrs and I'm yet to catch a trout. Add to that ALL EA fish censuses indicate poor fish stocks! So I wrote a response, as did several others and we're still awaiting a revised plan. If you recall a while ago there was uproar over the BBC's misrepresentation of facts when talking about health of our rivers. Now the ATr made a comment (if I remember correctly) which was basically ignored, but had a thousand individuals complained, the Beeb would not have been able to brush it under the proverbial carpet so easily. Some things are better served with large numbers of individual, others require the forceful clout of a large organisation. As an individual you just need to be a thorn in the side of anyone/everyone that is in anyway negative to angling. ha ha now I will be a troll and say "well the easy way out is just to pay your money but any angler worth his salt would spend time giving back to angling in the way you do Colin" Doh I mean't Martin Salter not Mike Heylin !
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 09:54:10
avatar
"it depends too on what the average angler ( and most anglers , like me , are working class guys ) would feel is acceptable in terms of salaries / expenses. In the IT industry consultancy rates of 700 - 2000 a day are common place for instance." I've often heard people say that to get the best people for the job you have to pay big salaries Benny but I'm afraid I don't agree. We are talking about a representative body for a hobby, not some high end business. There HAS to be an element of those in charge doing the job for the sheer passion of their chosen sport/hobby IMO. Using a position in the Trust as a means to bag a big salary for doing something they enjoy is not what I think the job is about. I remember people defending the unmentionable on that premise when he emptied vast sums of the ACA's coffers into his own bank account under the guise of working on behalf of angling. It just isn't on IMO and I categorically refuse to give over my hard earned to contribute to some ambitious individual's high end lifestyle. I expect mine is the minority view, but it is my stance none-the-less.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 09:56:54
avatar
Permission to join you in that minority group, Sir? :)
cg74 on 01/09/2013 09:57:18
avatar
ha ha now I will be a troll and say "well the easy way out is just to pay your money but any angler worth his salt would spend time giving back to angling in the way you do Colin" In fairness making a complaint to the BBC only takes a couple minutes and lodging objections with local councils takes only marginally more. Regards making comments on matters concerning the EA, if you don't know what to say, or how to word it, just ask around; on here, someone off the mailing lists. It ain't particularly hard or time consuming, AND IT GIVES ME A GREAT FEELING OF SUPERIORITY OVER THE PAYED THEIR £25 BRIGADE!! :wh:D:D
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 09:59:01
avatar
In fairness making a complaint to the BBC only takes a couple minutes and lodging objections with local councils takes only marginally more. Regards making comments on matters concerning the EA, if you don't know what to say, or how to word it, just ask around; on here, someone off the mailing lists. It ain't particularly hard or time consuming, AND IT GIVES ME A GREAT FEELING OF SUPERIORITY OVER THE PAYED THEIR £25 BRIGADE!! :wh:D:D Colin, Huge smile. Liking that immensely.
nicepix on 01/09/2013 10:06:47
avatar
In fairness making a complaint to the BBC only takes a couple minutes and lodging objections with local councils takes only marginally more. Regards making comments on matters concerning the EA, if you don't know what to say, or how to word it, just ask around; on here, someone off the mailing lists. It ain't particularly hard or time consuming, AND IT GIVES ME A GREAT FEELING OF SUPERIORITY OVER THE PAYED THEIR £25 BRIGADE!! :wh:D:D Exactly my thoughts. There would be far more impact in 1,000 anglers individually complaining about an issue than a national organisation with 25,000 members making one representation. I have in the past contacted my MP, the EA and local council about angling matters and have always had a response. If they had to respond to a couple of hundred individuals they would certainly think more about it than brushing off some toothless tiger of a Trust that doesn't have a vote in any electoral sector. But, some might find it easier to pay £25 and not have to justify why they haven't. That is their choice.
Fred Bonney on 01/09/2013 10:21:31
avatar
cg74 Some things are better served with large numbers of individual, others require the forceful clout of a large organisation. Say no more ,I'm not convinced that a 1000 anglers could be bothered though!! ---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ---------- I'm sorry to say you guys put too much hope in the voice of an individual counting for anything in the overall scheme of things.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 10:35:16
avatar
Exactly my thoughts. There would be far more impact in 1,000 anglers individually complaining about an issue than a national organisation with 25,000 members making one representation. I have in the past contacted my MP, the EA and local council about angling matters and have always had a response. If they had to respond to a couple of hundred individuals they would certainly think more about it than brushing off some toothless tiger of a Trust that doesn't have a vote in any electoral sector. But, some might find it easier to pay £25 and not have to justify why they haven't. That is their choice. I fully appreciate your "actions speak louder than monies" position, I really do - but some essentials such as retaining legal counsel can only be made possible by collective membership and monies. Given that, surely angling can only be served by the proposed dual approach of a representative body and concerned individuals? Any individual is at liberty to express their concerns in any legal way they see fit, I would endorse that completely. This town has to be big enough for the both of us, surely? I believe angling can only be served by both approaches, not just one. Would that be fair?
bennygesserit on 01/09/2013 10:41:03
avatar
"it depends too on what the average angler ( and most anglers , like me , are working class guys ) would feel is acceptable in terms of salaries / expenses. In the IT industry consultancy rates of 700 - 2000 a day are common place for instance." I've often heard people say that to get the best people for the job you have to pay big salaries Benny but I'm afraid I don't agree. We are talking about a representative body for a hobby, not some high end business. There HAS to be an element of those in charge doing the job for the sheer passion of their chosen sport/hobby IMO. Using a position in the Trust as a means to bag a big salary for doing something they enjoy is not what I think the job is about. I remember people defending the unmentionable on that premise when he emptied vast sums of the ACA's coffers into his own bank account under the guise of working on behalf of angling. It just isn't on IMO and I categorically refuse to give over my hard earned to contribute to some ambitious individual's high end lifestyle. I expect mine is the minority view, but it is my stance none-the-less. Chris I am not for a moment inferring that this is the case with the AT but what I am saying is that they could dispell the gravy train myth with more transparency. That said I donated for one year - I do think that you need the best and I do think that at least in part and all the way through to the top , people are volunteering their time in order to help. Now the cynic in me does temper the "best for the job" a little. But I am convinced that the Trust would increase membership , even if only by a couple of thousand , by being totally transparent about who is earning what , who is claiming what , and how it is funded.
