NFA Conference 2004

[Matthew Black]

Murray

I take it you are a member of the NFA through a club or Individual Membership?

You have to one or t'other to attend.

Conference is to be held at:
Cedar Court Hotel
Denby Dale Road
Calder Grove
Wakefield
Yorks.
(Smack on Junction 39 of the M1)

If you wish to attend then ring NFA HQ at Derby on: 01283 734 735

One of the girls will send you all the details such as Agenda, Annual Report, Finances etc.

Saturday 17th commencing at 1330 is when the 'business' side of things is sorted. (ie: NAA, Moran and should the NFA become an incorporated body)

Sunday 18th continuing 1000 and closing at 1400 is when 'angling debate' takes place.

This is a forum that I put in place a few years ago and I am very proud of, that despite 'those above' in the NFA being very dubious at first, but it has become extremely popular with the members, especially those that feel 'frustrated' on the main agenda.

Topics this year include:
Cormorants ... speakers Martin Read and some piss head called John Wright!
Disability Discrimination Act ... Terry Moseley BDAA
Insurance/Duty of Care & Competitions ... an update.
But it is an open debate.

See you in the bar?

 

[Terry Comerford]

How many anglers are members of the NFA?

 

[John Hepworth]

Notice of Motion:
That with immediate, any angler who would support any proposal put forward by any NFA delegate should be considered brain dead.

Get a life John/Matthew??

Does the NFA represent anyone theses days?

 

[Matthew Black]

Quite a few more than support the Gudgeon Society and others that make up the SAA.

Oh, and then there's NAFAC with apparently 380,000 members (ha-ha!) and not a pot to piss in.

Need I go on Terry?

Close on 200,000 should answer your question.

When last I checked Mr.Hepworth it was established that I at least had a brain which is more than can be said for numpties like you.

Did you have yours cremated, was it buried in sand or did the good lord forget to grow you one?

The NFA represents its membership which is the largest angling governing body by a country mile.

Has anyone asked you to join?
Has anyone insisted that you join?

No, then what's you gripe?

You just carry on doing whatever it is that numpties do and I'll continue to fight for my sport while snides sit back and do nothing but moan and complain about everything that doesn't fit into their mindset.

I'm sure you will know exactly which category you fit into John without me having to tell you.

 

[John Hepworth]

I just wonder if there isn't some kind of power struggle Matthew; why else would someone propose;(and post on an open forun)

"That with immediate effect the National Federation of Anglers withdraw their support of the National Angling Alliance (NAA) and cease to hold any form of office within the NAA.

That with immediate effect the National Federation of Anglers withdraw their support of the Moran Committee Joint Bird Group and cease to hold any form of office within the Moran Committee.

I wonder just who stirred up all this fuss and furore?"
---------------------------------------
Did I remeber reading about "UNIYTY IN ANGLING" some time ago? Or was is just one of the many dreams I have during the induced comma's I suffer from whilst listening to a Mr John Wright on the Keith Arthur angling programme

The last time I had a scan I sure did have a brain Matthew, AND I have a cetifiacte to prove I am sane!

Did anyone force me to join the NFA? No, but I had no choice untill my club(s) had the good sence to pull out.

Having said the above, Keith Arthur is one of the few in the angling media that I have any resoect for - at least he never tries to push his own views and oppinions

As for the NAFAC, it has been of more benefit to my club in 6 months than the NFA ever was during during all the years we were members. The one time we did need help from the NFA it didn't want to know.

 

[Terry Comerford]

Thank you Matthew/John?
The NFA only represents 200,000 anglers in the country out of 1.5 million.
I thought it was far more than that?

 

[Wolfman Woody]

John Wright, (too many Johns now) you say -
"Close on 200,000 should answer your question."

Is this individual members or the total member of clubs who have affilaited to the NFA so that the small number of matchmen in the club can fish the nationals? Do you see my point, I was a member of a club with 500 members of which 60 were matchmen but the club were affiliated for the purposes of the Nationals. However, the other 440 were reluctant members (perhaps) who would be counted in your 200,000. In fact, take away the Nationals and perhaps no-one would have wanted to join.

It's a bit like when the Labour Party used to claim having 8,000,000 members because every member of a trades union including "closed shops" had to be counted as well. Strange when the Labour Party never even got that many votes in a General Election.

