Ray, I just cant understand your reasoning that "the groups will not be around anymore, so NO funding there"
Just which GROUPS do you refer to; the SAA, NAFAC etc, or the individual groups such as the Tenchfishers, PAC, CSG etc.
As has already been stated the former are to merge, the latter will remain as will the funding. Seems simple to me.
As for individuals being screwed, how?
For the £20 individual members (if membership follows the NAFAC line) will get Public Liability cover, clubs will not and will have to buy into that, as clubs already do.
I could send all sorts of spread sheets covering budgets etc but as you are having difficulty in understanding that the SAA, NAFAC, ACA, NFA, NFAS (I'll not mention FACT as that will confuse even more) = Angling Unity, there is little point.
As for the S&TA, that is their choice; actually the latest S&TA news letter says more in what IT DOESN'T SAY than it does say about dropping out.
I will quote a comment made by the Secretary of a North Eastern game club re the S&TA;
"The club has received more help and information from just one written communication from NAFAC than we have received in over 10 years from the S&TA and recommend that the club becomes a member of NAFAC"
Doubt their absence will even be noticed let alone missed.
I am certain that I am not missing anything nor am I misunderstanding what is going on.
The Unity website was updated yesterday around lunchtime, a full 2 to 3 days after this "historical event" took place.
Now, a more dynamic approach would have been to have made a simple phone call immediately upon the signing taking place, and have some one update the website straight away. That would have been the way I would have approached this 'historical' event.
For many months a lot of people have been complaining about the distinct lack of information being made available (the behind closed doors syndrome) and yet when there is an important event such as this then it takes the best part of 3 days to be made public, and that on their own website!
It is interesting though to note that the press release had the caveat of; "subject to various conditions being met will see them bcome a single organisation etc. etc. . . . "
I do not know the reasons for the news not being uploaded withing usec's Peter,( sorry I cant find the 'micro' symbol) but the gentleman responsible for the Unity/FACT web sites does it all for free, has several other angling sites to maintain (all F.O.C) on top of running a media/graphic design business. Oh, and he is still on medication for a cancer illness so may be he just wasn't feeling too good Sunday evening and Monday. I know, I have been there and in the same position.
The Angling Trust/Fish Legal web site will be operated on a professional paid for basis and will include an on-line joining facility and I'm sure will meet even your very demanding standards & requirements, Peter.
Isn't it about time everyone got behind the Angling Trust, warts and all, and stopped picking holes before it's even begun. Almost everyone involved have given their time (and resources) for free and will continue to do so no matter what structure the resulting organization will take. Staff will be paid but we don't get people complaining about the pay structure of the S&TA or that of the currently constituted ACA.
In the final analysis A.T will be a group of men and woman aiming to get the very best for those of us participating in the sport/pastime of angling locally, throughout the regions, nationally and internationally.
"The Angling Trust/Fish Legal web site will be operated on a professional paid for basis and will include an on-line joining facility and I'm sure will meet even your very demanding standards & requirements"
I am sure that it will John providing that they can attract sufficient subscriptions to provide the right and proper budget.
I have no problem with well meaning amateurs, who work extremely hard and usually with little or no recognition. I simply thought that such an important event should have been lauded publically the instant it happened.
As far as the ACA and their salary structure is concerned; my opinion is that whatever they are paid is probably wholly insufficient. They do an excellent job and I hope that they will continue in the superb traditions that they have set.
John, As you said the groups will Merge, so they wont be there once that has happened.
Funding from clubs will not keep unity going, and I doubt very much that you will have anything near 100,000 individuals members by 2012.
Did the alarm bells not ring when unity stated there are 4 million anglers.
Its not unity, just a voice like before. The funding has been worked out that well that you will be paying twice if they get a levy on the licence, something many will oppose.
If the body is so great why not all pay the same, you wouldn't need a levy, and you wouldn't be screwing the individual members.
John, what you don't seem to understand is this has been done before, and it never worked. Its jobs for the boys, and using the groups is the only way they can control you.
As I said its for you John, but not for me and the majority of Anglers.
