TI- I am sorry you feel insulted by my comments. I did say that I have a lot of questions and few answers, right at the beginning of those comments.

From a rather distant perspective, I do agree with you that the Federation troops and similar grassroots level angling interests are the real heart and soul of tournament angling and its recent growth in popularity. Most of those folks I know are serious about their sport, and about their commitments to conservation, passing on the outdoor tradition, etc. I guess I don't understand how either Disney or Wal-Mart are necessary parts of that.

I have not at all taken any hard-line against tournament anglers. We still have many dedicated clients and friends that fall within that definition. Through the frequent battles of will with certain individuals, I have become more interested the hows and whys of where this sport is going in relation to the management of public resources. That is an area in which I am personally interested. I don’t see why it should be so much different for someone from the agency management side of these issues to question or comment on the tournament industry side than it is for the tournament side to question or comment on how things work in the agency management side. Sorry if that concept offends some folks. At least I didn’t threaten to sue anybody.

On the matter of public funding of sports arenas, I certainly don't always agree with that either; but at least it is usually done in a direct public setting where elected officials have to vote on their decisions and thus be on the record.

As for the tournament industry and corporate interests riding on public resources, I didn't say that was the case! I simply asked if there had been any research to compare the cost/benefit, or even examine such a possibility. If you know of any such data, I'd love to know where to read it.

For another respondent, I am sorry if my questions made this issue more confusing to you.