Opinion Piece – Party Time at the Barbel Society

It’s true, we all have the chance to voice an opinion on the forum, but the forum is read by only a fraction of those members who read the editorial part of the site.

If you have an interesting opinion, and want it read by the maximum number of visitors to FishingMagic, then this is the place for it. The debate will still continue on the forum just the same, but it gets a hell of a bigger kickstart when it begins life on the front page.

If you have an interesting opinion about anything to do with fish or fishing then send it to me at graham@fishingmagic.com. Make it at least 500 words and a maximum of 1500.

Party Time at the Barbel Society – controversy over Paul Owen’s departure

In recent weeks I’ve been asked on numerous occasions why I’ve not got involved in the latest Barbel Society debacle. Truth is, I have friends in both camps, enemies, too, and frankly I’d sooner go fishing.

On that basis it cannot expect us then have no say in its affairs. Goose and gander spring to mind and as we’re approaching the festive season, join me at a very special Xmas party…

Another Fine Mess in Fancy Dress

Picture the scene, it’s the Barbel Society Xmas Fancy Dress Party, Steve Pope, dressed as the portly Oliver Hardy, turns to Neil Degg (Stan Laurel) and says accusingly, “That’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley!”

Well that’s the way it reads to me in the forum thread. Perhaps I’m completely wrong. Paul Owens really did want to resign. Neil Degg didn’t take advantage of a minor tantrum and twist it into a formally tendered resignation and perhaps Steve Pope will be stepping in to make an official statement to clear the air and steady the sinking ship at any moment.

Was that a pig that just flew by my window?

Look, let’s make something very clear. Despite what certain vocal factions might claim, I am a supporter of the Barbel Society. In principle I believe in what it stands for but I challenge its right to make sweeping statements based on bad science, that’s all.

I am no longer a member, having publicly resigned over the incident at the Sutton fishery when a small group of members acted disgracefully, not just outside of the remit of the ‘friendly’ Society but outside the law. Water manager Phil Betterley carried out what he claimed was a full and thorough enquiry and came to the conclusion that nothing happened. I said it then, I’ll say it now, the man is a disgrace and should resign his office.

Switching to the category of an ex-member doesn’t mean I am not entitled to voice opinions on the Society. It is, after all, a self-appointed national body representing a species I fish for, they advertise their meetings openly and invite along anyone who wishes to attend and that gives me every right to comment. Indeed I attended such a meeting just two weeks ago.

I am not a member of any political party nor do I live in London, but that doesn’t preclude me from voicing opinions about congestion charging or the Fox Hunting Bill. It’s called freedom of speech.

A year ago you might have got better odds on Chelsea being relegated than on Paul Owens being kicked out of the Barbel Society. Paul was a shining light, rapidly rising through the ranks to Secretary after taking over the Yorkshire Region when it was struggling. I attended what was possibly the final meeting in a tiny room above the Dog and Partridge in Attercliffe before Paul took over and relocated the meeting to Wetherby. Mick Dinnighan delivered a fine talk to an audience of a good twenty-odd.

Sometime later I gave a talk at the Wetherby meeting in front of a hundred and twenty-odd. Paul certainly knew how to pull a crowd.

In next to no time Paul was getting noticed but success has its detractors. Paul’s ambition combined with the fact that he isn’t a great politician was his Achilles heel. Some folk don’t want change. He made a big mistake by rocking the status quo.

Paul was keen to see change – elections for Christ’s sake – that would mean poorly performing officers stepping down! Oh my, we’re not having that, dear boy. That’s far too democratic.

Three weeks ago, I was driving through the Black Mountains in pitch darkness on my way to spend a weekend with the new Minister of Lampeter having crossed the Pennines and skirted Manchester in the usual Friday night madness. Why they call it a RUSH hour bemuses me. And since when did an ‘hour’ last from three in the afternoon till eight at night? It didn’t help that the ‘Tom Tom’ insisted I’d still another three hours driving ahead of me when the mobile rang. It was Steve Pope. “Bob, tell me you’re not this bl**dy Trentrotter guy who’s posting on BFW – I’m going to fire him a right broadside!”

Well, at least I had a pretty solid alibi and my accuser went away satisfied. Aliases on the Internet forums are all fine and dandy when the prats are behaving but as soon as they start spouting malice someone else gets the blame. I cop that blame on a regular basis but rest assured if I have something to say it is always in my own name and if I didn’t have the guts to say it to someone’s face I wouldn’t say it. Surely you know that by now?

Clearly when Steve rang he was actively defending Paul and I feel that deserves to go on record here.

Two weeks later it’s all change and not only is Paul out of his job the committee is against him. He had to go. Meantime one or two rather vociferous supporters are claiming to have returned their memberships in protest.

