|
Knotty
Dec 27, 2014 16:38:43 GMT
via mobile
jb likes this
Post by northface on Dec 27, 2014 16:38:43 GMT
I don't understand why the delegates have turned down Graham's fencing plans......stinks of backhanders to me! The solution should be simple. Throw the horses off and change the locks! Thirty odd grand on a fence and we can't even use it properly. Sounds like Leeds should sell it like they did Catterick cos it's obvious know one, bar Graham, gives a rats ass! I'd like to to see a legal document of these so called grazing rights printed on here cos I bet a million bucks there isn't one!
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 27, 2014 17:13:39 GMT
Post by jgpark on Dec 27, 2014 17:13:39 GMT
Wasn't the delegates that opposed it, it was the finance committee which asked that it be tabled and that's how it will be minuted when it go's to the next delegates meeting at the end of January.
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 27, 2014 17:44:11 GMT
via mobile
Post by northface on Dec 27, 2014 17:44:11 GMT
Ok Graham, thanks for the update
|
|
|
Post by seabrook on Dec 28, 2014 7:35:14 GMT
I'm not one for continuous griping. I'll have my say and then vote with my feet. (Please don't suggest I get involved with AGMs etc - sounds like all the important matters e.g. Contracts with horse dealers seems to sidestep the democratic process and avoid any kind of transparency). I will however poise a question for you before I leave; what is Leeds offering for specimen carp anglers?
I know we are not everyone's kettle of fish, but on a whole we are not a bad lot. If you provide us with a good product, we are prepared to pay a premium for night licenses, keep your stock well fed and growing and provide a 24hr set of eyes and ears on your venues (dare I say it; doing a superior job to some of our more unwelcome "residents").
I initially joined Leeds to become a member to night fish polo pond. A nice intimate pond near to my home. Sadly it was not meant to be and the emphasis of polo was wrestled away from any kind of carp influence (despite the gleaming purpose built match venue next door). I was very disappointed to say the least.
The arguments regarding Knotford have been well hashed over on here (I will try to avoid going over old ground). We know the issues, yet despite the best efforts of some of the members on the ground (northface a clear example) the "good intentions" of the management seem to be doing the opposite; and are running this fantastic venue into the ground. What we needed were "good judgement" not "good intentions".
It looks like nothing is going to change anytime soon at Knotford and I am starting to question whether there is the will at the top to make it work as a venue. Yes we are eternally grateful for the otter fence; however whilst still keeping Knotford a saleable asset, it does not actually contribute anything to the angling experience.
Knotford is no longer a fishable option for me, so what is is left for me as a carp angler at Leeds? Graham I commend you for sticking your head above the parapet; whilst many of your counterparts dodge the flack. However I vehemently disagree with your stance on the horses at Knotford. As far as I can see you secured the harmful contract without securing any benefits for the venue itself. You are clearly disillusioned with the whole situation; well I think it's safe to say that disillusionment is shared by many of the membership.
I wish the club good luck, but I have to wonder whether a club that is so short sighted, it neglects the fastest growing branch of the sport actually deserves whatever comes it's way.
