I'm all for more kids fishing. I plan to take a friends child fishing soon if he can show me improvements in his attitude and school work.

By the way, if you are going to send an email through the TU link above, you need to do so before March 26, because after that they aren't taking comments or something

As a h.s. English teacher, tennis coach and outdoorsman, NCLI is a blessing. My students in this mostly rural South Texas school district are slaves to their internet and video games and never venture outside. In 10 years as a teacher, I've had a handful of young men and young women who were outdoors enthusiasts, in an area conducive to getting out and playing. We need these initiatives. Kids don't play outside anymore down here. If you drive around in town, you never see anyone outside. It's creepy.

It seems weird to me, reading TexasFirst's post. I live in Northern East Texas myself. And while I do believe him, we must be blessed in our small town because our neighborhood children are always outside. They are constantly running around and doing something. Just yesterday the girls were all together playing and getting muddy down in the creek in our subdivision. Not to mention my 2 year-old daughter is non-stop with requests to go outside or to the park. She saw a kiddo fishing set at Wally-World and has badgered me and her grandfather non-stop about "wanna go fish?" "let's go fish." It is a wonderful curse I guess.

This is wonderful. Glad to see it is meant to be "science based." My concern is whether HSUS/PETA/others can somehow hijack the bill or somehow misguide its implementation. There is a great need to stay alert to their actions.

I'm no fan of big government and I'm not willing to join in the love-fest.

jscottevans raises some very legitimate concerns and even if the animal rights folks don't have control of the agenda at this time, it is only a matter of time before they do control it in liberal leaning states. Just think your federal tax dollars going to support a "environmental literacy program" - sounds like tax sponsored brainwashing to me.

No thanks.

Wow, only 2 posts so far w/ the word "brainwash" in them. I think any bill that focuses on getting kids outside is positive. I've got a 12 year old and an 8 year old, and I know they'd argue tooth and nail if any teacher started 'preaching' about anti-hunting/fishing. Nothing like an educated kid to put an ignorant adult in their place. My advice to all the 'faux-news' sheep is to EDUCATE your kids yourself, don't rely on schools to do all the teaching, then whine about it afterwards. Let the -1's rain forth, I care not.

If speaking my mind results in an avalanche of -1's, so be it.

To assume that everyone who opposes this bill gets their ideas from Glen Beck, Rush and their ilk would be terribly wrong.

I am all for environmental policies based on science - which is why I am against this bill. Despite the language of the bill, I simply don't believe it can be anything but politically driven. I also dislike the federal government thinking that with enough money granting programs they can solve all of society's problems.

I'm a fan of small government and fiscal responsibility - not a climate change denier. In fact, if we truly were following science-based policies we would adopt a carbon-tax. (Let the -1's rain forth from the other direction as well).

take a kid fishing ONE TIME and he will be hooked FOR LIFE. take a kid hunting ONE TIME and he will be hooked FOR LIFE. do you see the point i am trying to make?

The home page for various promotors of the bill can be found here:

http://www.cbf.org/Page.aspx?pid=687

After taking a closer look, this appears to be one of the fine-tuning bills aimed at modifying the No Child Left Behind legislation. What it really wants to do is add environmental literacy to the list of items that schools have to address under the No Child Left Behind legislation. I really don't see how this will get any kids out fishing.

I support the idea of teaching environmental science in schools and getting kids to be more active outdoors. I still oppose the idea of the federal government getting further involved in the funding of local school districts. I'd like to see someone convincingly argue that this is a cost-effective way to achieve their stated goals and not simply a political payoff to the teachers union. Until then, all it has done is make me wonder if Trout Unlimited is too politicized.

Our children will have some very important decisions to make in the future. As the world becomes a smaller place conservation issues will become increasingly more important.

Most of the information received by the public concerning conservation issues comes from extremist groups from either side. Common sense and sound scientific solutions are in the middle ground which is rarely presented to the public. Much of what is done in this country is driven by the court of public opinion so it is important that the public be educated. Starting with basic conservation principals in the schools is a good start.

We have made many mistakes in the past. In the State of Ohio alone there is not one drop of water that is not considered toxic. Things have not changed. Most people in Ohio will put jobs and energy above the enviornment. Walk by any public fishing spot and the litter alone will tell you people need to be educated.

Will educating children help us? No. Our future is now. Will educating children help children? We can only hope so.

Check out what Colorado Youth Outdoors is doing in Northern Colorado (coloradoyo.org) This is a model program that could easily go nationwide.

The programs mentioned in the two preceding posts look effective. It would be nice to see them adopted in more areas.