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 10:44:13
avatar
Personally I made a choice to try and fund a few more 'teeth' for the only genuinely effective body that currently represents my hobby. Ask yourselves a question: Would our avian friends be better served by a 1,000 concerned and cogent people making representations to government etc on their behalves or by the huge and mighty powerful organisation that the RSPB has become? Ask yourselves another question: Is your typical angler really wholly represented by those of us who feel confident enough to write and debate on internet forums like this one, or might the greater number of them perhaps lack the articulation needed to make compelling cases by e-mail etc to the relevant authorities? You only have to look at the figures on sites like this one to realise that only a relatively tiny minority have the confidence to post and debate topics on the public forums. The greater majority of members appear to be interested enough to join and read the various contributions but unwilling or not confident enough to contribute. Those people are surely not only best served by contributing financially to a representative body to make the necessary protests and arguments on their behalves, but indeed unlikely to have the skills or conviction to do anything else. Paying the fairly innocuous fee of £25 a year and placing their 'Trust' in other better qualified people to campaign for them is a simple and effective enough way to help maintain their hobby. ---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 ---------- Chris I am not for a moment inferring that this is the case with the AT but what I am saying is that they could dispell the gravy train myth with more transparency. That said I donated for one year - I do think that you need the best and I do think that at least in part and all the way through to the top , people are volunteering their time in order to help. Now the cynic in me does temper the "best for the job" a little. But I am convinced that the Trust would increase membership , even if only by a couple of thousand , by being totally transparent about who is earning what , who is claiming what , and how it is funded. I concur with you wholeheartedly Benny.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 10:45:52
avatar
A truly excellent argument, Chris IMHO. :)
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 01/09/2013 10:57:00
avatar
Just had the offer of a free lunch and a few beers to accompany watching United spank the scousers around my mate's. (Sorry Phil. :D) So I'm off out in a few minutes, but I thought before I went I'd add just one more comment to stir the pot. :D Is the fact that a few fairly serious anglers seem to feel the need to continually rail against the AT on these boards actually an indication that underneath it all they feel a little bit guilty about not joining themselves? If not why keep taking the trouble to put the Trust down? If you don't agree with its validity, or don't wish to join for whatever reason, then obviously that's your choice, but aren't you doing your sport a disservice by seemingly trying to persuade others that they shouldn't join either? Adios for now chaps. :)
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 10:59:50
avatar
Yeah, yeah, mate......Dutch courage, obviously.....Rooney's the only Scouser who's gonna get spanked this week and that was by his own side.. Must have been at the Ferrari hub-caps again.......:D
cg74 on 01/09/2013 11:12:09
avatar
cg74 Some things are better served with large numbers of individual, others require the forceful clout of a large organisation. Say no more ,I'm not convinced that a 1000 anglers could be bothered though!! ---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ---------- I'm sorry to say you guys put too much hope in the voice of an individual counting for anything in the overall scheme of things. Fred, I think (make that know) you're right regards a thousand anglers actually bothering to complain at what they feel aggrieved about. Take my BBC example, plenty on here whinged and whined at the time, including a few ATr members but only about 300 complaints were made(I think?) which is comical considering it takes about the same length of time as placing a post on here. As for voices being heard, the ATr certainly get shown the EA's deaf ear when it suits.... So currently not really much difference between one mans voice and a collective 25000! I know the ATr have to work with the EA but currently IMO the ATr show the EA to much undeserved respect and seem a little scared of rocking the boat.
bennygesserit on 01/09/2013 11:17:07
avatar
Maybe more scared of a cessation of being recognised as the "true voice of angling" which the AT most certainly are not.
Fred Bonney on 01/09/2013 11:39:32
avatar
Well CAMRA can now boast 150000 members at £17.50 a year and everybody knows what they stand for. They also have clout.
dorsetandchub on 01/09/2013 11:58:26
avatar
I'll drink to that...:)
Peter Jacobs on 01/09/2013 12:11:02
avatar
Well CAMRA can now boast 150000 members at £17.50 a year and everybody knows what they stand for. There are 5 Stated aims of the CAMRA Group and I would venture to suggest that (without looking it up) fewer than maybe 10% could get more than 3 right . . . . . . The same goes for the Angling Trust; of the 5 Current Campaigns I wonder how many members, let alone non-members could get more than 3 right?