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 8:42:06 GMT
jb likes this
Post by winter55 on Dec 28, 2014 8:42:06 GMT
Well put but the committee have there heads up there arse as far as the horses at knote i think they are running in into the ground to justify selling it or the backhand gang are in operation
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 8:52:13 GMT
Post by winter55 on Dec 28, 2014 8:52:13 GMT
I don't understand why the delegates have turned down Graham's fencing plans......stinks of backhanders to me! The solution should be simple. Throw the horses off and change the locks! Thirty odd grand on a fence and we can't even use it properly. Sounds like Leeds should sell it like they did Catterick cos it's obvious know one, bar Graham, gives a rats ass! I'd like to to see a legal document of these so called grazing rights printed on here cos I bet a million bucks there isn't one! I asked about the (grazing rights)in the summer.the answer i got was it was a verbal contract between the gypsy and a committee man who is no longer on the committee
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 9:34:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by wrighty29 on Dec 28, 2014 9:34:04 GMT
The saga continues
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 12:03:54 GMT
Post by rushy on Dec 28, 2014 12:03:54 GMT
I'm not one for continuous griping. I'll have my say and then vote with my feet. (Please don't suggest I get involved with AGMs etc - sounds like all the important matters e.g. Contracts with horse dealers seems to sidestep the democratic process and avoid any kind of transparency). I will however poise a question for you before I leave; what is Leeds offering for specimen carp anglers? I know we are not everyone's kettle of fish, but on a whole we are not a bad lot. If you provide us with a good product, we are prepared to pay a premium for night licenses, keep your stock well fed and growing and provide a 24hr set of eyes and ears on your venues (dare I say it; doing a superior job to some of our more unwelcome "residents"). I initially joined Leeds to become a member to night fish polo pond. A nice intimate pond near to my home. Sadly it was not meant to be and the emphasis of polo was wrestled away from any kind of carp influence (despite the gleaming purpose built match venue next door). I was very disappointed to say the least. The arguments regarding Knotford have been well hashed over on here (I will try to avoid going over old ground). We know the issues, yet despite the best efforts of some of the members on the ground (northface a clear example) the "good intentions" of the management seem to be doing the opposite; and are running this fantastic venue into the ground. What we needed were "good judgement" not "good intentions". It looks like nothing is going to change anytime soon at Knotford and I am starting to question whether there is the will at the top to make it work as a venue. Yes we are eternally grateful for the otter fence; however whilst still keeping Knotford a saleable asset, it does not actually contribute anything to the angling experience. Knotford is no longer a fishable option for me, so what is is left for me as a carp angler at Leeds? Graham I commend you for sticking your head above the parapet; whilst many of your counterparts dodge the flack. However I vehemently disagree with your stance on the horses at Knotford. As far as I can see you secured the harmful contract without securing any benefits for the venue itself. You are clearly disillusioned with the whole situation; well I think it's safe to say that disillusionment is shared by many of the membership. I wish the club good luck, but I have to wonder whether a club that is so short sighted, it neglects the fastest growing branch of the sport actually deserves whatever comes it's way. Hi Seabrook. I think your sentiments are very much in line with most of the Forum users. Unfortunately as you say , it is a different kettle of fish when it comes to the majority of club officials and the Delegates, who at the end of the day theoretically represent the members. I personally think we should have a specimen water and Knotford is the obvious candidate - I know we also have Wintersett which I believe holds some big fish and then Polo which also holds some fish around the twenty mark . . Unfortunately we have problems there at the moment which are being addressed. So Leeds does offer something for the specimen angler. Unfortunately we have this problem with us which has been long discussed. I think it is fairly safe to say . . . The horses are staying. So for the sake of argument lets assume that is the case. If they are staying we need to get them under control which brings us to Grahams proposal to the FInance Committee. They have rejected the proposal but I believe I am correct in saying this now has to go to the Delegates for approval / rejection. As a supporter of the fence proposal I am quite happy to bring this up at the Delegates meeting if that is what the "Knotford" guys want. However, I don't want to bring it up and push it if folk are not going to be 100% happy with the outcome. ie. I think that we have to accept the horses are here to stay ! As regards Graham being the one responsible for selling the land to Andy , I feel it appropriate to say, Graham DID NOT make the decision. The proposal was put before the Delegates and it was voted on. It was the Delegates who approved the sale and as the Delegates represent the members then it is the members who have approved the sale ! I know you have said that you do not want to get involved with AGM's etc but if I would suggest you and a few of like minded Carp lads get together and form your own club ( as I've done with Forum AC) affiliated to Leeds. That way you will get your own Delegate who can attend the monthly meetings where the decisions are made and have your say. I'm sure the other Delegates would listen to your very convincing case as above and support you. It's amazing the difference makes when you are actually at the meeting expressing your opinions rather than here on the Forum ! All the best Rushy
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 13:30:09 GMT
via mobile
Post by wrighty29 on Dec 28, 2014 13:30:09 GMT
Andy was given a chance and niw his horses are back inside the otter fence. Why should we accept that horses are on our fishing lake. As for wintersett there maybe the odd big fish but waiting 3 years for a decent one is not everyones idea of fun. What guarantee do we have the horses will stay in the fence once erected. Surly we have rights as his horses are ruining the lake. This gypsy us nit even the one who originally put horses on
|
|
|
Post by seabrook on Dec 28, 2014 13:31:21 GMT
I made the decision to sell them the land, I also agreed the price, I am also dealing with the solicitors regarding the contract, I also mapped out the stockade for the horses so you would be able to fish safely, what more can I say, you try your best and fail to get the support so let's see who takes it on now. If it was a length of the R. Ouse it would have been sorted!!!!!
