We have recently received two emails that are extremely critical of the Executive Committee. This, in itself, is not a problem but as they were delivered under the pseudonym of Peter Slinge (presumably because of the vitriolic content) I can not publish the contents here. The emails have been circulated to all committee members and the Surrey Branch. The latter as Peter Slinge purports to be a member.

If Peter Slinge would care to identify himself then I will publish his emails here for comment.

FDG0001 This letter will be published in the Autumn 2005 Edition of Fly Dresser

The story of the Herts and District Branch of the FDG is typical of many branches. Twenty-five years ago, the membership was 140, now it is 32. On the face of it, that looks like failure, but, in fact, it’s a sign of success, because, two years ago, the Branch was on the point of extinction. So, now it has turned the corner and is on the up.

How has this turn-around been achieved? Not overnight, for sure. It’s a slow process, full of disappointments. But it is not rocket science. The first aim was to make sure that members felt welcome and involved. The Committee makes sure that all members are greeted at meetings and that they feel a part of the Branch. The second was to be efficient in the follow-up of potential new members. New leads are followed up by the Membership Secretary and receive, for a limited period, the Branch mag (The Hackle – a monthly six-page colour publication). The third was the creation of a website ( www.hertsflydresser.co.uk ) giving basic information, including contact ‘phone numbers, e-mails and the programme. It’s no good having a society if no-one can find out about its activities or where it functions or how to contact its officers directly, without fuss or bother. Its worth has been proved beyond doubt. The fourth was to have the best programme which the funds can afford and to make members aware of it. To that end, a Branch membership card is available at the beginning of the season with full details on it – 10 main meetings and 6/8 fly-tying evenings. The Hackle also contains the programme, in which the next meeting is highlighted, and an article, including photos where possible, on guest speakers. The Hackle is sent out by e-mail (preferably) and post (where necessary), and sometimes additional reminders are e-mailed. A limited poster campaign was tried, but it was difficult to establish a distribution network and ultimately its effectiveness was called into question. Free local press coverage has had a limited, but definite effect, and the FF&FT has printed the occasional snippet, too. Paid ads are not worth the candle. Publicity material has also been left on the Guild’s stand at game fairs.

This has been the strategy for recruitment and retention. Inevitably, not all those who become members stay, but there seems to be no pattern about whether they do or not. Value for money has never been in doubt and it has been possible to double the Branch subscription without loss of members. The funds are subsidised by an auction every other year and by members tying at a London video exhibition, courtesy of one of our members. The fact that Hertfordshire is not overblest with fisheries is a disadvantage, which means that there is only the programme to attract new members and the camaraderie to retain them.

There is cautious optimism for the future. But, the Branch feels isolated. It exists by virtue of membership of the FDG, but, to be brutally honest, it could exist without the main Guild. The only binding force is the Flydresser. That is the only time, for most members, that the parent organisation makes its presence felt, but it lacks that sense of belonging which has been nurtured in the Branch members. In fact, more often the opposite is true, and there have been countless committee meetings when the question of what exactly the Guild does for the Branch has been raised. The perception is that the Guild, as embodied in the FDG committee, has very little to do with the grass roots level, but takes more money per head than the Branch charges its members, just for the privilege of coming under the FDG banner. Somehow, four Flydressers and insurance cover do not seem to justify the subscription. And, sadly, the Herts Branch is not alone in thinking this way. At a time when Branches are struggling for preservation, the Guild has to put its own house in order before addressing the wider fishing issues which will almost certainly face anglers in the next five years.

We would not be bothering to write this article if we did not hope that this situation could change. We throw down the gauntlet to the committee to do nationally what we have done locally: create a sense of belonging and unity of purpose, offer value for money, be pro-active with help (perhaps, a national speaker network for starters), break down the “them-and-us” feeling and restore trust among the membership. Otherwise, not to beat about the bush, there won’t be a Guild in five years’ time.

The Committee of the Herts Branch

FDG0002

John T. Horsfall.
Founder and President
F.D.G. Bristol Area Branch.
(address supplied)

The National Committee.
The Fly Dressers Guild.
C\o Hon. Sec. Jerry Lee.

20,08,05

Dear Mr. Lee,

My attention has been brought to the notes of a recent national committee meeting via our branch secretary Colin Linge. I gather that last year there was a fall in national membership renewals of around 400. I would like, on behalf of the members, committee and officers of our branch like to offer some observations that are both from the former and myself.

