Access for All

Inland paddling
User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Access for All

Post by roo »

Sometimes I have to crunch numbers, not in an especially detailed way, there's software for that.

But I saw this on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Al_Humphreys/status ... 9912750080 "Only 2% open access"

And I immediately retwat it.

But then I thought, kayaking is a minority sport, what's our actual percentage of population that participate?

British Marine tell me (2015) http://britishmarine.co.uk/News/2015/Ma ... eport-2014 that canoeing is the biggest growing segment of participation with 1.5million canoeists.

That number doesn't seem very big to me and knowing how these stakeholders work, they might imagine they were being overly generous with river access.

All I know is that I prefer not to trespass and not much has changed in the last 15 years - Discuss...............

User avatar
Poke
Posts: 4888
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 4:35 pm
Location: Wigan
Been thanked: 26 times
Contact:

Re: Access for All

Post by Poke »

roo wrote: And I immediately retwat it.
Inspired!
Uniyaker - Uni expeditions
Team Pyranha - My adventures

chriscw
Posts: 908
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:35 am
Location: Basingstoke
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Access for All

Post by chriscw »

Paddling on natural rivers is not trespass. Crossing land to get to them sometimes is.
Chris Clarke-Williams
Location Basingstoke

Paddling Interests:
Touring, Coaching Beginners (I am an L2K), Surf White water trips, Weir Play (I'm not good enough to put freestyle!)

User avatar
morsey
Posts: 6282
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:36 pm
Location: West Country :-)
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Access for All

Post by morsey »

Keep, the pressure on.

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Adrian Cooper »

45% of people own cars so they should be allowed to drive only on 45% of the roads.

25% of people take beach holidays in the UK so they will only be allowed on 25% of the beaches.

Garry
Posts: 167
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 4:23 pm

Re: Access for All

Post by Garry »

60% of people voted so only 60% of MPs should take their seat in parliament.

User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »

Thanks for playing with me in this game.

All good responses so far.

Adrian's road analogy kind of works for me...........but what if there were only 1.5 million car drivers?

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Adrian Cooper »

Maybe there would be a lot of empty roads with anglers sitting at the kerb?

SimonMW
Posts: 2199
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 11:39 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Access for All

Post by SimonMW »

Roo, we aren't the only ones who use rivers. Doesn't matter if we are a minority, what about SUP, wild swimmers, picknickers, sailing dinghy people things, model boat enthusiasts, water doggi... umm yes, so the thing to take away from this is that access isn't just about white water or Whitewater rivers, but also about flatwater and flat water rivers and all the sun and enjoyment that we may emparch upon them.

twopigs
Posts: 1341
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:55 pm
Location: Stroud & Cheltenham
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Access for All

Post by twopigs »

Adrian Cooper wrote:Maybe there would be a lot of empty roads with anglers sitting at the kerb?
....complaining about the cars disturbing their fish
Canoeing - bigger boat, broken paddle, more skill!

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3658
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Access for All

Post by DaveBland »

The anglers at the side of the road would soon get exhausted.
dave

User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »

SimonMW wrote:Roo, we aren't the only ones who use rivers. Doesn't matter if we are a minority, what about SUP, wild swimmers, picknickers, sailing dinghy people things, model boat enthusiasts, water doggi... umm yes, so the thing to take away from this is that access isn't just about white water or Whitewater rivers, but also about flatwater and flat water rivers and all the sun and enjoyment that we may emparch upon them.
In my head I believe that access to Flat water is actually quite good.

I grew up in Cambridge and live in Chester.

Both have easy access to the Cam and the Dee and I do not remember access ever being discussed as an issue. Same for river access when I briefly lived in Glasgow, it was nae bother.

It does become an issue once you venture upland which is where the population becomes sparser.

Is the issue that river access is effectively as good as UK mobile coverage? The 2% we do have access to covers 98% of the population of actual and potential river users?

User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »

DaveBland wrote:The anglers at the side of the road would soon get exhausted.
That's it Dave, drive the message home :-)

SimonMW
Posts: 2199
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 11:39 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Access for All

Post by SimonMW »

The 2% we do have access to covers 98% of the population of actual and potential river users?
Nope, because that 2% includes things like canals.