I have never been quite about this subject. If you dont know that this hasnt been tried before, twice I am sure you will find, then I dont know where you have been.
It may not have been done in the same way, but those involved then didnt make it work, and I am sure Unity wont either.
You have your view, but not everyone has to agree with it, and I dont, its called an Opinion.
John,
Whats FM 50,000 members got to do with it?, most of them dont post, just look in. I am talking about the so called 4 million unity say we have. For you to have a majority you will need over 2 million members, and your not gonig to get that many, no where near it. Thats the only maths you need to worry about.
As I have said many times, if it was Individual membership only, then, and only then would I back it.
It seems that we will never agree on this matter, but then wouldnt fishing be boring if we all agreed on everything, all the time.
Some people embrace change and look optimistically at what benefits may result from it, others will never enter the fold preffering to sit outside pessimistically picking holes in the idea. Its the old half full / half empty glass syndrome really, my glass is half full Ray whats yours like?
Under what banner was it tried then Ray? The NAC don't think so! See my other post for the details of its composition. And the other time, the formation of the NFA back at the start of the 1900s? That was a COARSE ANGLING BODY ONLY! One thing you are right about, it has never been tried this way before and that's what make it vastly different this time.
Many who were around then are either dead or very old men now and the rest weren't even born when the NAC went up its own bum.
I do have my view, as you have yours, but mine's evidence based on historical knowledge. Yours ????????
Based on what you say bad one, never been done like this before, as I said. coarse angling only or not, it didnt work, did it.
NAC went up its own bum, unity may well do the same, only taking everything with it.
Bill,
Sorry your glass is only half full, mines over flowing. I know what I am going to do, whilst most of you will wait and see, thats the glass syndrome Bill.
As yet none of you have said what you will do when this doesent work. Start the groups all over again? what will you do with the funds? if you have any left that is.
It's fine having plan A, but whats your Plan B, or isnt there one?
Your plan as far as i can see is to sit back and do nothing whilst hoping it fails just so you can say "i told you so" well done Ray great plan!!
My plan is to embrace the change and do my utmost to sell it to other members. I will also put an information slip in with my next lot of club newsletters and next years joining packs in the club im secretary of pointing out the benefits of joining. In fact if the joining slips are available in january i may even copy a few hundred off and send them out as well. As for what happens if ? well thats obvious even to you Ray, we pick ourselves up and get on with it. New organisations would form to fill the void. Thats not going to happen though Ray because enough people will want it to succeed. This is a bold step Ray and the people steering it know that, do you really think that knowing there is no way back to there old orgs that the people concerned wont move heaven and earth to make it work? It would have been less likely to work had we tried to run it alongside the other orgs so i for one am happy they have done it this way.
Sitting back doing nothing, No mate. I do my bit for my clubs and the places I fish, have done for 38 years and will carry on doing so.
I told you so, not at all, wrong again Bill. I have stated so many times to you lot, that I would back an Individual Membership only, NO GROUPS, to many control freaks, thats why I cant see it working.
Also I buy my Licence each year, have insurance, get good tackle discount. Have sent money to the ACA, so I do my bit where I WANT to do it.
"It would have been less likely to work had we tried to run it alongside the other orgs . . . . . "
I think that this is where you and I differ completely Bill.
It would have been a far more simple, easier organised and less expensive in the long term to maintain the existing organisation but to bring them together in 'unification' when the needed, as I thought was the original 'mission' of F.A.C.T.
Then, after some few years, but based on a successful 'history' some amalgamations might have taken place.
As to the individual member benefits I agree with Ray; I already have an excellent comprehensive 3rd Party and tackle replacement Insurance as does any thinking angler today, I already get damn good discounts from my local shops, and I am not really interested in a 'loyalty' cash-back programme prefering to fish where I want to and when I want to.
Further, as an 'unincorporated' associated member I am very interested in seeing what degree of independance Fish Legal (the ACA by another name) will have.
I am also still very unhappy that this new organisation will not include the S&TA, as a full member, because without them we can hardly say that this unification process covers all anglers.
