Tweet
A few postee’s have voiced concerns with regard to the more favourable reaction anglers in the south received from the NFSA, comments indicated that until the powers that be showed anglers in the north that they were prepared to look at issues specifically affecting anglers in the north then the take up of membership would continue to be low.
I have tried to respond as honestly as I can, and again putting my head on the block, and not being very PC I left my own feelings to the end. Please don\'t take offence as they are not meant to offend anyone, and any comments back will be readily responded to.
With regard to the point about the ‘north and south divide’, what help do southern anglers get that isn’t available to anglers in the north? I’m not aware of any special fund or group that the NFSA has that deals solely with issues specific to the south coast. It is possible, and more likely probable given some of the comments at the meeting and based on my own experience in and around my own patch that the greater part of the current NFSA’s membership is south coast based. When you consider that the current membership probably relates to less than 1% of all anglers in England and Wales, this actually relates ‘possibly’ to less than 0.1% in the north of the country. Given such a low membership base in the north it is highly probable that the NFSA just doesn’t get to hear about the issues, not to the extent that the members on the south coast relate to head office.
I guess the real problem could be that anglers in the north more often than not, look at the NFSA and say there’s our representative body and they are not doing anything for us. The problem is that the vast majority won’t join the NFSA, they want the representation, but won’t provide the support to enable the NFSA to represent them adequately. Unfortunately, this undermines the work that the NFSA try to do on behalf of all anglers, this is especially the case when you consider the lobbying funds the commercial representative bodies have available. We are at an extremely important point in our consultation with government, and to put it bluntly, we have the financial backing of Blyth Spartans and have just drawn Chelsea in the second round of the cup!!!!!!!! (apologies to any Blyth fans out there).
The problem at the present moment is that the NFSA has funding from its membership, which as stated previously is low and not sufficient to support the work of the NFSA’s conservation group, the group has the responsibility of representing the interests of E&W anglers. It is the CG that provides information to government consultation, and proposes ‘what the future holds for RSA’.
For example;
Golden Mile of No Gill netting
Golden Mile of No Trawling
Increased representation on management bodies
Species reserved for recreational use only (Tope)
Inclusion of Minimum Landing Sizes (MLS) for species previously not included in fisheries management (Rays)
Increased minimum landing sizes to enable fish to spawn at least once (bass)
Prohibition on the use of flounder as pot bait
Right to Fish, open access for all
The conservation group is comprised predominantly of 7 anglers, 4 from the south coast, one from the south east, one from the east coast and me from Yorkshire. We have at least four meetings per year, meeting at Stanstead Airport, Newbury and Buckfastleigh (Devon), we pay our own travel, accommodation and even pay for the meeting rooms. We regularly attend meetings with DEFRA in London, and pay for our own train fares, sometimes the meeting or workshops may last a couple of days, again more accommodation required. Not only that, but in order to attend these meetings time off work has to be taken, so holidays are used up representing anglers.
Now here’s the thing, I don’t go to these meetings thinking how can I make sure southern anglers or northern anglers will get more out of this, the reason I do it is to improve RSA in the UK and to try and bring it back to some resemblance of what it used to be. There is no southern bias, every one of these proposals is as beneficial to northern anglers as it is to those on the south coast.
And this is where I vent my spleen (personal comments), for anglers in the north, or the south to say that the NFSA has to prove to me they are worth supporting, before I’ll consider supporting them, makes me wonder why I bother.
Why do I spend ££££££££££££££££££££££K each year taking time off work to attend meetings at Newbury services or Stanstead Airport, or getting on a train at 06:00am to go to London for a meeting with some civil servant who hasn’t got a clue about sea angling. The simple answer is that nobody else does it, apart from a small dedicated group of anglers who all want to see recreational sea angling in England and Wales heading back to how it used to be. We want to see youngsters coming into the sport and enjoying it, we want to see adults having the same level of sport that more forward thinking nations around the world currently have (E.g. USA, Australia & New Zealand).
In the end its very simple, if you decide that the NFSA is not representative of your needs then look at the alternatives available; these are:
• Bass (Bass Anglers Sportsfishing Society)
• SACN (Sea Anglers Conservation Network)
• DAN (Do Absolutely Nothing)
I stated in an earlier post that you ‘get the level of representation you are prepared to pay for’ this is still true. However, a few NESA members have indicated that they are going to join the NFSA to support the work currently being carried out to improve the angling experience of all anglers, this is welcome news, thanks very much lads.
I wonder if we took a straw vote, would my figure of 0.1% be far out, probably, given that there is a greater chance of you being a member if you use the internet (more environmentally aware apparently). Still I can assure those of you who are still not convinced that the NFSA does not stand for the National Federation of Southern Anglers, it stands for equal representation, access and bigger and better fish for ALL.
