Wilson secures a voice for anglers

Following a very positive meeting on Mon 24th August, the Angling Trust board welcomed the support offered by John Wilson on behalf of key figures from the angling community.

Both parties agreed that the current business plan was flawed, the AT board of directors accepted this position, agreed to transparency at all times and gave assurances that they would make the necessary changes to secure the immediate future of the Angling Trust.
The AT directors also agreed to be accountable to its membership and embrace an angling advisory panel representing sea, game, coarse and industry to secure the long term future for a single representative voice for angling.

As a result, over the next 6 weeks, John Wilson will select 15 volunteers from the sea, game, coarse, competition, fishery & industry sectors to create the angling advisory panel and a meeting has been scheduled with AT directors for early October to begin to revise the agenda and effectively engage with the angling community and the voluntary sector.

It is hoped that others will follow the lead of John and his team and consider their support where possible at this time.

www.anglingtrust.net

Good for John and the AT, it takes a bit of guts to admit when you're wrong - especially to the public from a position of responsibility.

Interesting.

Any idea specifically how the business plan is to be changed Ruth? What were/are the major flaws?

EC said:

Interesting.

Any idea specifically how the business plan is to be changed Ruth? What were/are the major flaws?

Click to expand...

I would be very interested in seeing the answers to EC's questions too.

In very simple terms, the AT based expenditure on extremely optimistic membership numbers targets which have sadly fallen way short of their predictions.

A great deal of expenditure can be covered by voluntary resources in the future and the addition of the advisary board should ensure that they are actually representing the views of anglers.

So to sum up, the AT have accepted there have been mistakes, agreed to cut their cloth to suit their purse, maintain transparency at all times and review all expenditure, allowing anglers to dictate the agenda from here in.

Interesting times indeed, I hope you can see your way to joining us in this move.

www.anglingtrust.net

In the old plan:

Clause 1: No laughing.

in the ammended new plan:

Clause 1: Lots of laughing.

This small change has now alowed JW to join the team. Simples...

Many thanks Ruth.

When you say 'joining us in this move' are you asking for suggestions or simply asking non members to join?

Ruth Lockwood said:

In very simple terms, the AT based expenditure on extremely optimistic membership numbers targets which have sadly fallen way short of their predictions.

Click to expand...

Interesting and yet not surprising, for me at least.

I would just ask one little question that people might have overlooked - What happend to the £1.56million promised by the Angling Development Board?


Or has that gone elsewhere, eh?

Wolfman Woody said:

Interesting and yet not surprising, for me at least.

I would just ask one little question that people might have overlooked - What happend to the £1.56million promised by the Angling Development Board?


Or has that gone elsewhere, eh?

Click to expand...

It is interesting that the membership fees were set so low to begin with.

If you 'do the math' then it was obvious that at £20.00 it wasn't going to add up, not if all of the constituent bodies were to undertake their previous programmes to the full.

I do wonder though how John Wilson will go about chosing these individuals to 'represent' ordinary anglers.

It seems that this Advisory Board will be yet another (albeit unpaid) layer between ordinary anglers, who we hope to attract to join the AT, and the Board.

While I appreciate the 'simple version' Ruth, would there be a more detailed version of the meeting available?

I think I'd be a perfect candidate for this panel.

Any chance of Mr Wilson giving me a call, Ruth?

Will these be the people on the Advisory Board ?

John Wilson, Keith Arthur, Martin Bowler, Danny Fairbrass, Ruth Lockwood, John Everard and Tim Norman, or are they just offering there services in a bid to help.

I think Dave Lumb would make a good candidate for this panel as he was heavily involved with PAC and has branched out to other types of fishing... He can also give manufacturers point of view as he is one. He isn't afraid to air his views. Also he has plenty of time on his hands as he is always fishing according to his Blog...:j.

