The Angling Trust

As an individual, not currently a member of any angling club or association, are there any major benefits in joining the Angling Trust?

The major benefit is that you will be joining an organisation that has the potential to be the collective voice of angling.
BUT
Only if you and many more join.

If your question is, what do I get out of it as an individual, then the answer is you will be part of that collective voice.

Fred is spot on ,the spirit to join 1 voice is highly important. But if it is a personal benefit you ask about, how about up to £5million public liability insurance included in your membership.....FREE..........

Your money would go, in part, towards the buying of fishing rights so that your fishing is protected.

Major benefits? -No But its the first time we have had one organisation talking for all anglers, and with Camerons faith in the "big society" and public money in short supply, the Angling Trust will get consulted more and more, if only for the fact their opinions are free!
This is the benefit, you are a member and your opinions are getting heard indirectly of course

I'm sure this subject has been aired several times,more recently by me when I was trying to decide on joining for a second year......

I did rejoin when I read other posts suggesting that 3 years was possibly a fair time to give the organisation time to build a decent membership,which,to be successful,it surely must have.
Every sport needs a single voice to represent its aims/opinions and angling is no exception....its just a great shame that some(seemingly)feel they cannot support it because it has not been organised in the way they want it or the wrong people are running it............whatever..

Personally I suggest you give it a go and see where it goes...............we may all turn out to be wrong and it may die in the not too distant future but the least we can do is give it a chance....

if it does fail and die in the future what/who will replace it? i cant think of anyone. its not neccesary to agree 100% with what the AT does to join its enough for me to know they are on the side of anglers and there aint nobody else.

Just look at the work the legal team are doing. I am happy to pay my subs just for that.

Ok maybe it ain't perfect but I think it is all we have. There seems to be more and more bodies wanting to ban angling, either directly or indirectly, and the only opposition appears to be the AT, so get your money out and get joined up.

Me too i,m sticking with it ,as you say who else have we got. And the more that join the better it will become.

i belive that part of the rod licence should go to the AT, i know that some will object because they dont agree with the AT,i dont agree with the road fund licence but if i want to drive i need to pay it,the threats to our sport are many and angler apathy shouldnt be allowed to stop the AT doing the best that they can to fight them.

the blanker said:

i belive that part of the rod licence should go to the AT, i know that some will object because they dont agree with the AT,i dont agree with the road fund licence but if i want to drive i need to pay it,the threats to our sport are many and angler apathy shouldnt be allowed to stop the AT doing the best that they can to fight them.

Click to expand...

The problem with this is that some people have paid "up front" for life membership, in my case I would not object to some of the licence fee going towards AT however I feel that some may object to paying again.

Emmo (Angling Trust) said:

The problem with this is that some people have paid "up front" for life membership, in my case I would not object to some of the licence fee going towards AT however I feel that some may object to paying again.

Click to expand...

good point but if the AT goes t**s up what happens to the money people have paid for life membership then?

Good point's, but lets be honest here. The AT haven't done what they said they were going to do, lack of funds has part to do with that, now ask why there is a lack of funds??.

IMO, the AT cost to much even if it is £20 or whatever, that has put off many anglers. Then there is the problem of the AT not getting the message out there to all anglers in the first place.

How many posters or stickers have you seen in shop windows ???

Go to some of the biggest trade shows, you wont find the AT at many of them, ask yourself why that is.

Fish legal, ( what a stupid name that is) are not doing anything different to what the ACA used to do, and have lost funding since the chance over.
The ACA should have remained as it was.

I hope the AT can move forward, but to get more members they need to get the word across to all anglers, and they haven't done that very well.
Subs have to come down, do you want 50,000 members at £20, or 250,000 members at £5 or £6 a year, the more members the bigger the voice. At £5 a year i would have thought you could get 300,000 members, if you got the word out there correctly in the first place.

On the other side of the coin, the AT are not very good in communication, and there are a few on FM that have had NO reply from the AT what so ever, doesnt give you much to shout about does it.

Ray-I thought you were a non-believer....or did you decide to join in the end??

I don't say you're wrong in what you say but how would YOU go about getting the'word'across to the countless thousands of fishermen who fish,maybe through the summer months only or pop down to the local lake for a couple of hours but don't really want to be involved in AT or anything similar...

No idea how it would work but I suggest the idea above of adding an amount to the EA licence would,at least,mean we are ALL'members'regardless of how much time we spend fishing(providing we buy a licence!!).......if this body is for ALL anglers then surely another couple of quid on the licence is not too much to ask???

................maybe some would still baulk at being'forced'to pay...who knows..