On a local level we, like other branches experience a membership turnover. A good proportion of this happens because new members join to learn new skills to suit their style(s) of fishing. Once learnt they are happy to go on their way and refine these skills for themselves. The average "life" of such members varies from between one and three years, we find that people who generally make their forth year are "lifers". This of course does not include the natural wastage factor. In our branches case this can vary from year to year from 12 % to around 30% in anyone year. We are always very grateful to get new members, whatever their level of ability. Usually they are beginners so they encourage the other more experienced ones to teach them etc. They also help us financially as we are able to run more events etc. I should at this stage mention that we probably have more meetings per year than any other guild branch. Our branch continues to attract new members and we seem to keep a steady membership number. The largest and longest established local club, The Bristol Reservoir Fly Fishers Assn, is now teetering around 300, not that long ago it was 600+. It's lost over 25% in the last two years. Several local tackle dealers have either closed down, or removed fly fishing\tying gear from their shelves. Since the advent of "Competition Fly fishing" numerous "splinter" clubs have formed to try to "cash in" on potential winnings etc.

We would be interested to know if this is a reflection of both other branches and if a similar proportion is reflected with the individual non branch members.

People's interests change with their "disposable income". We've only fairly recently had computers etc. to play with etc. There seems to be a very negative attitude with parts of the guild towards the encouragement of junior members, some years ago one of our juniors came second in the national junior fly fishing competition, despite requests for help from our branch towards some form of national guild sponsorship. At the regional meeting held some years ago, in Cheltenham Colin Linge asked one of the representatives why the guild seemed, at that time to be anti junior members, Basically he was told that the policy was "not to encourage them" "as they can cause all sorts of problems". Maybe this person had just been reading the latest government child protection literature? We do not at the time of writing have any junior members but we do have a nominated officer who has passed the relevant qualifications for tuition of same through one of the relevant nationally recognised bodies to advise us.

When was the last time that the national committee issued an up to date list of guest speakers? The last one I recall was about 20 years ago, and that had several people that had died some years before. Yes we still manage to find them, as over the years we have built up a good list of contacts etc. However for any new branch this is just another nightmare to overcome. Perhaps a national officer would like to undertake this task to help out all the branches and see that it is updated every year?

In spring 1987 our membership had perhaps its most important update, this was of course the first issue of Flydresser. At last members had a quarterly colour magazine that was the organ through which they could share their patterns and experiences with others.

As we are all aware over the years this has been developed, improved and made to look very professional. The photographic quality is peerless, as is much of the written content. However it seems a shame that it has lost its original intended purpose in that normal members seem to be ignored in favour of perhaps the occasional foreign writer, Paul Little and a huge content from what appears to be written by one person with different pseudonyms. The technical content is again without peer, perhaps a trifle stereotypical? Perhaps also above the heads of what a lot of members in my branch can be bothered to read.

I recall all the editors virtually begging for copy. As a branch we have responded on several occasions, we have also sent in contributions we thought would be of interest to other members only to have it filed away and forgotten. If its not wanted then it should be returned as it could at least be updated.

Recently we were not given sufficient time to see if we were able to find alternative insurance cover. Our branch agreed that we should, this time around find the extra £130. for a limited additional cover, as we attend several shows promoting both ourselves and the national guild. We realize that the guild was only given short notice of this situation but surely this is another important consideration, in these litigation conscious days for a national officer to undertake?

I would also be interested to know what the insurance situation is for non branch members, as we hope to contact several of these within our postcode area to invite them along to our meetings. One of the incentives we may mention in our proposed pack is improved (?) insurance cover. Again any guidance would be appreciated.

I mentioned earlier a regional meeting, this as I recall was rolled out across the country, with lots of ideas, feedback etc. This was to become a cornerstone of the guilds structure and would be encouraged from all directions. Perhaps other branches that attended our regions one did not like the idea, and guess what happened? Is this the same across the country? If so why have those who attended not been asked for feedback?

Several of our members are asking what are we paying our subscriptions for? This is in the light of the above questions. We are finding it increasingly difficult to give them answers that they are happy with. We look forward to being able to giving then these answers.

Thank you for reading through this extended letter.

Yours truly,
John T. Horsfall.