That's why I'm always a bit cynical when the NFA says it is the ONLY organisation quualified to represent anglers. (or however you would want to put it)

 

[John Hepworth]

And Cheeky M, how many of the NFA "members" are members of more than one affiliated club? At one time I was a member 4 times over.
For my sins I am now secretary of The River Wear Fisheries Improvement Association. With 12 memember clubs the Association represents over 5000 anglers that fish the Wear, so it could be claimed, on a pro rata basis, that we are stronger than the NFA, but that would be rather meaningless.

 

[Murray Rogers]

JOHN, Whats to be said then?



These are all good guys and the NFA do not represent any of them, Do they!!!


I would go to the conference, but apparently I am not allowed as I am a non member!! but I do buy me License every year etc, so why can't I go then??

What's me License for???????????

 

[Matthew Black]

Strange John that you have to own a certificate to prove you are sane. You sure you don't mean 'certified'?

I've already stated on this thread John that the reason I put forward the two NoMs re the NAA & Moran was twofold:

1. To have the opportunity to DEBATE at Conference the NFA's liaison with these two bodies. (Conference is run to a very strict format and you can't just get up and voice an opinion unless it is covered on the Agenda).

2. Both bodies (NAA & Moran) sold angling down the river over the cormorant issue ... fact!

I'd like to about the time the NFA refused your club help but NAFAC came to the rescue. If that is the case then I have to say it is very worrying.

Keith Arthur is a mate of many years and I'm not going down the road of bringing him into this debate.

John, you have a point over the membership figures. I am a member of 12 clubs & associations, plus paying ?15 as an Individual Member, but I am so because of my position in the angling media. Keith is a member of seven clubs so that is 20 between us.

Re match groups you are quite right and if the NFA did not run Nationals then the membership would fall BUT a great many big clubs are members of the NFA regardless of matches. Some of the very big clubs don't even enter a team in the Nationals.

Hope that puts you straight Jeff?

Murray, you pay your Rod Licence fee of ?23 to the Environment Agency not the NFA, or did you not know that?

Sad note:

Kevin D'Arcy of Quorn Amgling Society passed away over the Easter weekend.

He was a lovely man and represented his society at all NFA regional meetings and Conferences, and along with Roger Marlow, held the club together for years.

Some of you out there may have known Kevin and he will be missed without any shadow of a doubt. A tragic loss.

 

[John Hepworth]

Matthew, different times, millennium even.
NFA: Many years ago one club I was a member of needed help in connection with renewal of a water lease/a bid from another NFA affiliated club issue - We lost the water.

NAFAC: Excellent customer service, saved us several hundered ?'s on our public liability insurance, and from the many policy documents it certainly looks to better represent the majority of anglers and angling clubs/associations.
I would recomend ALL angling clubs

 

[John Hepworth]

(hit the submit button too soon)I would recommend ALL angling clubs should join up with the NAFAC.

 

[Phil Hackett 2]

Post 1.
Phil, Jason, Cheeky and co:

NFA?

I do not hold office within the NFA, apart from being co-opted onto the NFA's Cormorant Action Group, I am just an ordinary member.

Achievements?

(“The CAG has achieved more over the cormorant issue in the 18 months or so it has been established than both Moran and NAA have done since they were created.”)
Somewhat interesting this, given that NFA is part of both bodies???? So the NFA are crap as well then John? Or is it just your dummy spitting because wiser council prevails?

What's the point of the NFA?

(“It's the only governing body for freshwater angling (coarse) that is recognised by the incumbent Government and Sport England (Lottery Funding) The rest of the groups such as NAA, NAFAC, ACA, ATA etc. etc. are NOT”)
Your interpretation John, but not actual fact is it? The Govt. (then sport Minister Kate Howie) said it, she would only talk to a unified body representing all aspects of angling Coarse (including match NFA specialist SAA), Sea NSFA, Game Salmon and Trout Association, Angling Trade Association ATA and National Association of Fishery Advisory Consultatives, hence the formation of the NAA. Many clubs who are not members of the NFA have gained grants from Sports England. Some have even got money out of the Heritage Lottery Fund as well, without being or wanting to be members of the NFA.

Angling Development.

(”Just take a look at the number of qualified NFA coaches and the number of youngsters that are being introduced to angling today by the NFA.”)
Whilst it’s true the NFA have trained some coaches, the reason being they are at this time the only body running such coaching courses. That may well change soon! What you fail to recognise (probably because it doesn’t suit your purpose) is that many other organisations - BS, PAC, non-NFA affiliated clubs, etc, etc run teach-ins for their junior members. Many of which are fronted by Qualified Teachers not someone with 10 weeks training of dubious quality. And for the NFA to think it can stop such highly qualified people running such events is living in cloud cuckoo land. It will find itself facing a challenge under EU labour law and human rights, I can assure you of that.