bennygesserit on 01/09/2013 13:54:49
avatar
There are 5 Stated aims of the CAMRA Group and I would venture to suggest that (without looking it up) fewer than maybe 10% could get more than 3 right . . . . . . The same goes for the Angling Trust; of the 5 Current Campaigns I wonder how many members, let alone non-members could get more than 3 right? good post - campaigns or mission statements ? if campaigns then cormorants , canoes , hydro , EE's and looking into stuff ? ---------- Post added at 14:48 ---------- Previous post was at 13:25 ---------- this is worth a read - [url=http://www.worldseafishing.com/downloads/WSF_AT_QA_10042012.pdf]http://www.worldseafishing.com/downloads/WSF_AT_QA_10042012.pdf is it true some posts within the AT are funded by the EA ? ---------- Post added at 14:54 ---------- Previous post was at 14:48 ---------- 5. Question from Pauldo: What achievements has the AT made over the past 3 years? What do you think the AT could have done better if you were able to "wind the clock back"? Created a Unified Body for all Anglers: The formation of the Angling Trust was a landmark for angling. Several attempts to create a unified membership body for all anglers had failed in recent decades. The fact that a viable, functioning organisation which represents all angling in England has successfully been created, is recognised by anglers and external stakeholders, and is growing in the midst of the worst economic downturn in living memory is a very considerable achievement and demonstrates that anglers are recognising how important the Angling Trust is becoming as an effective organisation that exists to support all angling and anglers. Secured real influence: We have, at last, a professional body that can properly represent anglers. The Trust has developed significant influence with Ministers and officials, particularly in the Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) which sponsors the Environment Agency and increasingly in the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) which sponsors Sport England. We have been involved in organising two Angling Summits with government. The Trust is an active member of the European Anglers’ Alliance (we provide the secretariat for the EAA’s sea sub group and sit on working groups for both the Water Framework Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directives) and an accredited observer of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO). We’re represented on the water working group of Wildlife and Countryside Link, we sit on the Marine Management Organisation’s Stakeholder Focus Group, and we’re founder members of the Blueprint for Water and Our Rivers campaigns. We have high level contacts with WWF, RSPB, the National Trust, the Wildlife Trusts and host of other national organisations. We disagree with them on some issues and work closely together on others. We have recently appointed Martin Salter as our national campaigns co-ordinator. He retired as an MP at the last election and was the last government’s spokesman for angling. He has excellent contacts and a long experience of operating at government levels. Our contact with and access to policy makers and government departments is far beyond what could be achieved by any other angling organisation and allows us to fight for angling at the very highest level. Recruited a large and diverse membership: We now have the largest membership of any angling representative body in the UK, ever. We have 1,550 angling clubs in membership, and they have around 400,000 members. They include game, sea and coarse angling clubs. We also have 45 consultatives and river associations and about 50 fisheries (we have a new membership package for them that we’re busy promoting). We’ve done less well with individuals, but we now have 14,539 individual members. 12,500 of these are adult individual and life members, the rest are young adult and juniors. Junior membership is free up to the age of 18 and £10 for 18 – 21 year olds. Many of our campaign successes have been in freshwater angling because some of these were ongoing campaigns we inherited from the Anglers’ Conservation Association which had ongoing momentum and also because there was significant external funding available from day one from WWF to support freshwater campaigns. Many of the issues facing sea angling need to be tackled at a European scale because of the common fisheries policy. Influencing European policy is a long term process that requires more resources and time than we have at the moment. The biggest campaign success in freshwater has been threatening the government with a judicial review of the river basin management plans and getting them to commit to nearly £100 million of new funding to deliver the water framework directive. We’ve also managed 10 to get a review of cormorant licensing and hope to get new controls on the numbers of these birds early in 2012. We have taken on some local campaigns for sea anglers, such as providing legal advice to the campaign to overturn proposed new bylaws restricting sea angling in Rother District in East Sussex, to get a proposed ban of angling by Rother District Council. We are currently providing the Port of Liverpool Sea Angling Federation (POLSAF) with legal advice involving a dispute with a multinational company over fishing rights. We have lobbied the Department for Transport over the closure of Crosby Coastguard Station and most recently we have supported an anti-litter campaign that was originally created by local anglers and clubs in our Wyvern region in Devon. We have not yet won any campaigns for sea anglers at a national or European scale, which is largely down to there being no infrastructure in place when the Angling Trust was formed for sea anglers to have any influence over policies or decision making. However, this is now changing and we have drawn up a campaign plan for sea angling, which is summarised in answers below. The more support we get from anglers, and the more involvement members give our regional forums, the more we will be able to do for the benefit of all angling. Our successes in the freshwater sector show that we can have national influence and make a real difference for anglers. As with any start-up organisation, there are many things we would have done differently. I think the three main things are:  I wish we had secured more funds up front to pay for a national marketing campaign in the first year to explain the need for the Angling Trust and what the organisation could do for all recreational anglers.  I wish we had modernised the sea angling committee structure more rapidly so that members could get more involved in our work and so that it looked and felt like a new organisation rather than a continuation of the NFSA.  I wish we had managed to win a significant national campaign for sea anglers in our first three years but I didn’t realise how challenging this would be and what obstacles there would be to achieving this.  I wish we had known that it would be so difficult to recruit individual anglers to support the formation of a single representative body for all anglers. We can’t wind the clock back though, so we have to look at the future.
nicepix on 01/09/2013 17:30:40
avatar
Just had the offer of a free lunch and a few beers to accompany watching United spank the scousers around my mate's. (Sorry Phil. :D) So I'm off out in a few minutes, but I thought before I went I'd add just one more comment to stir the pot. :D Is the fact that a few fairly serious anglers seem to feel the need to continually rail against the AT on these boards actually an indication that underneath it all they feel a little bit guilty about not joining themselves? If not why keep taking the trouble to put the Trust down? If you don't agree with its validity, or don't wish to join for whatever reason, then obviously that's your choice, but aren't you doing your sport a disservice by seemingly trying to persuade others that they shouldn't join either? Adios for now chaps. :) The reason some anglers seemingly continue to rail against the Angling Trust may be that they are continually being asked to explain their decisions for not doing so by members who assume the high moral ground. For my part, on this thread I was specifically asked by Fed Bonney for my reasons for not subscribing. I certainly don't feel a twinge of guilt for not subscribing because I do not think the angling Trust has any part to play in angling.