Regards Graham
Rushy - you state Graham had no part in the decision to sell. Yet Graham posted this earlier in the thread (he sounds pretty categorical)? I'm not trying to be argumentative,I'm just trying to understand whom is making decisions and for what reasons. The constant "it wasn't me's" and inferences of being let down by others are wearing a little thin and are starting to sound more like misdirection than genuine information. Knotford is the flagship specimen water. I've heard several different reasons (sounds familiar) as to why polo abandoned night fishing and not all are related to fish welfare. As for wintersett - I've more chance of hooking the Loch Ness monster than a carp on there. A neglected Knotford sends the wrong message to specimen anglers. There are plenty of other societies and day ticket waters in the area that will take our money and provide us with what we need rather than fobbing us off and telling us what we must accept. Leeds really seems to of lost sight of what it is here for.
|
|
|
Post by seabrook on Dec 28, 2014 13:56:53 GMT
Let's take all the arguments to their natural conclusion.
If the horses are here to stay; then it is because the club cannot say no to the money the sale will bring; hence patiently waiting on Andy to sell horses etc to raise the money, whereas most of us would tell him to sling his hook.
If the club is so desperate for the funds they are willing to drive off membership, then it's because they have a financial black hole to fill or know their is one on the horizon.
It's not beyond reason that Knotford will be sold in the near future for further funds and the society engaging in more lease projects. The sale of Knotford will be justified because there will only be a handful of people still fishing it.
Paranoid thinking? Or an accurate reasoning as to why an organisation would be so keen to seemingly shoot itself in the foot?
|
|
|
Post by Eddie on Dec 28, 2014 16:45:40 GMT
Let's take all the arguments to their natural conclusion. If the horses are here to stay; then it is because the club cannot say no to the money the sale will bring; hence patiently waiting on Andy to sell horses etc to raise the money, whereas most of us would tell him to sling his hook. If the club is so desperate for the funds they are willing to drive off membership, then it's because they have a financial black hole to fill or know their is one on the horizon. It's not beyond reason that Knotford will be sold in the near future for further funds and the society engaging in more lease projects. The sale of Knotford will be justified because there will only be a handful of people still fishing it. Paranoid thinking? Or an accurate reasoning as to why an organisation would be so keen to seemingly shoot itself in the foot? I think you have to have a pretty vivid imagination to push the subject of knotford to that conclusion. The decisions and choices at knotford are a different matter. We have a club whose committee is made up of mostly match anglers, and without meaning to be rude, ageing match men at that. Some of the ideas and decisions at knotford might not have been made with an understanding of the specimen angler, or with no consideration of him at all. Not a malicious state of affairs, just like carp anglers probably not interested in the overgrown banks on the river nidd. You care most about your own branch of the sport, obviously. Fishing keeps evolving and changing over the years and Leeds, whose river venues would once be full of matches most weekends, hardly see an angler now. Yet we have knotford, very much a desirably specimen water. That should be made the venue it needs to be to cater properly for its anglers, it makes no sense not to do this. It's been mentioned, "don't talk about AGM's" etc. But if you have no voice at meetings, no representation on committee, how are you going to get what you think is best for knotford done. The Leeds committee is made up of mostly the same men year,on year,on year and we are lucky these same dedicated guys are willing to keep doing the job, because no one else seems to come forward at all. But I don't think anyone would disagree if I said most of them are unaware of the situation at knotford, or the depth of feeling and the amount of debate taking place on this forum. Mr Graham park being the exception and hopefully appreciated. We are in a better situation with Dave(rushy) having founded forum