This is the kind of press release I like reading, as it shows how our licence money is spent:

http://www.anglers-net.co.uk/news/articles/566.html

Guests - this sponsored link will vanish when you log-in. Click here to register for free.

In fairness should the polluters (which are named to an extent in the press release) not pay for this??

Also whilst it shows how our rod licence money is spent (though one wonders whether this will benefit the 625 licence holder whose fees it cost the EA) I cannot think of many schemes around our way where there is investment in fishing/angling as a sport.

In fact, the EA netted a bloody great section of our massive drain network and took just about every silver fish there (leaving the pike behind) due to someone polluting a river near Peterborough.......

An afterthought....

How many rod licence fees go to producing press releases telling us how well they are spending the money we pay them.......

I'd rather see more action, better enforcement of licences (such as making fishery owners and retail tackle shops responsible for checking them - they do with telly licences), and far less beurocracy(spelling?).

"Regenerating urban fisheries like this is an important objective for us"

"The total cost of the project was £15,000 which was entirely funded by revenue from rod licence sales"

Everyone benefits from improvement of an urban environment but why has the whole cost been met by anglers ?
The only upside is that when the birds start flying in to take advantage of the improved environment, it'll be hard for the twitchers to get anglers chucked off the water.

Like others though, I don't see why the EA is blowing it's own trumpet. This is an old idea even if it's a very good one - especially for waters with changeable levels.

[ 28. May 2005, 04:51 PM: Message edited by: Ken L ]