the blanker on 01/09/2013 19:38:05
avatar
good post - campaigns or mission statements ? if campaigns then cormorants , canoes , hydro , EE's and looking into stuff ? ---------- Post added at 14:48 ---------- Previous post was at 13:25 ---------- this is worth a read - [url=http://www.worldseafishing.com/downloads/WSF_AT_QA_10042012.pdf]http://www.worldseafishing.com/downloads/WSF_AT_QA_10042012.pdf is it true some posts within the AT are funded by the EA ? ---------- Post added at 14:54 ---------- Previous post was at 14:48 ---------- 5. Question from Pauldo: What achievements has the AT made over the past 3 years? What do you think the AT could have done better if you were able to "wind the clock back"? Created a Unified Body for all Anglers: The formation of the Angling Trust was a landmark for angling. Several attempts to create a unified membership body for all anglers had failed in recent decades. The fact that a viable, functioning organisation which represents all angling in England has successfully been created, is recognised by anglers and external stakeholders, and is growing in the midst of the worst economic downturn in living memory is a very considerable achievement and demonstrates that anglers are recognising how important the Angling Trust is becoming as an effective organisation that exists to support all angling and anglers. Secured real influence: We have, at last, a professional body that can properly represent anglers. The Trust has developed significant influence with Ministers and officials, particularly in the Department of Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra) which sponsors the Environment Agency and increasingly in the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) which sponsors Sport England. We have been involved in organising two Angling Summits with government. The Trust is an active member of the European Anglers’ Alliance (we provide the secretariat for the EAA’s sea sub group and sit on working groups for both the Water Framework Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directives) and an accredited observer of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO). We’re represented on the water working group of Wildlife and Countryside Link, we sit on the Marine Management Organisation’s Stakeholder Focus Group, and we’re founder members of the Blueprint for Water and Our Rivers campaigns. We have high level contacts with WWF, RSPB, the National Trust, the Wildlife Trusts and host of other national organisations. We disagree with them on some issues and work closely together on others. We have recently appointed Martin Salter as our national campaigns co-ordinator. He retired as an MP at the last election and was the last government’s spokesman for angling. He has excellent contacts and a long experience of operating at government levels. Our contact with and access to policy makers and government departments is far beyond what could be achieved by any other angling organisation and allows us to fight for angling at the very highest level. Recruited a large and diverse membership: We now have the largest membership of any angling representative body in the UK, ever. We have 1,550 angling clubs in membership, and they have around 400,000 members. They include game, sea and coarse angling clubs. We also have 45 consultatives and river associations and about 50 fisheries (we have a new membership package for them that we’re busy promoting). We’ve done less well with individuals, but we now have 14,539 individual members. 12,500 of these are adult individual and life members, the rest are young adult and juniors. Junior membership is free up to the age of 18 and £10 for 18 – 21 year olds. Many of our campaign successes have been in freshwater angling because some of these were ongoing campaigns we inherited from the Anglers’ Conservation Association which had ongoing momentum and also because there was significant external funding available from day one from WWF to support freshwater campaigns. Many of the issues facing sea angling need to be tackled at a European scale because of the common fisheries policy. Influencing European policy is a long term process that requires more resources and time than we have at the moment. The biggest campaign success in freshwater has been threatening the government with a judicial review of the river basin management plans and getting them to commit to nearly £100 million of new funding to deliver the water framework directive. We’ve also managed 10 to get a review of cormorant licensing and hope to get new controls on the numbers of these birds early in 2012. We have taken on some local campaigns for sea anglers, such as providing legal advice to the campaign to overturn proposed new bylaws restricting sea angling in Rother District in East Sussex, to get a proposed ban of angling by Rother District Council. We are currently providing the Port of Liverpool Sea Angling Federation (POLSAF) with legal advice involving a dispute with a multinational company over fishing rights. We have lobbied the Department for Transport over the closure of Crosby Coastguard Station and most recently we have supported an anti-litter campaign that was originally created by local anglers and clubs in our Wyvern region in Devon. We have not yet won any campaigns for sea anglers at a national or European scale, which is largely down to there being no infrastructure in place when the Angling Trust was formed for sea anglers to have any influence over policies or decision making. However, this is now changing and we have drawn up a campaign plan for sea angling, which is summarised in answers below. The more support we get from anglers, and the more involvement members give our regional forums, the more we will be able to do for the benefit of all angling. Our successes in the freshwater sector show that we can have national influence and make a real difference for anglers. As with any start-up organisation, there are many things we would have done differently. I think the three main things are:  I wish we had secured more funds up front to pay for a national marketing campaign in the first year to explain the need for the Angling Trust and what the organisation could do for all recreational anglers.  I wish we had modernised the sea angling committee structure more rapidly so that members could get more involved in our work and so that it looked and felt like a new organisation rather than a continuation of the NFSA.  I wish we had managed to win a significant national campaign for sea anglers in our first three years but I didn’t realise how challenging this would be and what obstacles there would be to achieving this.  I wish we had known that it would be so difficult to recruit individual anglers to support the formation of a single representative body for all anglers. We can’t wind the clock back though, so we have to look at the future.[/QUOTE I find that last statement incredible, did they really expect anglers to flock to the trust just because they thought that anglers should?