Cheers
Doc
[Edited on 9/11/2005 by Doc]
I have tried to respond as honestly as I can, and again putting my head on the block, and not being very PC I left my own feelings to the end. Please don\'t take offence as they are not meant to offend anyone, and any comments back will be readily responded to.
With regard to the point about the ‘north and south divide’, what help do southern anglers get that isn’t available to anglers in the north? I’m not aware of any special fund or group that the NFSA has that deals solely with issues specific to the south coast. It is possible, and more likely probable given some of the comments at the meeting and based on my own experience in and around my own patch that the greater part of the current NFSA’s membership is south coast based. When you consider that the current membership probably relates to less than 1% of all anglers in England and Wales, this actually relates ‘possibly’ to less than 0.1% in the north of the country. Given such a low membership base in the north it is highly probable that the NFSA just doesn’t get to hear about the issues, not to the extent that the members on the south coast relate to head office.
I guess the real problem could be that anglers in the north more often than not, look at the NFSA and say there’s our representative body and they are not doing anything for us. The problem is that the vast majority won’t join the NFSA, they want the representation, but won’t provide the support to enable the NFSA to represent them adequately. Unfortunately, this undermines the work that the NFSA try to do on behalf of all anglers, this is especially the case when you consider the lobbying funds the commercial representative bodies have available. We are at an extremely important point in our consultation with government, and to put it bluntly, we have the financial backing of Blyth Spartans and have just drawn Chelsea in the second round of the cup!!!!!!!! (apologies to any Blyth fans out there).
The problem at the present moment is that the NFSA has funding from its membership, which as stated previously is low and not sufficient to support the work of the NFSA’s conservation group, the group has the responsibility of representing the interests of E&W anglers. It is the CG that provides information to government consultation, and proposes ‘what the future holds for RSA’.
For example;
Golden Mile of No Gill netting Golden Mile of No Trawling Increased representation on management bodies Species reserved for recreational use only (Tope) Inclusion of Minimum Landing Sizes (MLS) for species previously not included in fisheries management (Rays) Increased minimum landing sizes to enable fish to spawn at least once (bass) Prohibition on the use of flounder as pot bait Right to Fish, open access for allThe conservation group is comprised predominantly of 7 anglers, 4 from the south coast, one from the south east, one from the east coast and me from Yorkshire. We have at least four meetings per year, meeting at Stanstead Airport, Newbury and Buckfastleigh (Devon), we pay our own travel, accommodation and even pay for the meeting rooms. We regularly attend meetings with DEFRA in London, and pay for our own train fares, sometimes the meeting or workshops may last a couple of days, again more accommodation required. Not only that, but in order to attend these meetings time off work has to be taken, so holidays are used up representing anglers.
Now here’s the thing, I don’t go to these meetings thinking how can I make sure southern anglers or northern anglers will get more out of this, the reason I do it is to improve RSA in the UK and to try and bring it back to some resemblance of what it used to be. There is no southern bias, every one of these proposals is as beneficial to northern anglers as it is to those on the south coast.
And this is where I vent my spleen (personal comments), for anglers in the north, or the south to say that the NFSA has to prove to me they are worth supporting, before I’ll consider supporting them, makes me wonder why I bother.
Why do I spend ££££££££££££££££££££££K each year taking time off work to attend meetings at Newbury services or Stanstead Airport, or getting on a train at 06:00am to go to London for a meeting with some civil servant who hasn’t got a clue about sea angling. The simple answer is that nobody else does it, apart from a small dedicated group of anglers who all want to see recreational sea angling in England and Wales heading back to how it used to be. We want to see youngsters coming into the sport and enjoying it, we want to see adults having the same level of sport that more forward thinking nations around the world currently have (E.g. USA, Australia & New Zealand).
In the end its very simple, if you decide that the NFSA is not representative of your needs then look at the alternatives available; these are:
• Bass (Bass Anglers Sportsfishing Society)
• SACN (Sea Anglers Conservation Network)
• DAN (Do Absolutely Nothing)
I stated in an earlier post that you ‘get the level of representation you are prepared to pay for’ this is still true. However, a few NESA members have indicated that they are going to join the NFSA to support the work currently being carried out to improve the angling experience of all anglers, this is welcome news, thanks very much lads.
I wonder if we took a straw vote, would my figure of 0.1% be far out, probably, given that there is a greater chance of you being a member if you use the internet (more environmentally aware apparently). Still I can assure those of you who are still not convinced that the NFSA does not stand for the National Federation of Southern Anglers, it stands for equal representation, access and bigger and better fish for ALL.
Cheers
Doc
[Edited on 9/11/2005 by Doc]
Comment