- Joined
- Feb 26, 2009
- Messages
- 277,087
- Reaction score
- 8
This is a dedicated thread for discussing article: The Angling Trust – Have Your Say
The Angling Trust – Have Your Say
- Thread starter FishingMagic
- Start date
thecrow
Well-known member
Not really "having ones say" is it? I am always suspicious of why organisations have these surveys, it might be that the trust really wants to know why anglers haven't joined in the numbers they expected from the start, if that's the reason there was no need for a survey just to listen to comments that have been made hear and elsewhere over the last few years.
theartist
Well-known member
I done the survey, took 3 mins. Saw no harm in it at the end of the day the input may help someone somewhere.
thecrow
Well-known member
The survey looks like a recruitment drive to me, nothing wrong with that but IMO its to late, opinions of none members should have been listened to before, they were not and as a result a large number of anglers have already formed opinions on the trust that will take some changing.
I hope that the trust do get more members but I am afraid that having seen some of the things the trust has done over the last few years I will not be one of them.
The survey is intended to identify the top priorities for the angling community to back up its campaigns and legal action.
The Angling Trust has been successful recruiting clubs but it has only recruited 17,500 individual anglers - a small fraction of the angling population - so it is asking anglers from all disciplines to let them know what it can do to persuade a larger number of individuals to support its work
I hope that the trust do get more members but I am afraid that having seen some of the things the trust has done over the last few years I will not be one of them.
The survey is intended to identify the top priorities for the angling community to back up its campaigns and legal action.
The Angling Trust has been successful recruiting clubs but it has only recruited 17,500 individual anglers - a small fraction of the angling population - so it is asking anglers from all disciplines to let them know what it can do to persuade a larger number of individuals to support its work
bennygesserit
Well-known member
Done biggest problem fishing faces - pollution
cg74
Well-known member
Same as me, only I included my disdain of the 12 monthly direct debit faux pas, where anyone that might be on a tight budget gets penalised by having their membership cost being increased by 20%.
Oh and my disgust of having events sponsored by the UK's biggest polluter; Thames Water!
Last edited:
theartist
Well-known member
Two points well made and I think many others will be leaving the same feedback in the comments section.
The same for me too, plus the problems of predation and illegal fishing.
The over-riding problem though for angling remains the apathy of the vast majority of anglers who have not joined the Angling Trust
thecrow
Well-known member
Although there is and always will be apathy within angling I don't believe that is the only or main reason for anglers not joining, its certainly not the reason for a lot of anglers not renewing their membership after their initial joining.
The trust wrongly believed from its inception that anglers would join in droves, they were clearly wrong and IMO its to late to change that due to the actions of some within the trust and trust members.
How does one distinguish between apathetic non-joiners and principled non-joiners who would still like to support FishLegal but NOT the ATr?
This survey gave very little option to express such a view! - Perhaps because ATr couldn't envisage such a scenario?
thecrow
Well-known member
How does one distinguish between apathetic non-joiners and principled non-joiners who would still like to support FishLegal but NOT the ATr?
This survey gave very little option to express such a view! - Perhaps because ATr couldn't envisage such a scenario?
You cannot join Fish Legal on its own in England although its possible in other parts of the UK, you can however make a contribution to fish legal.
I wonder how many ex ACA members have joined because they want to support Fish Legal but don't care for the other bit?
I myself decided against re-joining for about 18 months due to some of the issues and personalities involved.
I took the decision however to join again, and this despite still not agreeing 100% with some of the things that they were doing. Specifically I dont think they did themselves any favours by floating the divisive Close Season debate . . . . . .
That said, I highly doubt if any member is in full agreement with all of the issues and campaigns, but in the final analysis it is all we have as a national body and as such should be supported.
---------- Post added at 09:47 ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 ----------
Regardless of whatever principles one might have for not joining the Angling Trust you can still support Fish Legal by making a contribution solely for the use of Fish Legal,(goodness knows how much I dislike that name . . it was the ACA and should have remained so!)
thecrow
Well-known member
Sorry but I have never thought that something that isn't fully fit for purpose should be supported because they are all there is.
If there is to be an increase in the number of anglers wanting to join the trust IMO there has to be improvement in the trust understanding why the average angler wont join just saying its apathy doesn't do it for me. They also have to take constructive criticism on board not repeat the mistake as in the case of Thames Water sponsoring matches. The trust needs to attract members not just sit back and hope that members come to them, I would bet money that there are anglers even now that don't know what the trust are about.
All just my opinion.
sam vimes
Well-known member
I rather suspect that the lack of individual members is an even greater issue than it first appears. If you discount all of those that have to join to gain access to Fishomania, and other ATr run competitions, the numbers will look even thinner than 17500 they quote.
Of all the fairly serious anglers I know, only a tiny fraction are definitely ATr members. A slightly bigger minority of them are particularly aware of the ATr. The bulk, right or wrong, just aren't interested. Some of them can see the benefit to a club or syndicate, but not to themselves as an individual angler. If the ATr want them as individual members, they'll either have to offer something tangible or offer nothing at all but accept an indeterminate donation rather than a set fee.
Of all the fairly serious anglers I know, only a tiny fraction are definitely ATr members. A slightly bigger minority of them are particularly aware of the ATr. The bulk, right or wrong, just aren't interested. Some of them can see the benefit to a club or syndicate, but not to themselves as an individual angler. If the ATr want them as individual members, they'll either have to offer something tangible or offer nothing at all but accept an indeterminate donation rather than a set fee.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2004
- Messages
- 3,906
- Reaction score
- 4
No comment from me about the ATr here, but one about "apathy". Very popular Blame Game word used by the unfollowed, unelectable etc for those who don't see things their own, often strange, non-user-friendly way. Use it and such sorts will only lose more.
Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)
Senior Member
The majority of anglers don't join the ATr for similar reasons to those of most people who like to kick a ball round the park or play 5 a side don't join the FA....they don't have to.
chub_on_the_block
Well-known member
I think the only time there would ever be a mass take-up of ATr membership by anglers is if they felt an imminent and over-riding threat to fishing and they thought the ATr could stop it.
Lots of people follow politics without ever joining a political party, and as Corkers said plenty play football without joining FA. Same with tennis, except that for some inter-club matches you do have to be a member of the LTA. Widely resented of course and for good reason bearing in mind how little the LTA achieves with such a massive budget.
Lots of people follow politics without ever joining a political party, and as Corkers said plenty play football without joining FA. Same with tennis, except that for some inter-club matches you do have to be a member of the LTA. Widely resented of course and for good reason bearing in mind how little the LTA achieves with such a massive budget.
thecrow
Well-known member
IMO the reason that clubs/syndicates and fishery owners have been a greater success for the trust than individual membership is that the benefits of membership for that group are very worthwhile, the insurance alone is worth the fee.
I don't agree with that at all PB.
As I said before, there is a lot I don't agree with going on in the Angling Trust, but for a large number of anglers it is pure apathy that prevents them form joining.
It is the apathy of the leave it all for others to sort out attitude, but yelp and complain loudly when it turns to a pile of cods-krap types, that is hampering membership.
It is not a blame game at all, just a sad yet simple home truth for many . . . . . . .