stuart_s on 02/09/2013 11:57:39
avatar
All, This thread has been brought to my attention by a friend, and even though I a currently up to my eyes in the day job (working for Angling Trust, Fish Legal and ACA Trustee Co) I will, as one earlier contributor asked, try to answer some the questions and dispel some of the myths. However, I cannot and will not promise to answer all and every question as (1) I have a day job to be getting on with and (2) some information, such as individual's pay, is confidential. One other point to note, do not expect me to brow-beat anyone to join the Angling Trust. While we would like all anglers to join, we know that you can never please all the anglers all the time. So, encouraging anglers to join and giving them good reasons to join is what we are about, not making non-joiners feel guilty. Let's park that issue and look at some of the other points that have been raised above: What does the Angling Trust do? In very broad terms, and working closely with Fish Legal where appropriate, our work can fall into these six headings:
  1. Improving and protecting fish stocks
  2. Providing a strong and unified voice for angling
  3. Promoting the benefits of angling for all
  4. Standing up for the environment
  5. Making polluters pay
  6. Supporting excellence in angling
However, if you drill-down and look at our business structure this adds a bit more flesh on the bones (albeit in very broad terms): We have a membership team that facilitates not just membership income but benefits for our members. These include discounts on a variety of products both angling and non-angling related. We have some new big offers to be launched in the next week or so and are constantly looking for new and better offers. Members benefits is an area we are focussing on in giving angler's tangible reasons for joining. Our competitions team organises the national teams, competitions and the talent development pathway (for talented young anglers). This work is assisted by a significant number of volunteers. Our participation team (including our regional officers), leads on both Sport England and EA funded participation programmes. They also work closely with local clubs on a variety of matters including Clubmark accreditation which can assist those clubs in developing their own governance, growing membership and gaining access to third party funding. Our coaching "team" (I am lumping some staff together here) manage and develop the coaching qualification (which can be accessed through various coaching suppliers) and also organise coaching courses for those who wish to qualify through the Angling Trust. The team also facilitates annual licensing of those coaches and benefits for those coaches. The campaigns team deals with a variety of campaigns matters in both freshwater and marine environment. The campaigns team works very closely with the legal staff in Fish Legal. This includes keeping the EA (and others) focussed on angling matters, which they often lose sight of when considering their other duties, such as flood defence. Within the campaigns area we also a single regional co-ordinator who works with the local forums and County Angling Action Groups, and the Volunteer Bailiff Service co-ordinator who works with a volunteer bailiffs in assisting the EA's Fisheries Officers with bailiff duties (at this time on a pilot basis in the South East). We also have a National Angling Strategy Manager (Rick Warner was appointed in to this role) whose work straddles all areas of the business and works closely with the EA and other partners. While our New Media Manager leads on developing our media and IT presence, and is currently working on a number of major projects. My own team deals with central core functions of finance, corporate business, HR, governance (including compliance with Sport England's significant and rigid requirements), commercial development and anything that doesn't fit elsewhere! All of these teams, through their manager, work to our Chief Exec, who in turn reports to our Board. The Board are all volunteers. So how many staff do we have, what are they paid, who funds them etc Angling Trust currently has 37 staff. Of these 14 are funded by the business (membership income, contributions from competitions, management charges etc); 1 is funded by donations; 6 are funded by the EA, 8 are funded by Sport England and 8 are funded by both the EA and Sport England. We also have 2 individuals seconded to us by other organisations. Some of you may not like it, but I am not going into personal pay rates, however you have seen advertised rates for jobs. Pay is agreed between the relevant staff, senior management and the Board (as appropriate) on a role specific basis and advertised accordingly. The Chief Exec's pay is determined by the Board. On a personal note, I can inform readers that I earn less now than I used to earn in my previous job working for a government agency, where I was paid less than the private sector market rate. I also work even more hours than I have ever done (60+ each week). I will admit to earning more than the UK average, but then a qualified accountant with 17 years post qualification experience and over 20 years experience, including over 20 in specialist finance and insolvency fields, would command a higher than average pay pack. Why do I do this job? To put something back into angling, not for the pay or even the hours on the bank (I fish less now than I have ever done). I would add at least 50% to my pay if I went back into my previous niche. Board members and volunteers are not paid. They are reimbursed legitimate and reasonable expenses, such as train fares or mileage for attending meetings. Our relationship with the EA We have a dynamic relationship with the EA. I put it that way as we generally have a very good relationship with their central fisheries team with who we work with to deliver common goals, such as increased angling participation. It is through that relationship we have successfully bid for funding for various projects, such as the Building Bridges project. However, we also argue vociferously with the EA on a wide number of issues. For instance, where we consider that area or regional teams are prioritising angling and anglers below other duties or are undertaking works that are counter-productive to angling they are the first to hear. Unfortunately, that is the downside to a huge businesses that often has conflicting priorities. In an ideal world we wouldn't need to keep a watch on them, but we don't live in that world. Somebody above (sorry I didn't make a note of the name) mentioned a levy on the EA rod licence to fund the Angling Trust. It's not going to happen (the rod licence is a tax and Govt will not mix taxes and third party funding) and while a few pounds per angler would seem like a good result all round, it is not what we're looking for. Organic growth through anglers, clubs, fisheries etc who see benefit in joining is what we are about. Sport England You would have read elsewhere that we have been funded by Sport England to the tune of £1.8m. While umpteen journalists and contributors of various forums would have spent this many times over, the funding is limited to the agreed programmes and the staff responsible to deliver those programmes. The funding is also for a 4 year period from 1 April and is drip fed to us over the funding cycle. If we fail to deliver the key objective (of increasing angling participation as measured by Sport England's annual participation survey) we lose funding. In that regard angling is treated the same as other sports by Sport England. One small benefit of having Angling Trust; without a recognised body we would not have access to that funding, not that the bidding process and associated obligations are easy. And in case anyone asks, Sport England rarely support national teams as their focus is on mass participation, not elite participants. Transparency I hope this reply has helped to answer this issue in part. It is our intention to provide more and greater detail on a variety of topics, although we have to balance this external reporting with actually delivering the things we do. Obviously with more resource we could do more of this, but this is clearly another of those chicken and egg conundrums. Anyway, I think that's enough for now. I have already taken two calls while drafting this and must crack on with the day job. I hope this has given some insight, particularly as this isn't part of my day job. Stuart
