IT is interesting reading the letters regarding making the rivers Arrow and Alne navigable.

If people had read your report properly (Chronicle, April 7), both Alan Stevens and myself made it quite clear that we were talking about the effect on the whole environment and not just the anglers' viewpoint.

Our whole intention was that the inhabitants of Alcester be made aware of Advantage Alcester's feasibility study.

Unfortunately, certain people like Norman Barker (Letters, April 21) seem to think that all the anglers are concerned with is the fishing aspect.

Nothing could be further from the truth, as I would claim our anglers are the most environment-friendly group of people I know.

Anybody can easily see the effects the scheme might have by standing on a towpath of a canal and then standing on the banks of our meandering river.

Like the industrial matchstick men painted by Lowrie and Constable's landscapes, there is just no comparison.

Julian Turner is quite right - fish are not the sole issue (letters, April 14).

Why do we have green belts? Why do we have listed buildings? Why do we have protected birds, animals and their habitats?

Some older Alcestrians will remember the punts for hire at Oversley Garage, others will remember when the millpond at Oversley Mill was filled in with red marl from Redditch new town.

This beauty spot is now no more. Let us not make the same mistake.

If money is available, why don't they suggest a riverside walk from Alcester to Wixford and beyond, or haven't they noticed the amount of ramblers Alcester is attracting.

Alcester Town Council's walk from Gunnings Bridge to the Roebuck is a prime example of benefits to the town.

Norman Barker does sterling work for St Nicholas' Church restoration and deserves all the praise one can give in preserving our church.

If someone can prove to me that the scheme is of benefit to the inhabitants and the town of Alcester without losing any of our heritage and amenities, I will stand corrected.

L Wade

Ten Acres

Alcester