Please do not join the British Astronomical Association

This has been very hard for me as I had been a member of the BAA for about four years now but I have had a very unpleasant experience with them just over a week ago and it convinced me that it was no longer worth my being a member. The problem started when I decided, for the first time, to write something for the BAA to be published. This was an article for the Venus section newsletter, the Messenger. I sent this to the director of the section on the 5th December last year. This had taken me quite a bit of effort and I had been assuming that they would only be too pleased to have someone new contribute to their newsletter (I will publish the article here in full, at some point). What went wrong is the following:-

• After I had emailed the director with my article I introduced myself to him, in person, after a meeting in London on December 6th 2025 but I really felt like he gave me the brush off and had no more time for me than to acknowledge who I was (this wasn't the first time I had an uncomfortable encounter with this person - at a Winchester weekend some years before I had been shood away from joining him and some others at a dining table which was very embarrassing).
• The director didn't get back to me about my article until April 10th and then only a six days before he was going to publish Messenger - so very late.
• He then wanted me to make some very large last minute edits which would have meant I would have lost about half the article (the discussion).
• The reason first offered for this major edit was that he thought something was incorrect, without giving any explanation of why he thought it was so. This is very intimidating. Just try to imagine what this would be like for a person who is a new to the subject and an amateur. I didn't believe there was a mistake.
• I had to defend myself by saying that I had a BSc and PhD in astrophysics and he back-tracked and said that he thought the discussion was going over material that was historic. This was true, but I was mainly counter-acting a throw-away comment that the director himself had made in the BAA journal. It felt to me that he was editing this out because he didn't like me contradicting him.

I then went on to tell him that I thought that his approach and that of the BAA wasn't very caring of amateurs who are trying to contribute to the BAA. It felt like I was being treated as if I was a professional astronomer and had to pass their stringent vetting. I admit I was pretty cross about how I was being treated and told them a home truth - I find a lot of the published output of the BAA to be pretty tedious and mind-numbing.

I decided to take my concerns to the BAA president to get their view on all this and I took my time to explain how I felt and how I thought I was being treated. I tried to appeal to her as someone who was finding it hard, as an amateur, to navigate the BAA. I was even more shocked by her response as it seemed, rather than take on board anything I said, the BAA closed ranks on me:-

• I addressed the president using her first name as I have met her at a meeting but she addressed me suddenly as Mr Hale-Sutton as if I had suddenly stepped over some boundary. Not only that, she referred to the Venus section director as Dr. so and so, but having become formal didn't address me as Dr Hale-Sutton even though I had explicitly said I had a PhD. This seemed cold and insulting to me.
• She referred to my article as 'research' and claimed that articles for the journal and section newsletters needed to be refereed as such. I never claimed my article was research. She also said that "In your case I am aware that several other experienced observers in the field also concurred in the opinion that some more work would be necessary." This is incredibly intimidating and shows how they have closed ranks on me.
• She didn't address the issues of how I had been treated in person, but reflected on how the section director had responded to me in his emails, completely missing the point.
• I had the tables turned on me suggesting that I had not been kind for not understanding the personal issues of the director.
• She missed my point that new amateurs to the subject often can't spend a lot of money on equipment as it is very expensive and therefore it is hard for such amateurs to contribute to the BAA. What it means is that it is a barrier to taking part. 
• There was not one bit of trying to see things from my point of view. I had tried to be reasonable and explain how I felt, but the BAA was stiff and formal. They may have thought I was being deliberately insulting but I was telling them the truth.

This all goes to the heart of the matter. As my friend said to me "he was never sure what the BAA were for." On their web title heading they say "Supporting amateur astronomers since 1890". But they aren't supporting amateurs if they think that all their output is for professional publication. There are enough professional bodies to do this - the Royal Astronomical Society for one. Why don't those who want to do this in the BAA go and join the RAS! It makes the BAA elitist and not open to everyone. They can't satisfy the two at the same time - supporting amateurs whilst trying to be a professional organisation. The trouble is they do neither well - they aren't kind to amateurs and the professional stuff they produce is a bit humdrum and unexciting. No wonder they keep losing their members. Well, they have lost this one for sure!

All text and images © Duncan Hale-Sutton 2026