(”In the year 2112 you will have to be fully qualified and vetted to take any youngster fishing, and even parents going fishing with their own kids will be scrutinised, and insurance regulations will also come into being. Think about it .... in 2004 if you have a bath with your 2-year-old kid certain sectors of the PC brigade would have you locked up as a child molester!”)
Who says so?The NFA…. bollox! The yellow-brick road is a long one to lar lar land.
Whilst it would be advisable for all clubs, associations, groups etc, to insist that anybody dealing/working with children, young people or vulnerable adult people should be CRB checked, as the community, voluntary and statutory sector do. For you John, that stands for Criminal Records Bureau. It isn’t mandatory and I have seen no plans in the near or far off future to do so. And yes John, I would known, as volunteer in that sector, and my wife has worked in child protection for over 25 years.

(“The ACA is not all it is cracked up to be.”)
Whilst I’d have some agreement with this, they have won over 2000 cases since they were formed 50+ years ago. But yes they are a reactive organisation, not as some think a proactive body, and again yes, they’ll only take cases on that they think they can win, based on legal advice.

 

[Phil Hackett 2]

Post 2.
(“Two years ago the NFA handed over a cheque for ?25,000 re an ongoing polution case that had been taken to court by the NFA's own solicitors.”)
And which case would this be? And how many have they handled over the 100+ years they’ve been going?

12 years ago I contacted them over the loss of fishing on a local lake, I’m still waiting for the reply and help. We turned to the SACG/NASA and got angling back on the lake within 18 months.



The ACA turned the case down flat!

I could go on but the NFA's website will tell you all you need to know about the Federation or you ring the HQ on 01283 734 735 for an info pack.

Run matches?

(“Yes, that's where the NFA receives a lot of revenue via adimistration fees and sponsorship. They seem to be quite good at organising big events too.”)
After a 100 years of doing such work, even a monkey would learn to be quite good at holding such events.

(“The two NoMs at Conference and why I put them to the East Midlands Region who voted them forward to Conference?

Both Moran and the NAA sold angling in this country down the river re the cormorant issue after an European Angling Alliance Conference held in Liepzig last April.

All 19 member nations voted in a clause that sent delegates back to their own governing bodies with a view to put pressure on Government to reduce the inland Cormorant population.

Moran and the NAA conspired NOT to go ahead with this .... why should the NFA have any truck with these organisations and the people who run them?”)
Later for this one!!!!!!!!

1.5 million anglers to overthrow any political party in office? Are you having a laugh or what?

The hunting lobby brought London to a standstill ... twice!

(“If angling was threatened (well, it already is actually but then I probably know more about PETA than most) you could hold the protest rally in Dr. Who's tardis!”)
Emmmm!
And which organisation was it that went in to print saying that we might have to give up livebaiting to placate this pernicious group of fascists? Errrrrrrrrrrrr ….. the NFA!
And where was the support for the SAA/PAC over the Lake District coarse fish ban? Didn’t see any cash either from them. Strange that form a body who thinks it’s the voice and leadership for all coarse anglers, don’t you think?

Must go, I've got to put some trebles in some roach and the like and exercise my right to livebait, which I’m not sure the NFA, who says it’s the only governing body for freshwater angling (coarse), supports or not.

 

[Nick Austin 2]

I'm confused.... and i think many others would be too?...
I thought matt black was ?Tim Paisley?.... who is he now?...

 

[Matthew Black]

John Wright.

John, the NFA's Constitution NOW states that NO member club can go after another member club's water or waters without permission.

Good for NAFAC but they are not recognised by the incumbent Government, so why don't they join the NFA, the Governing Body for Freshwater Angling?

No Phil, that's why the two NoMs were put in place for Conference to decide whether or not the Federation leaves both the NAA & Moran.

The NFA sits round a table and has one vote.
The 'Gudgeon Society' sits round the table and has one vote.

Now that is 'bollocks'!

The Rt. Hon. Richard Caborn MP rules the roost now and not Kate Howie, who I met and knows sod all about angling, so let's stay with both the present and the future.

For your information, Caborn has actually cast a line and caught a fish or two.

He will only recognise the three Governing Bodies (NFA, S&TA, NFSA) and not the 'minnows'.

So they should join the 'big boys' if they want representation

Angling Development?
Wrong again.
Never heard of the PAA?

No, the NFA doesn't say anything of the sort about 2112.
The legislation has already been put in place at some gaff called The House of Commons.

