Fishing MPs

[no-one in particular]

Perhaps the "To comment on this article, go to..." should be changed to, "To give a glowing comment on this article, go to..."

The point is the article is highly political mentioning Corbyites, troskites etc. If Martin does not want to respond then he shouldn't let these articles appear. I am sure he carries a portable device to answer his emails every morning and he could log in to FM as well to answer questions the same as I do and many others.. He once told me as an ex MP bricks and brats were water off his back. If that's not the case then again he should stay away from a discussion forum for that's what it is as far as know.

Personally I don't like the personal attacks but he is the only person I know who is at the heart of the trust here so he is the only person who could make clear some views of the trust and expound a bit more on his articles. I wanted a discussion on marine conservation from him a while back, I got a one line answer, I am not interested in his ex MP status or his personality but his views on important issues re his trust status would be appreciated. I am sure that's the case for most of us and someone should be doing this..

 

[Cliff Hatton]

I shall be bringing the foregoing comments to Mr Salter's attention.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Peter.

Constructive criticism. Not a dislike of the AT.

Nothing I would like more than an effective representation for Anglers.

There are a number of conflicts that exist. Such as the tie in with Thames water, a major polluter, and AT members paid consultancy work for them that simply cannot be brushed aside so transparency is required.

Graham.

 

[thecrow]

Nothing I would like more than an effective representation for Anglers.

Believe it or not nor would I.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Peter.

Constructive criticism. Not a dislike of the AT.

Nothing I would like more than an effective representation for Anglers.

There are a number of conflicts that exist. Such as the tie in with Thames water, a major polluter, and AT members paid consultancy work for them that simply cannot be brushed aside so transparency is required.

Graham.

Unfortunately, there is a fine line that once crossed displays an inherent dislike of the Angling Trust from some contributors on here. You only have to do a simple search, over a period of time, to prove that my comment is wholly correct.

Please feel free to undertake another search, based on my comments both for and against the Angling Trust . .. . I hope that you will find my constructive criticisms particularly regarding Thames Water and their sponsorship of Angling Trust events.

That said, and noting that MS is on vacation is seems rather caddish to continue to complain that he is not responding to (very important) questions.

In keeping with every other company or organisation here in the UK their annual accounts have to be published annually so we can all see who gets paid and what . . . .

 

[thecrow]

Unfortunately, there is a fine line that once crossed displays an inherent dislike of the Angling Trust from some contributors on here. You only have to do a simple search, over a period of time, to prove that my comment is wholly correct.

I am one that has shown a dislike for the Angling Trust on here, there are a few reasons why I have shown dislike for them in the past.

1) Their continued use of a massive polluter as a sponsor for their riverfest matches.

2) their refusal to answer any questions on here re the sponsors while at the same time using FM to publicise the matches.

3) The secret membership deals done with lapsed members paying less to rejoin than new members joining.

4) their refusal to answer questions on the secret deals on here while using FM as a vehicle to try to get anglers to join.

5) Being involved in "the next big thing" as they see it and publicising whatever it is only to allow it to fall by the wayside when it suits them.

6) their refusal to answer questions on here once the questions become awkward but are perfectly happy to use FM to blow their own trumpet with articles submitted to FM

Need i continue?

The consistent thing in the above is the Trusts refusal to engage with anglers members or not, i am a lapsed member and that will continue until there are big changes within the Trust, i will continue to criticise the Trust if i see the need because if nobody does the trust will never change although i believe they are so comfortable with the status quo that nothing will make them change.

 

[robertroach]

That's why they don't spend their time on forums like this. There are some on here who would never stop their interminable whinging and the arguments would never come to an end. I would much prefer M.S. and other AT staff to be doing other things rather than trying to defend themselves on here and on other social media.

 

[thecrow]

In keeping with every other company or organisation here in the UK their annual accounts have to be published annually so we can all see who gets paid and what

Could you point me to where that can be found please?

---------- Post added at 09:01 ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 ----------

That's why they don't spend their time on forums like this. There are some on here who would never stop their interminable whinging and the arguments would never come to an end. I would much prefer M.S. and other AT staff to be doing other things rather than trying to defend themselves on here and on other social media.

I presume you are a member Robert? if you are that was your choice to join, others that are not have exercised the same right not to join and it is the vast majority of anglers that have chosen not to join.

To call those that choose not to join whingers and moaners does the trust no favours at all it will however harden the views of others who just might believe that all members of the trust are the same.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Could you point me to where that can be found please? ---------- Post added at 09:01 ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 ----------

Simply go to the Companies House site and search for Angling trust.

You will find their last final accounts there for the year ending 2015, together withal the relevant notes.

 

[thecrow]

Simply go to the Companies House site and search for Angling trust.

You will find their last final accounts there for the year ending 2015, together withal the relevant notes.

