[Doc]

Jim, we are on the same wave length I assure you.

The NE branch of the NFSA may well have their own ideas, as they are entitled to do so, however, the dialogue that the government has over such issues is with the NFSA head office, primarily through the Conservation group. We have a clear view on this particular issue, that is, that until such time that the fishing experience improves significantly, we cannot endorse a sea angling rod licence (as per my response). That is not to say we would not even discuss the issue, but there is a big difference between discussing it and giving the green light. The NFSA has to be responsive to its members and to the angling public as a whole, if the masses agree to the licence then so be it, if not then we\'ll fight that corner as well.

However, the NE division of the NFSA cannot make unilateral decisions and should not be dealing direct with the Government wrt a sea angling rod licence (which I know they are not).

Sea angling is no longer just the past time of the working class, as a consequence we have the full range of society represented within our sport, as a result you will always get diverse opinion, and there will be those who favour a licence NOW, and those who would wish to wait and see the benefits before they subscribe, there also those who will never subscribe, no matter what, or how ever much our sport improves. These are the problems the NFSA as our national body face, you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can\'t.............

One of the problems is, and it is extremely likely that a member or a couple of members of the NE division may have said that they would be willing to pay a sea angling licence, this has been taken by others as representative of the Divisions stance. I could name a host of top anglers (well known at least) who are willing to pay for a rod licence, equally I know a number who won\'t just yet. I regularly hear anglers saying they will leave the sport and take up freshwater fishing, which is a bit strange, as they will still have to pay a rod licence, however, a commonly used phrase is \"what about the Magna Carta\"? Well if I remember right, over the last 7 or 8 years this one has been done to death on NESA, and I\'m not about to bring it up again, however.......

The Magna Carta (in my own opinion) is out of date, obsolete and no longer representative of the modern day society, we are no longer hunter gatherers, although looking at some you wouldn\'t think so.

As a response to both yours and Paul’s points, The only people who could implement the sea angling rod licence would be the government (through DEFRA I would assume). I’m certain it would go out to consultation, in which case every man, cat and dog would have an opportunity to make his and her views clear, be they for or against. If you are totally against the rod licence, then I would be very keen to listen to the argument, purely and simply because its an argument that will have to be aired at some time, why not discuss it now.

On a final note, I did have an opportunity to speak to Terry on the night, although for not as long as I would have liked. However and I’m surmising here, the possible reason for the lack of correspondence or feedback may be due to the way that the affiliated club membership worked. For example, a club may have been affiliated to the NFSA costing just a few pounds (£10), this covered the three principal officers of the club and a single journal and or newsletter would have been sent each quarter. Under the old scheme the club paid a certain amount (£2.50) per club member and the secretary got one lot of information. However, if you can appreciate, the cost of sending out 4 glossy journals per year, letters, newsletters, all the postage and time to ensure that each and every club receives what it is due, add to that the cost of member insurance (up to £2m). The cost vastly outweighs what is being received, it does not make good economic sense to charge £10 lets say for membership and spend £25 sending out reams of information. Most other national representative bodies charge a hell of a lot more and then charge extra for subscription to journals etc.

I guess it boils down to the fact that you get the level of representation your willing to pay for.