5 Nottinghamshire anglers have been found guilty of fishing without a licence, resulting in penalties totalling £4,265 and criminal records.

Jake Munns and Jai Makanji of Nottingham, Keegan Lambert and Kieran Buxton of Mansfield, and Phillip Galley of Sutton-in-Ashfield were all found guilty of fishing illegally. They were caught at the Woodend Lakes in Huthwaite during a routine patrol carried out by Environment Agency bailiffs.

The Environment Agency carries out these routine patrols to ensure that the future of angling is protected for the vast majority of anglers who fish legally. With an annual rod licence valid from 1 April only costing £30, the offending anglers have been left several hundred pounds out of pocket by their actions.

The 5 offenders were tried on 2 March 2017 at Mansfield Magistrates’ Court. Fines totalled £3,300, but with £635 in costs as well as £330 in victim surcharges the total penalties amounted to £4,265.

Environment Agency enforcement officer Peter Haslock said:

This is an excellent result for the Environment Agency as well as for the hundreds of thousands of anglers who follow the rules.

These offenders could have saved themselves a substantial sum of money as well as a criminal record if they had bought the required licences. An annual rod licence that is valid from 1 April is available from just £30, so there really is no excuse.

The Environment Agency recently launched “Get a Fishing Licence” on GOV.UK to simplify the process of buying a fishing licence. This new webpage is part of a series of changes that have been made to improve the service. The improvements include:

• Free licences for junior anglers, up to the age of 17
• The fishing licence will now last for 12 months from the day it is bought rather than expire at the end of March every year. A standard year-long licence is available from £30.
• Anglers now need only one licence to use three rods, rather than the two licences that were needed previously.

All money raised through rod licence sales is used to support fish, fisheries and the angling sport. The Environment Agency’s activities to protect and improve fish and fisheries include protecting stocks from illegal fishing, pollution and disease, eradicating invasive species and improving fish habitats.

The Environment Agency urges people who suspect they may have been witness to, or have information of, illegal fishing to report illegal activity by calling its incident hotline on 0800 80 70 60 or Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

ENDS

Notes for editors

• All five individuals in this case were prosecuted under Section 27(1)(a) of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975, for fishing for freshwater fish or eels by means of an unlicensed rod and line in a place where fishing is regulated.

• Jake Munns, of Worrall Avenue in Nottingham, who was proved guilty in absence, was fined £660 and ordered to pay costs of £127 as well as a victim surcharge of £66, making the total penalty £853.

• Jai Makanji, of Leivers Avenue in Nottingham, who was proved guilty in absence, was fined £660 and ordered to pay costs of £127 as well as a victim surcharge of £66, making the total penalty £853.

• Kieran Buxon, of Milton Street in Mansfield, who was proved guilty in absence, was fined £660 and ordered to pay costs of £127 as well as a victim surcharge of £66, making the total penalty £853.

• Keegan Lambert, of Stuart Avenue in Mansfield, who was proved guilty in absence, was fined £660 and ordered to pay costs of £127 as well as a victim surcharge of £66, making the total penalty £853.

• Phillip Galley, of John Street in Sutton-in-Ashfield, who was proved guilty in absence, was fined £660 and ordered to pay costs of £127 as well as a victim surcharge of £66, making the total penalty £853.

Waste firm Associated Waste Management Ltd has been fined £125,000 for causing odour pollution at its sites in Leeds and Bradford.

The company was sentenced at Leeds Crown Court on 6 March 2017 after previously admitting two environmental offences relating to its waste transfer facilities in Gelderd Road, Leeds and Canal Road, Bradford.

The Environment Agency prosecuted the company following repeated odour problems that had a detrimental effect on local residents.

Austin Stoton, prosecuting for the Environment Agency, told the court that AWM’s Leeds site caused repeated odour problems between June 2012 and October 2013. During this time, Environment Agency officers carried out around 75 odour assessments, and most of them recorded smells that were likely to cause offence to human senses.

In October 2013 the Environment Agency suspended the company’s permit for the Leeds facility, preventing it from bringing any more waste onto the site until it had made improvements to its odour management plan. This new plan was approved that month and the permit was reinstated.

In the same year, between March and July, AWM’s Bradford site was also the cause of odour issues. These prompted local residents to complain on 49 separate dates.

One resident had complained that the odour was so bad that it had made him feel sick. He also said that if there was a smell present, he couldn’t open windows and his family couldn’t spend time in the garden. Another resident said at the time that he and his family had found it virtually impossible to have any enjoyment from their garden.

An inspection visit in March 2013 revealed that the company was not closing the shutters on a tipping shed used by bin wagons, which allowed the smell of rotting waste to leave the site.

In July, the Environment Agency served an enforcement notice on the firm that required it to improve its odour management plan for the site. The company’s first revision of this document, submitted in August, was rejected as inadequate and it wasn’t until October that a new plan was approved.

A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said after the hearing:

Waste sites like those managed by AWM can have a detrimental impact on local communities if they are not managed properly. That’s why it is vital that operators adhere to environmental regulations and the conditions on their environmental permits.

In this case, AWM failed to maintain high standards of odour management at its facilities in Leeds and Bradford, and local residents suffered as a result. We hope today’s outcome demonstrates that odour pollution is not acceptable and that the Environment Agency will take action against businesses that fail to adhere to permitting rules.

In mitigation, the company told the court that it had relied upon an external company that had approached it regarding odour suppression equipment, which had not worked.

AWM was fined £75,000 for the Leeds offence, and £50,000 for the Bradford offence. It was also ordered to pay £75,000 in legal costs.