Thank you for that.

 

[Cliff Hatton]

I have asked Martin Salter - through the AT Head Office - to address the points made here.

 

[thecrow]

I have asked Martin Salter - through the AT Head Office - to address the points made here.

Thank you much appreciated.

 

[martinsalter]

Hi Guys
Happy to engage with this issue. We've been doing a fair bit on the 'militant paddler' canoe issue but Mark Lloyd is leading on this one and he's on hols this week. I'll get him to come back to you when he returns and in the meantime I'll try and dig out some useful info for you from our website.
Cheers
Martin

 

[martinsalter]

Here you go guys. As you can see we got stuck into a messy legal challenge on behalf of anglers. I know it went to some form of arbitration involving Sport England but this is not one of mine at the moment so I'm afraid can't be more helpful. Hopefully Mark can update you further when he's back

Anglers launch legal challenge against canoeists
https://insideangle.anglingtrust.net/2013/12/02/canoe-trespass-must-be-tackled/
Canoe campaigner's access case sinks - The Angling Trust
Cheers
Martin

 

[binka]

Here you go guys. As you can see we got stuck into a messy legal challenge on behalf of anglers. I know it went to some form of arbitration involving Sport England but this is not one of mine at the moment so I'm afraid can't be more helpful. Hopefully Mark can update you further when he's back

Anglers launch legal challenge against canoeists
https://insideangle.anglingtrust.net/2013/12/02/canoe-trespass-must-be-tackled/
Canoe campaigner's access case sinks - The Angling Trust
Cheers
Martin

Many thanks Martin.

But...

Your first link is from an article dated 2014.

Your second link appears not to be dated but includes an image from the first link, again dated 2014 and I suspect which was included for self merit (Angling Trust) in relation to the latter paragraphs.

The third link refers to Andy Biddulph and again I can't see a date but, being familiar with the case, I would think that it was circa the same time as the first two around 2014.

So what progress has been made in the last two years?

Absolutely none as far as I can see!

Paying anglers are still fighting a ground war against militant and ignorant individuals whilst their so called representetive body appears to be patting themselves on the back whilst mamsy pamsying around, quoting ineffective sound bites, from two years ago?

I really hope that Mark has something better than this to offer...

 

[thecrow]

Many thanks Martin.

But...

Your first link is from an article dated 2014.

Your second link appears not to be dated but includes an image from the first link, again dated 2014 and I suspect which was included for self merit (Angling Trust) in relation to the latter paragraphs.

The third link refers to Andy Biddulph and again I can't see a date but, being familiar with the case, I would think that it was circa the same time as the first two around 2014.

So what progress has been made in the last two years?

Absolutely none as far as I can see!

Paying anglers are still fighting a ground war against militant and ignorant individuals whilst their so called representetive body appears to be patting themselves on the back whilst mamsy pamsying around, quoting ineffective sound bites, from two years ago?

I really hope that Mark has something better than this to offer...

This echo's my own thoughts when I looked at the links last night, its nothing more than deflection tactics but this isn't going to go away and the longer it goes on the more damage will be done to the already poor reputation of the Trust.

I doubt very much that anything of note from recent times will be communicated to anglers, if there was anything why hasn't it been publicised?

You can fool some of the people some ..............................................

---------- Post added at 07:33 ---------- Previous post was at 07:31 ----------

I know it went to some form of arbitration

How can the law have gone to arbitration? the law is the law and it hasn't as far as I know changed.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

I along with others await the response.

 

[martinsalter]

Like I said I've not been dealing with this issue myself for the last two years but I know our legal action resulted in both ourselves and the BCU being asked to engage in some kind of arbitration process but I don't know where it got to. More to follow for those patient enough to wait in the meantime feel free to crack on with the slurs and conspiracy theories as I'd be worried if some of you didn't !

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Slurs?
Like the one aimed at Jeremy Corbyn?

Pot kettle black I'm afraid.

 

[thecrow]

Hi Guys
Happy to engage with this issue. We've been doing a fair bit on the 'militant paddler' canoe issue but Mark Lloyd is leading on this one and he's on hols this week. I'll get him to come back to you when he returns and in the meantime I'll try and dig out some useful info for you from our website.
Cheers
Martin

Anglers are still waiting for answers and it wont go away.

---------- Post added at 19:29 ---------- Previous post was at 19:25 ----------

Like I said I've not been dealing with this issue myself for the last two years but I know our legal action resulted in both ourselves and the BCU being asked to engage in some kind of arbitration process but I don't know where it got to. More to follow for those patient enough to wait in the meantime feel free to crack on with the slurs and conspiracy theories as I'd be worried if some of you didn't !

I hadn't read this post until today, how much patience is needed while pertinent points are called "slurs and conspiracy theories" by a representative of the trust. When divertionary tactics don't work revert to type.