Nfsa

[Maverick Martin]

As affiliated members of the NFSA we have a say in the direction our governing body take.

 

Their position is dire and needs urgent action NOW! If we feel we are to have a body like the NFSA represent us at all levels we need to help them now.

 

Please read the attached and give your comments here so we can respond as a club by the deadline

 

Martin

 

BTW some may have trouble opening this file, if so save to your computer then open from there

[Paul J]

I think we definitely need a national organization just a more effective one.

I go for option three although this will most likely mean a rise in subs next year

 

PJl

Edited August 19, 2007 by Paul J

[alun j.]

Sorry, but all I got was a blank screen!

 

Alun.

[charlieannear]

I'm not currently an individual member of the NFSA.

However, I've read the document and Option 3 makes the most sense to me as a prospective member.

Now I'm conquering the seasickness and have a vague idea of what to do with the tackle I own, I'll send a cheque as soon as a decision is made- The loss of a body such as this would be a heavy blow indeed.

[alun j.]

Thanks Martin........that worked!

 

Members on the commitee will have a much better understanding of the work and value of the NFSA.

 

I am happy to take a lead from your considered thoughts!..........even though I, personally, am not aware of how NFSA has helped or improved my angling.

 

Alun.

[reb]

I would support option 3 with the hope that something can be done to make HMG realise that RSA is a vital part of the coastal economy

Cheers, Richard.

[gaffa]

This is yet another area that government intervention is ******up

 

Don't get me started!

 

I will be supporting option 3 and sending off my cheque .

 

This is just one of a number of different organisations that I am having to help privately fund due to Government mismanagement and interference or in the case of my stuffed up pension plan lack of management.

 

As I said don't get me started!

 

ooops too late I feel the blood pressure rising

 

The additional contribution to the NFSA is still good value for the insurance alone,

However it would please me a bit more if they could show some teeth now and again.

 

Cos next on the agenda is going to be sea fishing licences and registration and policing administration but no money left to improve the fishing.

 

Enough for now OR I'll rant for Europe!!!

 

PeteG

[Maverick Martin]

Enough for now OR I'll rant for Europe!!!    

 

PeteG

NO don't rant for them they are worse than our shower of no hopers

 

Martin

 

ooops sorry of topic back to the question please

[TomBettle]

I had received my letter a short while ago and straight away replied with a big tick against option 3.

 

As a club member, option 3 too please.

 

The NFSA do fight our corner and represent us nationally. We can't afford to lose the support they provide all RSA's.

 

Tom

[Maverick Martin]

Any more views please asap so we can make a decision with your views in mind

 

Martin

[Adam F]

Hmmmm....

 

Option 3 for me, BUT..

 

Option 2 says that this will stabalise them, and replace 1/3rd of the lost income - so how does a

[hotshot]

Hmmm....

 

I'm not quite convinced it's good value for money, but as there appears to be no other viable national representation, I'll give the benefit of the doubt and support option 3 (which, if I understand it correctly would result in a

Edited August 22, 2007 by hotshot

[Swainiac]

option 3 here too, Martin.

 

Rich

[Maverick Martin]

which, if I understand it correctly would result in a

[Bob F]

Option 3.

 

BF

[Mike Fox]

I also believe Option 3 is the best of the limited options available, and reluctantly agree to it.

 

I am frustrated by the NFSA's inability to make effective achievements in the matters of fisheries policy, and feel that we may well be supporting a "toothless tiger".

 

I would want them to make firm commitments to take strong actions in matters of huge importance to all sea anglers, including but not limited to :

 

- minimum bass size increases

- stronger limitations on pair trawling for bass

- introduction of wide exclusion zones for all commercial fishing

- legal prevention of dumping of by-catch and over-quota catches

- significantly reduced catch limits for foodchain species such as sandeels

- limiting the impact of foreign fishing vessels in British waters

- pushing back firmly on the introduction of sea fishing licenses

 

I wonder if the new body might have more effect here?

 

Anything else we really believe they should be doing on OUR behalf? If we don't tell them in conjunction with our response, our private concerns might not be escalated.

 

Mike

[Neal]

I have been a personal member for a number of years - this I consider to be my "licence to fish" especially as it covers third party insurance liability.

 

Perhaps they (NFSA) should change their marketing in such a way that this membership becomes the official licence to fish and ensures that everyone has adequate insurance, each and evey time they go out.

 

I personally would be rather annoyed to have to pay NFSA membership, club membership and a government licence as well - I know which one would be dropped instantly.

 

I have already responded to their letter - Option 3 being the better of a limited number of options. But I have suggested that the club contribution be raised to

[conger king]

have read all this as a

member of the nfsa and will support option 3 26.00 pounds is not a lot too help support them i have won 3 awards from them and a lot of my freinds have too it is a very good system that works

[Rob]

Option 3 for me as there isn't an option 4!!!

 

Mike F - well said.

 

Rob

[great white]

Hi

 

I suppose that option 3 is the only way to try and get the funds that the NFSA need

 

I have no idea haw many affiliated Members or full Members they have, but will the funds raised by option three raise twice as much as they lost from the government?

 

I realise that many will know that I am not the NFSA's biggest fan, because I find it hard to recollect what they have managed to achieve recently

 

Perhaps someone from the NFSA board could expand on their comment about "recent considerable improvements"

 

I hope that if we support option 3 the NFSA can grow some teeth and work with the new Angling Developement Board on the very important issues that are needed to maintain our british fish stocks and gain recognition for the value of our recreational angling to the economy

 

Charlie

[Swainiac]

Many wise words here......Martin, are we able to invite a fugure head from the NFSA along to a club meeting, to give some sort of presentation to an affiliate??? Then, we may actually get an understanding of wehat actually goes on in the higher echelons. I grinned slightly when I read mike fox's Toothless Tigers remark...which was my thinking exactly. Unfortunately, we are going along these lines in all walks of life, with comunity support officers, more special constabluary etc etc...no one to actually do the job in question.

 

My thoughts are, that if an invite was extended, it would be swerved to send a minion, so exact views and standings are not extended to our membership.

 

Rich

[Ferret]

hi martin,

option 3 i think gets my vote

bill smith (ferret)

[Coddy]

Agreed option 3 for me as well

 

Have already sent my own vote in some time ago.

 

Coddy

[cullodon]

option 3 for me

if its weaned off government support it might develope proper teeth

 

[Leicester Fisheagle]

Option 3 seems to be the only viable one.