Quote:
Originally Posted by FishALotNot
To be fair, only about one quarter of the ACA's funding comes from angling licenses. A much bigger chunk comes from hunting licenses. And if I recall correctly, fishing and hunting licenses are meant to be a conservation levy - a source of funds that is put toward conserving fish, wildlife, natural spaces and recreation.
I think people misunderstand the system if they think that the ACA's funding is meant to simply improve fishing (or hunting) opportunities in the province. Personally, I am very glad that they do more than that (although, their effectiveness is a whole other topic).
|
The ACA spends less than 5% of the Grant program on fisheries. Of the other several millions od $'s they spend, we occasionally get reports of some study of another.
Although hundreds of thousands were spent on the DogPound Creek, the ACA walked away. From the original Buck for Wildlife program, much has been loss or derailed into things that didn't benefit fisheries or wildlife.
I find it shameful with the pressure on native stocks, there was no money allocated that I can see.
Don