Here's a map of all the navigable rivers (inc WW ones) in Scotland, England and Wales. Purple indicates rivers with disputed navigation rights.

http://access.canoedaysout.com/map/rivers

gp.girl
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Crawley Down, West Sussex
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Access for All

Post by gp.girl »

chriscw wrote:Paddling on natural rivers is not trespass. Crossing land to get to them sometimes is.
Got this one on Sunday. Didn't have the guts to ask him if he confronted all the dog owners who use the 'private beach' at Byfleet on the Wey! Just told him we were getting on anyway and walked off. Access been used for years and unless they act to stop everyone he's just a hypocrite.
I can roll :)

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3658
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Access for All

Post by DaveBland »

roo wrote:In my head I believe that access to Flat water is actually quite good.
It comes down to the fact that the best fishing rivers and paddling rivers are pretty much the same thing.
To be fair, if I were a fishy folk that had paid a crapload of $$ to haul fish out of a river, I'd be pissed off at the paddlers having all that fun for 'free'. I get it.

But... They are choosing to pay to fish. They could go dangle their appendages in a canal or somewhere else. Plus they are paying the landowner for use of the land to sit on. Plus most often, 'exclusive rights' – so they don't have to sit next some awful pleb and talk to them.

Paddlers on the other hand, get on and off using public land and just pass by. Totally different thing. And we don't mind being with some awful plebs as thats what we are.
dave

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 14029
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2002 2:14 pm
Location: Dumbarton
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 62 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Jim »

The knowledge of angling displayed here is laughable and full of misconceptions... and I don't really see what it has to do with the access for all subject line? There are plenty of killjoy riparian owners with angling connections at all.

SimonMW
Posts: 2199
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 11:39 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Access for All

Post by SimonMW »

True, but it is generally the likes of the AT who are the most vocal opponents.

BC Waterways Env
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:37 am

Re: Access for All

Post by BC Waterways Env »

We work on a figure of 4% of rivers having an uncontested Right of Navigation. This is based on research the University of Brighton did in the early 2000s, which looked at rivers over a certain width (3m from memory) which could be shared. It only includes rivers (not canals) but this includes managed rivers. There are very few examples of an unmanaged river included in the 2% - the upper Severn and Thames.

Even if (and what a very big if that is) the view held by many landowners/anglers (and others) is held to be correct - then there should be many, many more rivers included as uncontested. The Upper Wye, Western Rother, Hampshire Avon, Upper Trent, Warks Avon being just a few of the examples of the top of my head.

Of course then there's the strong case for a much more wide ranging PRN than this through un-rescinded Common Law rights.

And then, dropping any legal debate at all there's the clear fact that nearly all rivers (as the Brighton research found) can be shared effectively with little to no restriction.

Chris, W&E Officer

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Adrian Cooper »

You need to tread very carefully on the subject of the various Brighton Reports, Chris. When the final report came out it was roundly condemned as biased and potentially manipulated by contributors to this site. If you read beyond the executive summaries (and you need to) you will see two completely different stories.

User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »


User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »


User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »

Adrian, do you have a link to those Brighton Reports online?

User avatar
roo
Posts: 838
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2002 11:11 am
Location: Chester
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Access for All

Post by roo »

I found this - which is interesting but not the right doc I believe. http://eprints.brighton.ac.uk/1692/1/UT-SNR-1755.pdf

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Adrian Cooper »

http://www.riveraccessforall.co.uk/docs/Brighton3.pdf

I think there was also an executive summary but haven't been able to track that down.

User avatar
DaveBland
Posts: 3658
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:01 pm
Location: Calgary Canada
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Access for All

Post by DaveBland »

When the final report came out it was roundly condemned as biased and potentially manipulated by contributors to this site.

Had to read that twice!!
dave

Mal Grey
Posts: 279
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:55 am
Location: Surrey, UK
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Mal Grey »

gp.girl wrote:
Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:21 pm
chriscw wrote:Paddling on natural rivers is not trespass. Crossing land to get to them sometimes is.
Got this one on Sunday. Didn't have the guts to ask him if he confronted all the dog owners who use the 'private beach' at Byfleet on the Wey! Just told him we were getting on anyway and walked off. Access been used for years and unless they act to stop everyone he's just a hypocrite.
Hmm, we got accosted (politely enough) by a chap there a few weeks back. Probably the same bloke. He seemed to think we were putting on there from the little private road to the mill, and that was his main problem, and didn't know how to react when I explained we'd come down the river from the Navigation and portaged over the road, as he didn't think that was physically possible. Chatted for a few minutes amicably enough, and wished each other a good rest of the day.

In the summer, loads of kids mess about on that beach, its immediately off the public footpath. I suspect he's a resident of this little expensive, private, lane who is concerned about it becoming too busy. The grey area here is the 2 feet of ground between upstream water and the right of way, and 10 feet of beach below the weir. To me, we are getting out of the river immediately onto the right of way, and getting back in by the shortest reasonable option.