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 02/09/2013 12:30:19
avatar
"Some of you may not like it, but I am not going into personal pay rates.." Obviously it is your's and the Trust's perogative not to do so Stuart, but I'm afraid until you/they do I believe you are never going to get the take-up that the Trust really requires to operate on a par with the likes of the RSPB. Too many of us had our finger burned by the former debacle with the ACA. :mad:
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 12:41:58
avatar
Certainly got burned at Anfield yesterday, didn't you.......:wh
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 02/09/2013 13:01:55
avatar
Certainly got burned at Anfield yesterday, didn't you.......:wh I can't believe you took that long to lord it over me Phil. :p If Sturridge had chosen a No.1 instead of that quiff when he visited the barbers on Saturday it would have been a 0-0 draw. :D
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 13:10:50
avatar
Be a different story at Old Trafford, mate - I have to enjoy it whilst it lasts...... Should make for a better, more interesting season anyway, hopefully....:)
barbelboi on 02/09/2013 13:11:16
avatar
Quite nostalgic to see L'pool back at the top..............probably the first time in colour as well;)
stuart_s on 02/09/2013 13:12:29
avatar
"Some of you may not like it, but I am not going into personal pay rates.." Obviously it is your's and the Trust's perogative not to do so Stuart, but I'm afraid until you/they do I believe you are never going to get the take-up that the Trust really requires to operate on a par with the likes of the RSPB. Too many of us had our finger burned by the former debacle with the ACA. :mad: Chris, My comment above is not an official media release by the Angling Trust and until I have had the opportunity to discuss the issue of releasing pay information with the relevant people, there is no way I can release that information. I hope that is understandable. However, I would be interested to hear (whether by reply, PM or email) what people think is happening whether that is based on pure speculation or past experience with previous staff members.
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 13:22:43
avatar
Quite nostalgic to see L'pool back at the top..............probably the first time in colour as well;) Yes, well, SOME of us are dreaming of the stars, Jerry :D ---------- Post added at 14:22 ---------- Previous post was at 14:14 ---------- Chris, My comment above is not an official media release by the Angling Trust and until I have had the opportunity to discuss the issue of releasing pay information with the relevant people, there is no way I can release that information. I hope that is understandable. However, I would be interested to hear (whether by reply, PM or email) what people think is happening whether that is based on pure speculation or past experience with previous staff members. I'm completely with Chris on this (and it takes a lot to ally Liverpool and Man U fans). I trust and believe you ARE doing a great job for a reasonable but not excessive wage but after the ACA debacle, surely you can understand people's caution in accepting the new organisation? If you're starting from behind square one, you surely need to be whiter than white and uber transparent? If you tell me that what previously can't happen again, then fine - but if it did, I, for one, would want answers AND heads on a plate. Until then, as a believer in the need for an umbrella organisation, I'll go along with the ATr. The accent is on the word "Trust" though. Very best regards, Phil. :)
stuart_s on 02/09/2013 14:15:34
avatar
Thanks Phil, although I am slightly disturbed that a MUFC and a LFC fan are agreeing over something! Perhaps I should nail my colours to the mast, as an Arsenal fan and say that our season has improved noticeably over the past 24 hours and may improve further later today. I trust and believe you ARE doing a great job for a reasonable but not excessive wage but after the ACA debacle, surely you can understand people's caution in accepting the new organisation? If you're starting from behind square one, you surely need to be whiter than white and uber transparent? Totally understand your position there on the caution and transparency. I will discuss with the appropriate people and add these transparency issues to our to-do list. Incidentally, I wasn't around during the previous regime but am aware of some of the issues.
Chris Hammond ( RSPB ACA PAC} on 02/09/2013 14:40:23
avatar
Quite nostalgic to see L'pool back at the top..............probably the first time in colour as well;) I believe Suarez was still teething Jerry. :D ---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 14:36 ---------- Chris, My comment above is not an official media release by the Angling Trust and until I have had the opportunity to discuss the issue of releasing pay information with the relevant people, there is no way I can release that information. I hope that is understandable. However, I would be interested to hear (whether by reply, PM or email) what people think is happening whether that is based on pure speculation or past experience with previous staff members. You (The ATr.) don't have to convince me Stuart, like Phil I've taken it on trust, I fear there are quite a few prospective members who feel differently though. Thanks for taking the trouble to reply though, and many thanks for your's and the Trust's efforts on my behalf. It can't be an easy task I'm sure representing anglers who largely don't seem to appear to want representing.
Peter Jacobs on 02/09/2013 14:47:48
avatar
Perhaps I should nail my colours to the mast, as an Arsenal fan and say that our season has improved noticeably over the past 24 hours and may improve further later today. I knew there was something I liked about you . . . . . . . . I think our season is going to be just . . . . . . Capital signed: a Gooner for over 50 years
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 14:50:38
avatar
You might have to do another 50 before they win anything......:)
barbelboi on 02/09/2013 15:23:07
avatar
You might have to do another 50 before they win anything......:)[/QUOTE Now be fair Phil - It looks like we've just spent some money on a decent player...................now that's a bigger achievement for AW since David Dein left than winning a trophy.