Meanwhile, a number of former members not known for reticence are jumping in and questioning the Society leadership. There are claims of downwardly spiralling membership numbers and the possibility that waters will be lost. There’s even talk of an alternative Barbel Society. All in all, a doomsday scenario.

It’s not actually as bad as that, yet, but whilst ever the leadership fails to act positively the knives get sharper and clouds gather, getting blacker all the time.

These are the sort of questions that won’t go away:

• Has Paul Owens been good or bad for the Society?
• Did he actually want to resign his positions within the Society?
• Did he actually tender his resignation for all his roles?
• Did he phone the Chairman and state clearly that he did not wish to resign?
• Why did various members of the committee contact Paul and offer their support and state categorically that they did not wish him to leave and then oust him?

And you could add:

• Is there a clique within the committee who saw him as a threat to their comfy little club, decide to oust him and do so without fully consulting the rest of the committee?
• If so why haven’t the Owens supporters resigned?
• If they did change their minds and switch camps, how did that come about?
• Is the Society weaker or stronger now that Owens is no longer part of proceedings?
• Is the way the debacle is being handled in the best interests of the Society?
• Do you trust this committee?
• What are the long term implications?
• So what’s to be done?

Well, the Society can stick its head in the sand and hope everything blows over. Folk will quickly forget, won’t they…?

Actually, they might not this time.

The longer the deafening silence from the centre goes on the more things fester and the less likelihood there is of an amicable solution.

One thing is abundantly clear. The Society desperately needs a spokesperson. Someone with the bottle and the decency to speak on its behalf when these disputes arise. Someone prepared to lay out the facts and not wait until they can see which way the wind is blowing.

Steve Pope either cannot or will not do the decent thing but whether he likes it or not, his own constitution covers communication. All this rubbish about advising its own members first is a smokescreen.

If Steve or his appointed representative was to lay the facts in front of the angling world in a precise, concise manner, avoiding speculation and insinuation, just stating what the situation is and why, he wouldn’t have to become embroiled in a debate. A good statement is just that – a statement.

As it is I would suggest the other committee members are reluctant to speak on the basis they might just end up following the former secretary down the road.

Meanwhile, Paul Owens is hung out to dry and the stain of suspicion left to hang over him. Why on earth would any Society eject a fine, upstanding, diligent, enthusiastic, hard working supporter? Did he have his fingers in the till?

Of course not.

Did he get up to no good with the juniors?

Equally ridiculous.

But surely there must have been something, mustn’t there? Otherwise his removal from office makes no sense whatsoever.

Apart from a storm in a teacup over the way local finances are managed there is no apparent reason why Paul has been ousted beyond spite or a clash of personalities and surely that’s not enough to sack the Secretary or cause factions within the Committee to switch loyalties.

Paul could have fuelled an inferno on the Internet had he wished to and seriously damaged the Society. That he kept his tinder dry is of great credit to him and some relief to the Society.

The thing is he has been accused of nothing. He has nothing to defend other than an accusation that he resigned.

Let’s consider that. Neil Degg says Paul resigned. Paul says he didn’t. Steve Richardson comes out, backs Degg and suggests Paul take advice on the exact meaning of a word he has used. Not only is that pedantic to the extreme but completely ignores Paul’s sentiment.

Paul has said quite openly, “I did not resign.” How many ways can you interpret that? He has told Steve Pope he did not wish to resign. Remember, Steve Pope phoned me because he wished to support, nay, defend Paul.

So what happened? What changed the Barbel Society stance?

Who stabbed Paul in the back?

And how did they sway the committee?

It’s a Machiavellian mystery.

Take some advice guys. Sit down and have a rethink before it’s too late. Do you want the Society to move forward, to grow and be treated with respect?

Get round the table with Paul and either accept your mistakes, welcome him back into the fold or agree a dignified exit strategy. He probably won’t want to come back now. If so you’ve lost a vibrant talisman and for that, those responsible within your ranks should be held accountable.

If it’s a mutual decision that Paul should now leave then find a way to part on good terms in a manner that maintains the respect of both sides.

And then make a joint public announcement.

At the very least I thought we might be hearing the words, “On behalf of the Society I would like to thank Paul for all the hard work and effort… and we wish him well in whatever direction he takes… etc…”

But no, we get utter silence from the Chairman.

Is this is the same passionate Chairman who just three weeks earlier was prepared to confront me for allegedly having a go at his friend Paul on BFW under a pseudonym? What on earth can have caused him to turn his back on that friend?

So, let’s return to the Society Xmas Fancy Dress Party. Paul Owens has gate crashed wearing a toga, a rubber knife protruding from between his shoulder blades…

“Et tu, Brutus?”