I think that the Magnificent 7 will take a seat on the sidelines while John looks to secure unpaid advice from people who can represent the views of sea, coarse and game anglers, clubs, fisheries and the angling trade. I believe he will look to recruit the most experienced people possible from within the sport who understand angling and anglers.
Basically the Trust needs to stay solvent in the near future in order for the advice that this panel gives to kick into effect in the mid-term. This is, I suspect, dependent upon the cheif exec running the business solvently in the short term. In the mid-term seats on the board do need to be filled, but, as far as I am aware, no decisions have as yet been made about who will be chosen (but I suspect it would be reasonable to assume that some of the Mag 7 and some from the 15 advisory panel could well be in the frame).
I personally think this latest development is cause for plenty of optimism. It would appear that those running the Trust have to get a proper grip on its finances and that future policy, shape and recruitment will be greatly aided by listening to people who understand the sport and can engage the Trust's potential customer base.
Yes, this could lead to plenty of pointless and irrelevant arguing about who exactly is suitable to give advice. However, I personally believe that John is well positioned and advised in terms of who to approach, and perfectly able in terms of convincing the right individuals to generously give up their time and skills to make this thing work for the benefit of the majority of English anglers.
Best of luck to him and all involved. He has our full support and best wishes.

How is this "advisory panel" of the Great and the Good going to collect the views of ordinary anglers?
Given the musings of some of them over recent issues, they DO NOT represent my views in anyway shape or form. Am I to take it on trust that they will represent my views fairly and not push their own views, which I DO NOT agree with, forwards over mine?

I'll wait to see what the shape of this panel is and who's agenda they are dancing to before I make any firm decisions

I've got fingers and things tightly crossed.

There are just so many important issues that urgently demand attention from a functional Governing Body, which won't wait whilst angling gets its act together.

I'm grateful for the effort that is being put in by everyone trying to pull it all together.

(ps David gets my vote!)

I think Greg Whitehead has it about right..........and I agree this move gives a feeling of optimism for the future even if it is early days to make judgements.I am sure everyone will have an opinion as to who should be on the panel and no doubt some will anti this move but I think it is positive and says the AT are not sitting around waiting for things to get better.
Personally with the membership as poor as it is surely the AT should consider reducing the joining fee to £10 for the first year just to get more people on board and give them a chance to see just what the AT can do for them......probably not the best financial move but 10% of something is better than 50% of sweet FA!!

I have not joined yet(for many reasons)but this move by AT will probably change my mind and be happy to pay my £20 quid!!

I really do think the AT deserves a chance to get it right if only for the fact they have seen the errors in initial planning.......

This is indeed a positive turn, issues of accountability and transparency appear to have been addressed, the board appear to have listened to what has been said and are taking action accordingly!

All in all, a jolly good result - good luck to all involved for the future (I suspect your going to need it!)

I think that Tee-Cee has said it about right , give the A.T. a bit of space to regroup , look to the bigger picture , 2 or 3 years down the line , to see how they are going , should be a bit stronger by then .
At least here on fishing magic ( that ok Woody ?) they will have 2/3 or more new members .:w

Ruth Lockwood said:

In very simple terms, the AT based expenditure on extremely optimistic membership numbers targets which have sadly fallen way short of their predictions.

A great deal of expenditure can be covered by voluntary resources in the future and the addition of the advisary board should ensure that they are actually representing the views of anglers.

So to sum up, the AT have accepted there have been mistakes, agreed to cut their cloth to suit their purse, maintain transparency at all times and review all expenditure, allowing anglers to dictate the agenda from here in.

Interesting times indeed, I hope you can see your way to joining us in this move.

www.anglingtrust.net

Click to expand...

I think we...the paying members should know what the expenditure based on extremely optimistic membership went on.....if its cars and the like then drop kick the culprits straight out and start again!!

We badly need this, what we don't need are suits with meal tickets...........

if anyone in this country knows how anglers are thinking up to the minute, then mr wilson should look no further than our own dear old granville marsdin and get him on his advisory board forthwith.