A New Beginning?

The only thing I can suggest is that anyone posts a new thread for each policy you want to debate. Keep all the threads in the Barbel section and post links to other threads that debate the contents of this article. General debate on this article can continue on this thread.

I suppose some mug has to kick off.

I've had the pleasure of meeting Bob, and the pleasure of meeting Steve Pope (on the same day as it happens), and I've got no axe to grind with either. I'm not a member of the BS (you can count my recent barbel captures with your thumbs) as I'm not that bothered about catching barbel but I do take an interest in what the BS get up to, and have no problems with it from a fishing or political point of view.

Whilst Bob's proposals are fine in themselves it doesn't mean that any society has to adopt them, or would be better for adopting them. I've been involved with clubs and their politics for over thirty years (mostly wasted) and democratic they ain't! Most are run by a tiny handful of strong individuals, sometimes with good judgement, sometimes not. Often these individuals are very hard working, fanatical even. But any organisation run by committee or allowing its membership to constantly sway its decisions ends up prevaricating and drifting along.

With any organisation if you share their aims, take advantage of their facilities, want to contribute, you do so from the inside. If you can't find the one that suits your own personal standards then you have the option (maybe) of starting your own. This applies to angling clubs, political associations, pressure groups, whatever. Whether it is democratic is up to the members. If the leaders take too many liberties or are seen to be so autocratic that the majority are fed up then eventually either they will force the issue regardless of democratic procedures or form a new organisation.

Having prattled on for too long, I'll sum up by saying that if Bob want to change the BS then he must join and influence from within. If he wants one run on his lines, and the existing one is unwilling to change to how he wants it then he'll have to set up his own.

Or there's always the Burboteer's Fellowship!!!!!!

A very well put and realistic post Mark, well said.

Dear All,

Speaking entirely for myself, I'm not really interested in being part of either forming or joining a "new" barbel society. I'm happy enough being a member of the real one that?s been around for the last ten years.

To be honest, I also feel that "angling" is pretty well represented on all of its collective political fronts so I don't think my bedroom ceiling will come crashing down if the real Barbel Society or a make believe one for that matter didn't affiliate themselves to a wider political remit. Then again, I reckon the real BS might well surprise a few concerning its political/conservation front this coming season.

But what do "I" want from my real BS membership? Hardly ow't really.

I'm not bothered about the BS fisheries because I've already got more fishing than one can lob balls of ground bait into. I'm not bothered about meetings and the like because I'd rather be out there fishing, or doing something I really want to. I'm also not bothered about the magazines or newsletters either because at 51 years of age, I've pretty much read enough of that stuff to wall paper the moon. I definitely don't want to go fishing dressed in BS garb either so its merchandising won't make a profit out of me! I "might" attend the odd AGM but I doubt it as I've done so much of that stuff before in the past that I find the whole pantomime quite boring.

So why "AM" I a BS member especially when I used to make Bob look like a mere beginner in the BS criticism stakes? Well, I decided to try and make a difference to my chosen branch of fishing in a positive way instead of being negative all the time towards something that lets face it,"is" a "successful" single species organisation dedicated to barbel fishing. So far, I've made a very tiny effort at "suggesting" a couple of things to the BS Conservation team so I feel I've done something worthwhile. And the BS ?does? remain the only barbel fishing organisation that?s truly open to all and is regarded as the ?voice? of barbel fishing?

Sorry I can't be more help to the make believe BS but you never know, given another ten years?

Regards,

Lee.

To imagine starting from scratch is a great way of working out if things are going the right way.

I'd like to see a better national spread of fisheries but it's completely understandable why there is a concentration of BS fisheries in the Midlands.

I'd like to see more information and articles on the webiste and better access to fisheries, for members, via a day ticket system of some sort.

Everything is in discussion on the BS forum so I don't feel my wishes are going unheard.

I feel some BS members could do with having a greater understanding of match fishing knowledge with regard to the keepnet debate but that's down to the members and not the committee.

If things were going drastically wrong I be calling for a democratically elected committee, but I pretty happy as things are.

The BS stil gets 9 out of 10 from me.

I'm more concerned about the dodgy Mark Knopfler haircuts of various committe members than anything else. Seriously scary stuff which I'm convinced adversely affects barbel welfare (Steve and Fred!)

As to the BS itself I'm broadly happy with how things stand and have posted suggestions on their site. I don't want to see half or more of the subscription fees spent on (IMO) needless administration costs and votes on this, that and the other.

I have one vote and cast it every June when the time comes to renew membership

Dear ALL.....or Bob really.

9 out of 10 from Matt....nice marks Matt. You could do worse than to sit down with Bob and explain why 'you' are that happy with the 'real' BS as it stands today.

Mark has made a very sensible post.....mind you, I expected nothing else as he has shown on many ocassions in the past that he is a sensible chap.

Lee has once again posted his astute thought process and reasoning on a subject matter that was once a hobby horse that he rode to Doncaster races and back again with much snarl and spit....and strangely for him, hides behind some very worthwhile positive contribution to the Research and Conservation area of the BS since he opened his membership to the Society.