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 15:41:26
avatar
Jerry, Ten bucks says he's on the treatment table next to Wiltshere by this time next week. Arsenal's injuries are that bad they don't need trainers, they need palliative care consultants.....:)
steph mckenzie on 02/09/2013 16:16:57
avatar
I would rather give the money to Cancer Research.
dorsetandchub on 02/09/2013 16:33:20
avatar
Jerry, Besides, we've got Suarez (God) and now Moses - if we could nick that Jesus fella from Man City, we'd have all the divine intervention we need......:) ---------- Post added at 17:33 ---------- Previous post was at 17:26 ---------- OK, no more footie on this thread - except to mention Liverpool have bid £40m for Juan Mata. Have we robbed a post office or what?? :)
Peter Jacobs on 02/09/2013 16:59:08
avatar
Besides, we've got Suarez (God) and now Moses - if we could nick that Jesus fella from Man City, we'd have all the divine intervention we need . . . and even with that "Trinity" you still wont make the Champions League . . . . .
geoffmaynard on 02/09/2013 17:26:41
avatar
I wish you lot would stop talking about cricket and concentrate on the topic :omg:
Graham Elliott 3 on 02/09/2013 17:50:50
avatar
I think Peters initial post was entirely accurate, although maybe not totally in relation to the article in question. Many people, and probably even more so in relation to mr general angler don't like being told what to do. On a personal note, after listening to one of the initial launch presentations my thoughts were.......why is corporate business talk being used and is this going to end up as a fat cats money grab? I could see a situation developing like the recent concerns regarding charity pay levels. I have not seen it happening yet to be honest. I was going to join this year but a certain persons rantings about joining put me right off..as he has many other membership potentials everywhere.
Fred Bonney on 02/09/2013 19:26:30
avatar
What a ******!
bennygesserit on 02/09/2013 19:36:41
avatar
Stuart S thanks for replying I have seen some forum exchanges with AT leading lights and the difficulty is the questions never end and go off topic - its just not the best medium. However making the AT more transparent will result in more members , I think, as long as no one takes exception to the rates of course.
binka on 02/09/2013 20:22:29
avatar
I was going to join this year but a certain persons rantings about joining put me right off..as he has many other membership potentials everywhere. Ah... firm in your convictions then and not easily swayed? ;) Have you decided on what you'll blow the saved membership money on yet... will you be shrewd and spend it in 7p daily increments or go crazy and blow the whole lot? I've made my decision and I respect everyone else's individual decisions and reasoning on whether or not to join the ATr and try (more recently!) not to get embroiled in an ever revolving door of debate but I cannot for the life of me figure out why, if you have made a decision based on merit and your own personal convictions, you would allow yourself to be deterred by anyone else? :confused:
the blanker on 02/09/2013 21:11:38
avatar
Ah... firm in your convictions then and not easily swayed? ;) Have you decided on what you'll blow the saved membership money on yet... will you be shrewd and spend it in 7p daily increments or go crazy and blow the whole lot? I've made my decision and I respect everyone else's individual decisions and reasoning on whether or not to join the ATr and try (more recently!) not to get embroiled in an ever revolving door of debate but I cannot for the life of me figure out why, if you have made a decision based on merit and your own personal convictions, you would allow yourself to be deterred by anyone else? :confused:[/QUOTE] It might be that having waited to see what the trust was about before committing to supporting the trust anglers have seen to much browbeating by members of the trust to none members in a misguided attempt to get them to join. its the wrong way to go about things and every time that the trust comes up on here the same thing happens and I believe more potential members are put off. Its a pity really because its obvious that some posters on here are very passionate about the trust and want others to feel the same, the way to get others to come round to your way of thinking is through persuasion not browbeating and trying to make others feel guilty.
binka on 02/09/2013 21:33:03
avatar
] It might be that having waited to see what the trust was about before committing to supporting the trust anglers have seen to much browbeating by members of the trust to none members in a misguided attempt to get them to join. its the wrong way to go about things and every time that the trust comes up on here the same thing happens and I believe more potential members are put off. Its a pity really because its obvious that some posters on here are very passionate about the trust and want others to feel the same, the way to get others to come round to your way of thinking is through persuasion not browbeating and trying to make others feel guilty. It's a very valid point and I can appreciate that "brow beating" may have been the case when emotions have run over and each of us with a common interest embark on our own respective, individual agendas. I've read what I consider to be some reasonable points on which not to join the ATr but the bottom line has to be to protect our own interests and it just seems a bit like cutting off our noses to spite our faces when someone objects on the grounds that they can (theoretically) see the reasoning to join but won't because of their own personal feelings relating to a third party issue, namely in-fighting. I don't see the ATr as the losers in this situation so much as angling itself and the divisions within it which are there to be exploited. Divide and conquer... :(
bennygesserit on 02/09/2013 21:47:41
avatar
its just human nature to resist when someone tries to push
binka on 02/09/2013 21:59:37
avatar
its just human nature to resist when someone tries to push I know what you mean... it's a reactive, instinctive response irrespective of the circumstances but we're talking about a situation in which we can sit back and make a considered decision, over a period of time, on the basis of evaluation. As said before that's not to say that there aren't reasonable points not to join the ATr (just like there are) based on evaluation but having made a decision on this basis I still can't understand the swaying due to a third party issue? :confused:
Graham Elliott 3 on 02/09/2013 23:09:33
avatar
Binka. If you had read my post properly you will have seen that your initial comment "Ah... firm in your convictions then and not easily swayed?" Didn't apply at all, so don't try and second guess to suit your prefered outcome. As I mentioned, the initial presentation I listened to was more akin to a corporate business presentation. When what I wanted to hear was more to do with the passion I feel about angling, the people and the environment. And if you don't think that individual views can influence people one way or the other you might want to look back in history a bit. One idiot speaking rubbish CAN affect membership levels. I saw it affect the BS membership.. As for the money/cost aspect, to play on that is a little bit childish. Do you really think that will help the cause? If so you need to take a marketing lesson. No, as Peter first intimated, trying to embarrass people to join the ATr is not the way to go. Effective communication will help, but not the rubbish spouted by some on here in their efforts to encourage joiners. Graham
Paul Boote on 02/09/2013 23:19:35
avatar
Less politics, "attitude" and courting self-promoting high profiles, more quiet, easy-going, no effort apparent, laid-back love for what WE all love, a non-self conscious, not trying so hard coolness. I saw the warning signs years ago when a certain website - ACA or its successor - had a button up in the top rack of its front page - "Celebrities" - and at once thought, "Jeez. Lost the plot and in bed with the living death".