Oh, and Sarah, if you get the same again, this is what it says as a note on the Riveraccessforall map:
Natural River Section through Byfleet & Brooklands. As such it is sometimes suggested by local anglers that the right of navigation does not extend here, being confined to the adjacent canalised section.

However the Act of Parliament of 1671 is very clear on the subject, declaring that 'the said River of Wey extending from Guildford to the Thames as the same now runneth partly through the old and partly through the new channels ... shall be and is hereby declared to be to all intents and purposes a Navigable River for Navigation and Passage of Boats, Barges, Lighters, Wherries and other vessels and the same shall be so continued a navigable river for ever'

Chris Bolton
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:33 pm
Location: NW England
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 110 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Chris Bolton »

Adrian Cooper wrote:When the final report came out it was roundly condemned as biased and potentially manipulated by contributors to this site.
Adrian, just for clarity, did you mean: "When the final report came out it was roundly condemned, by contributors to this site, as biased and potentially manipulated."?

My recollection of it was that it examined four rivers, on most of which access was uncontested in practice, and concluded that access agreements were a viable way forward. I went to some of the consultations, and what was reported wasn't what I remembered from being there.

gp.girl
Posts: 618
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Crawley Down, West Sussex
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Access for All

Post by gp.girl »

Mal Grey wrote:
Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:53 pm
gp.girl wrote:
Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:21 pm
chriscw wrote:Paddling on natural rivers is not trespass. Crossing land to get to them sometimes is.
Got this one on Sunday. Didn't have the guts to ask him if he confronted all the dog owners who use the 'private beach' at Byfleet on the Wey! Just told him we were getting on anyway and walked off. Access been used for years and unless they act to stop everyone he's just a hypocrite.
Hmm, we got accosted (politely enough) by a chap there a few weeks back. Probably the same bloke. He seemed to think we were putting on there from the little private road to the mill, and that was his main problem, and didn't know how to react when I explained we'd come down the river from the Navigation and portaged over the road, as he didn't think that was physically possible. Chatted for a few minutes amicably enough, and wished each other a good rest of the day.

In the summer, loads of kids mess about on that beach, its immediately off the public footpath. I suspect he's a resident of this little expensive, private, lane who is concerned about it becoming too busy. The grey area here is the 2 feet of ground between upstream water and the right of way, and 10 feet of beach below the weir. To me, we are getting out of the river immediately onto the right of way, and getting back in by the shortest reasonable option.


Oh, and Sarah, if you get the same again, this is what it says as a note on the Riveraccessforall map:
Natural River Section through Byfleet & Brooklands. As such it is sometimes suggested by local anglers that the right of navigation does not extend here, being confined to the adjacent canalised section.

However the Act of Parliament of 1671 is very clear on the subject, declaring that 'the said River of Wey extending from Guildford to the Thames as the same now runneth partly through the old and partly through the new channels ... shall be and is hereby declared to be to all intents and purposes a Navigable River for Navigation and Passage of Boats, Barges, Lighters, Wherries and other vessels and the same shall be so continued a navigable river for ever'

He didn't seem bothered by us using the river just the 'private' beach. There were signs up on one of the other non-footpath trails though the woods saying private no access too. That one was fishermen not residents. A nice lady asked a couple of questions but she was concerned about the 5 cars and trailer in a small area and it was easy to reasure her we were taking all but one car away as soon as possible. He would only have been satisfisied if we all went back to our cars and drove away with our boats so not really worth the effort of talking to him. Still had a lovely paddle although Mike had to apologise for false advertising as you now can't see concorde from the bank where we stopped for lunch :)
I can roll :)

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

Re: Access for All

Post by Adrian Cooper »

Chris Bolton wrote:
Sun Jun 25, 2017 3:26 pm
Adrian Cooper wrote:When the final report came out it was roundly condemned as biased and potentially manipulated by contributors to this site.
Adrian, just for clarity, did you mean: "When the final report came out it was roundly condemned, by contributors to this site, as biased and potentially manipulated."?

My recollection of it was that it examined four rivers, on most of which access was uncontested in practice, and concluded that access agreements were a viable way forward. I went to some of the consultations, and what was reported wasn't what I remembered from being there.
Yes Chris, that is what I meant. Another 'eats shoots and leaves' problem. I try not to do these but they seem to slip through every now and then. ;-)


The details are becoming hazy but I recall one of the issues was that the rivers selected were whittled down to exclude those where they felt that negotiating an agreement might be too difficult and one where the agreement eventually reached was worse than had historically been the norm.

Post Reply

Return to “Whitewater and Touring”