ac, we have 3 forum delegates who will take our members concerns to Leeds and vote on their behalf on all subjects put before us. It was Dave's intention I'm sure to give anglers more of a voice and make more information available to members. So regarding knotford, what do we need doing. How much will it cost and can we get Leeds interested enough to get it done. Already Leeds have listened to anglers and made a huge investment at knotford with the otter fence( doesn't seem like wanting to run the place down to me!), but the horses have proved to be a obstacle to the venues success. Andy has his own gate and access to knotford. Surely a simple and unanimously acceptable solution would be to leave Andy and his horse to do what they like, but have no access inside the otter fence. The fence already exists so finance shouldn't be much of an issue and the anglers and the club take back control of our venue. Obviously grazing inside the fence doesn't work at all. Eddie.
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 28, 2014 17:58:06 GMT
Post by rushy on Dec 28, 2014 17:58:06 GMT
Let's take all the arguments to their natural conclusion. If the horses are here to stay; then it is because the club cannot say no to the money the sale will bring; hence patiently waiting on Andy to sell horses etc to raise the money, whereas most of us would tell him to sling his hook. If the club is so desperate for the funds they are willing to drive off membership, then it's because they have a financial black hole to fill or know their is one on the horizon. It's not beyond reason that Knotford will be sold in the near future for further funds and the society engaging in more lease projects. The sale of Knotford will be justified because there will only be a handful of people still fishing it. Paranoid thinking? Or an accurate reasoning as to why an organisation would be so keen to seemingly shoot itself in the foot? I must admit mate, I don't think you are being paranoid at all. The above certainly seems a feasible option and maybe you are privvy to more information than the rest of us ? The only info I have is the end of year accounts which shows a £300 k cash investment and total assets of £600k . . . Hardly desperate times at present !
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 29, 2014 12:02:07 GMT
Post by winter55 on Dec 29, 2014 12:02:07 GMT
Let's take all the arguments to their natural conclusion. If the horses are here to stay; then it is because the club cannot say no to the money the sale will bring; hence patiently waiting on Andy to sell horses etc to raise the money, whereas most of us would tell him to sling his hook. If the club is so desperate for the funds they are willing to drive off membership, then it's because they have a financial black hole to fill or know their is one on the horizon. It's not beyond reason that Knotford will be sold in the near future for further funds and the society engaging in more lease projects. The sale of Knotford will be justified because there will only be a handful of people still fishing it. Paranoid thinking? Or an accurate reasoning as to why an organisation would be so keen to seemingly shoot itself in the foot? I must admit mate, I don't think you are being paranoid at all. The above certainly seems a feasible option and maybe you are privvy to more information than the rest of us ? The only info I have is the end of year accounts which shows a £300 k cash investment and total assets of £600k . . . Hardly desperate times at present ! Well it would be a good idea to spend some of the 300k of members money to get a good solicitor to get us out of this mess it really is beyond belief what has happend to a once lovely place to fish. it seems there are 2or3 people who keep saying (the horses are hear to stay) why ? its certainly not the members who the committee represent who want them there no money has been paid for the land so stop the sale get the horses off and get members back not rocket science just common sense
|
|
|
Knotty
Dec 29, 2014 14:02:41 GMT
Post by Springer on Dec 29, 2014 14:02:41 GMT
It would be great if someone could tell the forum just how we have got into this p•ss poor situation and how the gypsys have got this position of power over our water in the first place . It seems to me that every time the question is asked it's brushed away like an old Embarrasing family secret that nobody wants to confront !
|
|