Bob seems to have this hobby horse firmly fixed between his legs now, even though he states that he isn't having a pop at the BS but, to anyone reading with an iota of understanding, it appears that he definately has problems with the present BS and then goes about writing articles pretending to think sideways but embarrassingly showing a difficult task of letting go of the rag doll he calls the BS.

Bob, you are worrying me fella......you need to pay your BS subscriptions next year out of your own wallet and be pro-active within the BS, like the offer you have made to me within the realms of better education in the keepnet issue, or let it all go my old son.

I hope it is the former option as I know that you can help toward a better barbelling world.

Lastly from me........my considered opinion is that if there were elections tomorrow within the BS commitee set up, the same guys would get elected into their present roles.

The BS was never set up as a democracy and for now there is no reason for one to be put in place outside of some peoples desires....a minority not a majority at that....worse yet, is that if you put yourself up against any of the present committee personnel, you wouldn't get voted in. That has to be a worry Bob cos your not that bad a bloke.

I sincerley look forward to your help and imput into the keepnet issue Bob....I hope that my comments here do not create a path to you withdrawing that offer.

You asked for opinions on what 'we' would do......without further debate on my post, you have now had a few which feel that nothing much is wrong with how things are at the minute....there has to be a message there somewhere.

Yours With Respect.....
Steve.

At last a reasonable supposition from Bob,still can't understand his motives??

Also,some terrific responses,although Brad had me worried for a bit )

I'm happy the way the Barbel Society is currently run, so I don't need to consider any other way.

I think Brad has a very valid point. Good job Fred and Steve dont get too many these days, scare the barbel to death

My congratulations to Bob for a most evocative article; yes there are clubs whos interests are with either a specific species, match or with total pleasure angling at the other extreme, these represent angler members and them only.
When it comes to the political scene and trying to enhance our sport and conseveration of species and environment on a national scale that is a totally different kettle of fish. A national body has to take into consideration a far wider field of views to become a viable lobby group to change legislation which may over time enhance the aims and objectives of the ( coarse ) angler. These may well require the input of international groups with similar interests to achieve some modicum of success. This latter is a very hard row to hoe as I am well aware trying to preserve coarse fishing in New Zealand.
Thank you Bob for this well constructed article.
Tony Stevens: New Zealand

I'm amazed, a barbel thread spawned by one of Bob's articles and not one dummy been spit yet! 2006 could be a good year.

Or Bob's just getting too polite......

Dont get exited Graham, only 11 posts, bit dull really, must reflect summut

Seriously for a minute, I think it reflects that most of us don't really care how the BS is run. And I don't mean that with any disrespect for the BS, just that in the grand scale of things it affects most of us very little indeed.

Agreed Graham, why do some like to shout so loud on here about it then, sad I think.

As this ones obviously not going far, and the barbel board is a bit quiet, best get Bob to write another ey.

Having been involved with both types of groups/societies described by Bob, (Rights of Ways and Horsy Organisations) at grass roots all the way up to meetings with Government Bodies. I?ve come to the conclusions that democracy, all be it admirable is not always evident or very practical. When taking a job on any committee that person is going to run it as they see fit, otherwise they wouldn?t have volunteered to do it. After all you?ve got to be a bit thick to do a job you don?t like for no money. That?s not to say democracy doesn?t work entirely it?s just a safety net for the organisation if someone really screws up or has got the plot completely wrong. Customer satisfaction is a bit like joining the RAC when given 4 or 5 options. There?s never one option that gives you everything you want except the most expensive. I?ve no doubt that there are organisations out there that are just right for you but they probably come at a cost, either you pay someone to do exactly what you want or you do it yourself. Anything else then there bound to be some element of disappointment.
Re Bobs 10 rules; I?d have no problem with joining such a club, however re rule 2
?The Society will be an open democratic organisation in which individual officers will be set annual targets. Those failing to meet these targets will stand for re-election at conference.?
That?s managing by threat which may be OK if I?m paid but I?d much prefer there to be an element of reward for doing an unpaid job. I?m very much of the opinion, don?t ask someone else to do that which you are not prepared to do yourself. Most large clubs or societies post rule changes attached to an Agenda that can be voted on by the members at the AGM. If I got really upset about a rule change that didn?t go my way at the AGM then I?d vote with my feet. Also read the club or societies rules before joining, that way you?ll avoid getting upset.

Great post there John.

Graham, I think the reason there has been little reaction is down to the fact that many people on here have switched off because of all the in fighting in previously related threads. It's a shame because some important issues are being ignored.

I assume Matt, you mean important issues raised before this current article ?

If so, you may be right,it just shows, that if you have a serious point to raise, you should stick to that point.

I think there have been more important points raised in the past, but I think the interesting issue in Bob's latest article is this approach of imagining you had a blank slate - What would you do?

Excellent article Bob, I may add to the debate later.

Excellent article Bob. You should start something up, so you can run it to suit your ideals and as you see fit.

Thats Democracy in reality. ....or is it?

Graham