Only read the summary, but it seems they are using tone and language that says they WANT access to all waterways, rather than they believe they ALREADY HAVE access, and just want carification of the right in law. ...I still think the campaign should be to announce our interpretation of the law and ...

Welsh Government's current consultation closes early next week and the Minister is expected to make a statement on access to the countryside sometime in November. Access to water gets NO specific mention in the consultation document, nor did it in the Minister's recent response to the Petitions Comm...

It took me a couple of attempts to find it when I did mine!

http://www.britishcanoeing.org.uk

Click the 'Awarding Body' tab.

'New Personal Performance Awards' is clickable on that screen.

There's nothing wrong with the Scottish system Pam, I was not suggesting that there was. 'The Scottish system is broadly what BC are calling for. It is British canoeing's language that I found fault with. I do not want any new rights, I don't want anyone to renegotiate the rights that I already hav...

Through the Charter, British Canoeing will be asking the Government to legislate through new modern legislation: to confirm fair, shared, sustainable open access to water. Halejuah! We all believe that the rights of access are already enshrined in law, all we need is confirmation of the interpretat...

The survey closes on Monday - last chance to have your say!

They are asking for a right we already have We have the right of navigation (as yet not clearly enshrined in law) on rivers, though our ability to exercise that right is often hampered by challenges and objections. The charter is asking for public rights of access on and along all water in England.

Adrian Cooper wrote: ↑

Fri May 18, 2018 11:25 am

Out of curiosity the survey did not ask me for contact details but might it be taking these from me without my knowledge?

I have no idea about that, you would have to ask someone in the BC access department!

Member or not, we all need to complete this survey

New Paper on the River Access for All site. The above evidence (see page 2) seems sufficient to establish the existence of a common law Public Right of Navigation on all rivers in England and Wales which are physically capable of navigation. How and when the common law PRN was created is lost to th...

The official word from the Peak Park is they would like to see better access, but they are doing nothing about it. I wouldn’t be surprised if they also say to the fishing clubs that they want to block access to kayaks/canoes. That's why we can never achieve a sustainable solution by negotiating wit...

I don't understand how the national parks authority, dur to their constitution, can allow there to be access problems within its boundaries. One way is by quoting (mis)information from the BCU ("most upland rivers are privately owned") and from the EA ("it is widely believed that rivers are private...

If it's of any help in arguing the case in the future Pam the reason I set up my businesses in Scotland was because there is good access to both land and water. Having the option of being anywhere in the UK 16yrs ago it seemed a no brainer to come here, I did look around the whole of the UK. Thanks...

I thought you would be striving in England and Wales for the same situation that exists in Scotland? We are! Shortly after devolution of the necessary powers to Wales, WCA presented a petition to the Welsh Assembly: The Welsh Assembly Government is urged to consider and implement a Bill to benefit ...

Just to make my own position clear, as it relates to the draft motion, and joint statement with BC: To charge for access to/use of private land is legitimate. To charge a block 'facility fee' to paddlers while making some of the same facility (e.g. Tryweryn Trail, map for Tryweryn Trail, WC, use of ...

Yes I am talking about the tryweryn, and if they charged for facilities as they claim it would not bother me but the only people chargesd are those who pass down river so to me it is a charge to pass down the river. This is not acceptable I agree. B.C. said this was not initially they now seen to h...

Pam, could you explain what you mean please? I didnt understand what you were suggesting on Saturday, and a number of other people around us didnt either. My suggestion was that the Board of CW should call a general meeting to discuss the relationship between the NGB (ie CW) and the commercial oper...

This is the get out of jail free card It is not, and the issue has not been dropped. I raised it at the BC AGM and suggested that as this is now an issue to be addressed in Wales, CW Board should take the lead and call a General Meeting to discuss the relationship between the NGB function and the c...

Could someone remind me why we do not have a Canoeing England? There was a Canoe England, for a while, but it was never constituted with the same degree of separation as SCA/WCA/CANI so it's function was never fully understood. As Chris mentioned earlier in the thread, this reflects the political a...

stonercanoe wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:55 pm

Hi Pam, thanks for that. Not on Facebook.
Jason

I've seen it on there somewhere; maybe in WoW or one of the paddling groups.

stonercanoe wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:03 am

I think BC and CW should post a response on this forum at least,......

BC's response was posted on their website and FB page early this month.

Can you tell us anything about that, Pam? I wasn't aware there was a new one. You know about as much as I do now, Chris! It came out of the discussions around withdrawing the motion to the AGM, where I was told by BC that the new Federal Agreement between the four nations will soon be completed, an...

No matter what you call it when only people passing down the river are charged it is a charge for passage. I fully agree. With their intention not to take this up with Canoe Wales I see no reason the government will take any notice either as they do not practice what they preach. BC is accountable ...

...Let's say they are framing their legislation and taking evidence from all 'stakeholders' how about an argument which goes something like 'well BC have identified over 200 canoe trails where their members are perfectly entitled to paddle; why would they need anything else, they've managed with th...

I see the canoe trails as a potential detrimental move. The opposition cannot help but look at the list which covers almost entirely waterways where there is no access debate. If these trails are going to be of any worth at all in the access campaign, they need to include, for example, rivers where...

The Draft Motion requested that the Board of British Canoeing should “Make an unequivocal commitment to campaign for legislation to secure open access for all recreational users of water and waterside, accompanied by a code of conduct.” Acting for the membership of British Canoeing, the Board is pl...

Here is the joint statement on access arising from Ivan and me withdrawing our motion to the BC AGM. I, Ivan, and all those from BC that we have worked with on this, are equally determined to make this work! BC are making time available at the AGM for a discussion on access, so any member can have ...

cp wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 01, 2018 7:15 pm

It appears Ivan Lawler has toed the line to keep his position on the board.
Chris

From what I know of Ivan, toeing the line is not his style...

Joint statement with Ivan Lawler: Pam Bell and I have requested that our AGM Motion relating to Access be removed from the agenda. Having put the motion out there before the recent series of roadshows it was becoming apparent that the distance between the BC stance and the stance we were asking to ...