Cheque for ?25,000?
I can't remember the name of the club but if you ring NFA HQ on 01283 734 735 they will give you all the info you need.
I can't be arsed as it's history!
(Bit like your spurious and pathetic arguments really)

What other 'monkeys' have the facilities and know-how to run such big matches as Fish 'O' Mania or the National Championships?

If they are out there then why don't they cash-in?

Do you think that either Embassy or Barrie Hearn would have gone to the NFA if they could have found someone better?

Finally the NFA supports its Membership and not a bunch of clowns that have nothing better to do than try and put them down at every opportunity.

Phil, you think I talk and write crap, but tell me, what's it like actually being a pile of crap?

Must go now I feel a dump coming on!

 

[Wolfman Woody]

This is like your worst ever SOAP nightmare.

I thought Phil was defending the NFA apart from the odd criticism and now he gets a slating from Wrighty. No need to get personal with the insult either.

And still my very civil question on how the 200,000 anglers is counted has been side-stepped. I WANT TO KNOW - HONESTLY!

And Phil "1.5 million anglers to overthrow any political party in office? Are you having a laugh or what?" Yes, it was a little tongue in cheek because with diverse opinions that have been expressed here on this thread there's more chance of me becomming King.

 

[Matthew Black]

Jeff, if Phil was DEFENDING the NFA then I must have developed double vision ... yes, I know, before you say it, too much cider!

200,000 NFA members is a 'park-ball' figure taken from the membership figures that member clubs state when joining and re-joining each year, plus the individual members, which I am told currently stands at just over 500.

The trouble is the more members you declare, the more per capita you pay, (up to a limit of 3,500), so a lot of member clubs do not declare the full quota because they either don't want to or can't afford to pay the full whack.

Believe it or not the cost of joining the NFA per member, if say your club has around 500 members, is about 68 pence each!

Example: The 'Gudgeon Society' .. sorry, the SAA, has a per capita voting power of 500. Tell me, does that mean the SAA has a total of only 500 members?

I don't think so.

Do you see where I am coming from now?

Take on board another example: A club that may have 10,000 members but has only declared and paid for 1,000 members when entering the NFA will have all their 10,000 members thinking they are indeed members of the NFA.

Confused Jeff?

Yep, so am I!!

The system is wrong because I feel that any club, association or otherwise should be compelled to produce 'the books' before membership is excepted .... AND, I feel that should apply to all bodies, INCLUDING NAFAC, who reckon they have 380,000 members, especially when they conveniently want something like funding from the EA or Government!

By the way Jeff, I get slated on this site for using a fictitious name (can't spell or pronounce pseudonym!) and yet you get away Scot free by using 'Cheeky Monkey' when your real name is Jeff Woodhouse, AKA 'professional long letter writer'.

Why?

 

[Phil Hackett 2]

Finally the NFA supports its Membership and not a bunch of clowns that have nothing better to do than try and put them down at every opportunity.

Oh really! I don't think specialist anglers see it that way at all, because if they did there would never have been an NSAG-NASA-SACG/NASA = SAA would there now?
The NFA are totally match oriented and it's questionable whether they have ever been anything else, or likely to be for that matter.

Jeff No I wasn't defending the NFA My personal opinion of them is they are a dinosaur organisation that like the dinosaurs should have die out….

In a nutshell they are and always have been a crock of sh1j.

And with people like Mr. Wright involved, will always be that way, sadly.

 

[Wolfman Woody]

I'll back away from the personal mud-slinging then.

CHEEKY MONKEY - started as a laugh, I had Jay Dubya for a while when people were take the P155 out of George Dubya (come to think of it they still do). It was no more than a nickname and old school teacher (Mr Lord or 'Snudge' to us) used on me. Look at my profile you see the real name, no-one is christened Cheeky Monkey now are they. But there could be a Matthew Black somewhere saying "I never said that!"

Long letter writing - I never have a humble opinion so if I have one at all I express it well. Anyway, most of my letters to CF have been funny or tried to be - except when some pillock starts name-calling. I even get attention from my dear friend and fellow nutter McMad.

Most of the Mole's letters in CF are usually criticising other anglers or rival organisations AND YOU WORK FOR THE BLOODY MAGAZINE! Call yourself the Mole by all means, but expose your real name when people want to see you for who you really are.

ANYWAY - a point - It could be also that the NFA only represent a handful, say 4,000, anglers all the remainder having been dragged in by their clubs so that a select few can fish the Nationals. Well, it could be.