next years membership fee

[andyoak]

We have paid £85 to fish this year

Would you pay £105 next year if there was no weed, I Know I would but what does everyone else think??

The commitee have indicated that they don't have the funds to treat the weed as the cost  is around £2000. If we could get some sort of idea how many members would re-join if it was £105 it might be possible to get the commitee to pay half and next years members pay the other half [50 members at £20]

After all 100 quid to fish for a year is nowt. On one of the other threads we have been on about cromwell and raker, £100 would get you 5days on Raker and just  4 on Cromwell or 365 on ravo!!

We have had a mump about everything but lets face it if the weed was gone then we would put up with the rest, even if the place was perfect we would still find something to go on about.

[Tiger Nuts]

I would too, however Terry told me that there is some chemical ready for next February, if thats the case they could use the extra to maybe improve the swims a little? Or whatever else so long as it was spent on the carp pond I would be happy.

I wouldnt be happy if any extra I paid was spent on fish stocks in the other ponds etc even though I do fish them too.

[stufish]

I would happily pay £150 per year to fish Ravenfield, if the extra funds went to clear the weed thus enabling anglers to fish the year through.

Like Adi I would be loathe to think of any extra money being paid going towards funding fish stocks for the other lakes. But surely, if the committee has paid out nothing whatsoever towards upkeep of the carp lake for years now, some funds should be available somewhere to help combat the weed.

It would be great to meet up with the committee and be able to say that a poll on this forum revealed that ex number of anglers stated a willingness to pay extra towards upkeep of the lake and battle against the weed etc.

Adi, how about running a poll asking anglers to vote on their willingness to pay an increase in their membership next year, and what amount they consider reasonable.

[Tiger Nuts]

We are only 1/5 of the carp lake syndicate, we need more of the members to join here. I wonder if Martin could put a link on the main site to these forums, I doubt it though because of the many negative points raised.

[andyoak]

If this meeting comes off with martin and some of the commitee then may be we could ask for a list of members and get some letters out to them asking the same.

Adi is right with his numbers but if we could find out what most of the current members think regarding the matter then my be this could be a way forward regarding the weed and even some other matters.

Stu has stated he would be willing to pay £150 which would leave a pot of £3250 after the commitee have taken there normall £85.

I might be speaking out of turn and the other members might not want or be willing to pay more but unless the question is asked then we are not going to know and we will be at the same stage next year.

I walked the dogs round yesterday and had a good look. When you walk round any venue your thinking where you could put a bait, even if you don't mean to do it, it's just the angler within trying to get out. But it was a bit of the opposit yesterday. It was IF I did manage to get a bait there, and IF I got a pick up how the hell would I get it out.

[hursty]

as we all know pheonix angling have already taken in excess of £4000 for carp tickets this year ,and have done so for a few years , yet there has been little visible reinvestment . Why would this change ? We all see vast shoals of their precious silver fish swimming around a lake that we pay to exclusively angle for carp .Maybe the weed will never go because it provides the silver fish with total protection from cormorant predation ? Face boys , it might be that the committee just see the carp lake as a convenient place to grow on there precious stock for the match lakes , and the weed will stay.

[Tiger Nuts]

If there were more silverfish the water might be more cloudy though and less weed ..... well maybe LOL

[hursty]

if the silver fish were bream you'd be spot on , but they're re rudd which are not predominantley bottom feeders . But then we'd probably moan about catching snotties then , Lol . We,re never happy are we ?

[Tiger Nuts]

One of the committee men dropped 70 odd rudd into the carp lake whilst I was there. I couldn't really work out what they would do to benefit the situation, but what do I know. 

[hursty]

Same old story isn't really , we pay good money to fish the lake and the only stocking it receives are a few poxy rudd !

I know I may seem negative , but we are dealing with an inwardly looking group who appear to only have their own interests at heart . Why stock rudd into a carp syndicate lake ? I cannot think of one benefit to the paying carp angler , but several spring to mind for the match/coarse angler .

[stufish]

Though I don't wish to come across as being controversial, I cannot but imitate Hursty's comments. There is absolutely no reason that springs to my mind as to why Rudd, in any numbers, should be introduced into the carp lake. It can in no way be of benefit to carp anglers, or to the carp lake itself. So one can only be led to believe that the beneift of such a move is for the match anglers alone.

And surely, as paying members of the carp lake, shouldn't we have been notified of the stocking and given the reason for it? Or is this too much to ask of the committee. At Wentworth where I am also a syndicate member, all activities such as this are made known to anglers in advance.

Again, I can only think that the stocking is purely beneficial for matchmen alone, and knowing the reaction that may have been generated by carp anglers to such a move, the committee chose to remain silent.

I'm sorry if members feel these comments may rock the boat at Ravenfield, but I really feel that we carp anglers are getting a very raw deal for the fees we have paid.

Reading Andy's post of a few days ago, I found myself nodding in total agreement to his sentiments - how the hell could any carp angler land a fish from the lake in the state it's in at the moment! Any poor bloody thing that was hooked would be ripped to pieces by the time it had been dragged through that choking mess of green stuff. And how many anglers can put their hands up and say they haven't witnessed fish damaged due to being dragged through the weed? I've seen it too many times to count, and it turns my stomach every time.

I would be very interested in hearing from someone in the know as to why the Rudd were stocked. If it was for some reason to benefit the carp lake, then the committee should be applauded for their efforts. But again, when anglers are kept in the dark about such matters that concern the water they pay to fish, it so easily breeds frustration and supposition. If only the committee realised this I think a great deal of resentment towards them could be avoided.

Adi, it's such a shame that you or Paul, after being asked, were unable to run for a place on the committee. God - the good you could have done! Any other members on this site able to step up to the mark?

[Tiger Nuts]

I woould think that anyone can put themselves up at the Annual General Meeting if the club has one, which I suspect it must od.

Do rudd each weed? I dunno 

[Tiger Nuts]

Just fond this about rudd:

They are a shoal fish, and a large weight can be amassed if they are targeted. The average size is usually between 2oz and 6oz, although they have been caught over 3lb! Rudd are adapted to be a surface feeder, and naturally take insects of the surface as well as bloodworm, plankton and also eat some aquatic plants.

But then i guess that goes for most fish

[hursty]

suppose we could always form a rudd syndicate lol.. Now where is my copy of ruddtalk and crafty rudder ?