Tee Cee,

I haven't joined, and don't think i will until the AT start to listern to Anglers, which we know they are not doing at the moment. Whats the point having the AT if they can't be bothered to reply to groups and members ????.

Put a few quid on the licence fee, good idea for some, but many have said they would then not bother to buy a licence, you can't force anglers to join the AT.

The best way to get the word out is via press, trade shows, stickers and posters in tackle shops for a start, that hasn't happened. You should be seeing the AT in every angling paper and mag everytime you open it. The press could aid the AT by putting in a free running AD all year round, lets face it, theres enough room as there isn't much fishing these days in the papers, just ad's.

Also, what has this so called group, John Wilson and co been doing ?? haven't heard a thing of what they have been upto, have you ?? I would have tought these so called known anglers would have been spreading the word. Have you also noticed that the AT doesn't get any mention at all on the TV, other than the odd bit on tight lines, if your lucky.

All in all, the AT should be in your face where ever you look regarding fishng, it isn't thats why it hasn't got the members it claimed it would have.

I don't want to see the AT fold, but i'm not going to jon something that doesn't listern to those who they need to fund them. If the ACA was still going i would still support them, but i don't and won't support fish legal.

The ACA went T*ts up over the Bob James affair, they lost a lot of funding and members, I don't care what Bob James was paid, how much he had, or what went on, Bob James was worth every penny and more to the ACA, he bought them in more funding than they had ever had, when he went, so did the funding. I don't help Fish legal, to many there who like the AT, don't listern to those who fund them.

Ray Daywalker Clarke said:

Go to some of the biggest trade shows, you wont find the AT at many of them, ask yourself why that is.

Click to expand...

They were at the latest T&G trade show Ray. Little stand, right at the back of the hall, next the emergency exit and coffee stall. I saw Mike Heylin all on his lonesome and spent a few minutes (30 or thereabout) with him. Amazing thing was how many dealers walked past and turned their heads as if the stand wasn't there.

I agree with a lot of what you say Ray, about membership costs and the Fish Legal name, but in the end it comes down to us supporting it by word and mouth. All the best ideas/products can get along in this world without any advertising so long as people feel the need for them and want them.

Word and mouth is the best form of advertising there is so it's really down to us to convince our mates and for them to convince their mates to join.

Looks like one of the ATr's 'partners' the WWF, is about to kick recreational sea anglers in the $alls

SAIF believe anglers impact commercial stocks | The Scottish Sea Angling Conservation Network

This is a report going into Defra with little or no sea angling input with recommendations that IFCA committees be given powers to force sea anglers as to where and when, they can or cannot fish.

Not one of my club committee (DCAC) is a member of the ATr and I doubt very few of probably 1000 ATr application forms I've sent out to members over the last 2years have been returned. I did stamp the forms with the club stamp as an audit trail but couldn't get any feedback.
£25 for individual members from 2011, no decision on clubs/groups yet

Its never going to work without regular income,be it a business or a society,money has to come in to make it viable..

Trying to make a go of it on a shoestring with membership stagnant instead of growing means AT can only hobble along.It needs to be seen to have power to make itself heard just like any other body fighting for what is right.

Pay back the money to those who have bought life memberships and add a fixed sum to the licence...............as with anything else we would'get used to the idea'and buy the licence anyway just as people will moan about the cuts the country is facing for a while and then just get on with life....

Yes,I am saying anglers DO need to be forced into supporting the sport they keep saying they love so,so much.We MUST have an organisation to represent US in this day and age-so to those who'fence sit'and continually find something to nag about just because its not EXACTLY how they want it,I say "Look at what the sport has given to you for decades,how much pleasure you've taken from it and ask yourselves-isn't it time I gave a little back???

(I'm just pi$$ed off 'cos I didn't go fishing this morning-housework-again!!)

Tee-Cee said:

Yes,I am saying anglers DO need to be forced into supporting the sport they keep saying they love so,so much.We MUST have an organisation to represent US in this day and age-so to those who'fence sit'and continually find something to nag about just because its not EXACTLY how they want it,I say "Look at what the sport has given to you for decades,how much pleasure you've taken from it and ask yourselves-isn't it time I gave a little back???

Click to expand...

I would be totally against any form of enforced membership fee to the ATr or to anyone else for that matter. The annual license should remain exactly as it is.

As an individual member of the ATr, and one who has made a decent sized cash contribution, I firmly believe that their funding should be directly proportional to their performance!

I wouldn't want any of my funds supposedly allocated to ATr by the EA, it a government organisation and funds could well be use as directed by them.

It must remain independant and not rely on "government" sourcing.