dorsetandchub on 03/09/2013 06:02:19
avatar
. . . and even with that "Trinity" you still wont make the Champions League . . . . . Peter, We'll steal YOUR customary 4th place, it's what Scousers DO, innit??? :D
bennygesserit on 03/09/2013 06:13:28
avatar
Have you decided on what you'll blow the saved membership money on yet... will you be shrewd and spend it in 7p daily increments or go crazy and blow the whole lot? that is another quick way to put people's backs up
steph mckenzie on 03/09/2013 06:19:45
avatar
Biscuit Man has once again failed in his duties to protect us mere forum mortals from the evil bilge that has been left to run rampage through out this thread. If he is not up to the job i suggest we call for Toastie Man :D Seriously though, some of the stuff i have read on this thread is beyond pathetic, and from adults too. Grow up and get a life, there's way more to life than bickering.
bennygesserit on 03/09/2013 06:51:53
avatar
Biscuit Man has once again failed in his duties to protect us mere forum mortals from the evil bilge that has been left to run rampage through out this thread. If he is not up to the job i suggest we call for Toastie Man :D Seriously though, some of the stuff i have read on this thread is beyond pathetic, and from adults too. Grow up and get a life, there's way more to life than bickering. I think you have fired your biscuits prematurely this thread has been comparatively bicker free and mostly on topic too.
Graham Elliott 3 on 03/09/2013 07:19:16
avatar
"that is another quick way to put people's backs up" Yes Benny, couldn't agree more. It certainly seems to have underlined Peters initial post unease about "tactics" There seems to be some surprise about ATr membership levels. If you consider there's probably at a guess, about 20,000 regular barbel anglers in the UK. Yet individual membership of the Barbel Specialists groups totals a mere 800 when you take out duplicated numbers. The BS having about 650 and the ABF about 370. Plus those in other groups. Costs of joining are comparable with the ATr. On a personal level I have found contacts with the local EA personal, and establishing a rapport, has enabled quiet progress on my main specific concerns, mainly involving water testing/quality. I understand that "The Bigger Picture" is through the ATr, and it might get my monies in the future. But it will be after considering the well thought out and cohesive sensible postings / communications highlighting the benefits to anglers and the future generations, not by attempted bullying or name calling as per Fred's response to my earlier thoughts.. Fred, having changed his name from Boney to Bonney when he was bullied as a child, should be aware that being bullied won't work against some just because it did with him., although he obviously has my sympathy.
the blanker on 03/09/2013 08:37:59
avatar
its just human nature to resist when someone tries to push Correct and as I have said before if I don't rejoin it will be because of the antics of a few on here who do the same thing every time the trust comes up on here. shame because there are things that make the trust worthwhile but I am a stubborn sod and wont be cajoled.
binka on 03/09/2013 12:00:04
avatar
Binka. If you had read my post properly you will have seen that your initial comment "Ah... firm in your convictions then and not easily swayed?" Didn't apply at all, so don't try and second guess to suit your prefered outcome. I have no preferred outcome at all, you either join or you don't and you left no requirement for second guessing anything after stating... I was going to join this year but a certain persons rantings about joining put me right off..as he has many other membership potentials everywhere. That in my opinion implies that you saw good enough reason to join but got swayed by a third party issue... ? As for the money/cost aspect, to play on that is a little bit childish. Do you really think that will help the cause? If so you need to take a marketing lesson. I'll skip the marketing lesson thanks, I do enough of that anyway but I can't see what harm is done by pointing out the daily cost of an annual subscription, albeit with an added pinch of salt :) that is another quick way to put people's backs up I totally agree. Pointing out the trivial daily cost of something that, lets just say for arguments sake "might" help the future of angling is bound to make anyone wonder what all the fuss is about ;)
Fred Bonney on 03/09/2013 17:36:19
avatar
"that is another quick way to put people's backs up" Yes Benny, couldn't agree more. It certainly seems to have underlined Peters initial post unease about "tactics" There seems to be some surprise about ATr membership levels. If you consider there's probably at a guess, about 20,000 regular barbel anglers in the UK. Yet individual membership of the Barbel Specialists groups totals a mere 800 when you take out duplicated numbers. The BS having about 650 and the ABF about 370. Plus those in other groups. Costs of joining are comparable with the ATr. On a personal level I have found contacts with the local EA personal, and establishing a rapport, has enabled quiet progress on my main specific concerns, mainly involving water testing/quality. I understand that "The Bigger Picture" is through the ATr, and it might get my monies in the future. But it will be after considering the well thought out and cohesive sensible postings / communications highlighting the benefits to anglers and the future generations, not by attempted bullying or name calling as per Fred's response to my earlier thoughts.. Fred, having changed his name from Boney to Bonney when he was bullied as a child, should be aware that being bullied won't work against some just because it did with him., although he obviously has my sympathy. What a ******! Some have my respect even though I have an occasional tussle, this ol'boy has tried the bullying and snide digs tactic for many years. I left that with the schoolboys many ,many years ago.


Add a comment

  • Email to a friend Email to a friend
  • Print version Print version
  • Plain text Plain text

Tagged as:

opinion, Rod Sturdy

Follow FishingMagic!