Most importantly, the main thrust of the organisation's work is stronger than ever before in our 60 year history: last year we settled a record 34 claims against polluters and others who damaged our members' fishing. We secured over £200,000 in damages for those members and gave a bloody nose to 34 companies and individuals who had thoughtlessly caused the death of fish and other wildlife in our rivers, lakes and canals. We also negotiated a £500,000, 5 year funding package for the restoration of the River Wandle with Thames Water after they accidentally polluted the river with bleach.
In spite of all this success, the ACA's Committee and I remain disappointed, if not frustrated, that we can't do more. Less than 1% of the UK's individual anglers support our work and all too often we find that clubs and river owners affected by pollution are not members of the ACA. We are then very limited in what we can do for them because we can only act for our members.
The reasons for being a member of the ACA seem all too clear to me - but yet there are also genuine reasons why individuals, clubs and owners have chosen not to be members. Clubs have limited funds and need to spend them wisely. If they buy NAFAC membership they will benefit from its third party liability insurance scheme. If they want to fish in national coarse fishing competitions, they must join the NFA. They might want to support campaigns about issues specific to salmonids and want to support the S&TA. Equally, individuals face a bewildering choice of organisations to support. Each, as the ACA does, pleads with them on the basis that the subscription will cost about the same as a day's fishing or a pint of maggots a month; but if an angler were to support several national representative bodies, he would be paying the same as he would for a new rod each year.
In the past there has been, at best, a failure to co-operate and, at worst, outright competition between the many organisations claiming to represent anglers. This has left government, the tackle trade and the Environment Agency confused as to which organisation they should deal with. It has led to organisations which are too small to carry out their work to a satisfactory standard and unable to secure national publicity for their successes.
The ACA has therefore been working with all the other national bodies over the past year to explore how we might work more closely together to achieve angling unity: the creation of a single organisation which clubs, owners and individuals can join to support work on many different fronts with the aim of protecting angling and the environment on which it depends. We have made very significant progress towards what was previously seen to be an impossible dream. For the latest news on unification, please click HERE.
The committee and I have not taken the decision to proceed with these discussions lightly, given the ACA's unique 60 years of history and our current success and growth. We have, however, always considered our options by asking the question: "what would be in the best interests of anglers and angling?" The answer to me is now clear: the creation of a single, professional, high profile, efficient organisation representing anyone who fishes with a rod and line. We will be seeking the support of you, our members for a detailed proposal at our AGM in June.
In the meantime, please continue to support our valuable work, which will continue to develop and expand within the new organisation.
Dr Stephen Marsh-Smith
ACA Chairman
March 2008 |
