Responses required

Inland paddling
Post Reply
User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:04 pm

Again I was encouraged that the chairman clearly had read the documents and was aware of the issues within the evidence.
He did seem to be subtley hinting at a few points for Ash to point out documents

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:07 pm

Do we know the next steps? and when we can expect a decision from WAG??
They said something at the end about deferring a chat with the Minister till a later date and having a round table chat with other interest groups.

Also I wonder if dear old FG was watching.

The EA representative saying publically and on the record that there is no evidence that paddlers disturb fish...

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Thu Sep 24, 2009 3:55 pm

http://www.assemblywales.org/newhome/ne ... &ds=5/2009

_____________________________________________________________________________________


Access to inland water in Wales is a right of equity and social justice

The current situation regarding rights to inland water in Wales is confusing, untenable and unworkable; there should be the same right of public access as there is in Scotland, according to the National Assembly for Wales’s Petitions Committee.

“The rivers of Wales are a natural ‘gift’ that everyone should have the right to enjoy,” said Committee Chair, Val Lloyd AM.

“Access should not be based on the vagaries of permissions bestowed or ability to pay, but on the fundaments of equity and social justice.

“We believe there should be the right of non-motorised access to inland water in Wales as there is in Scotland.”

Val Lloyd made these comments as the Petitions Committee launched its report into a petition received from the Welsh Canoeing Association.

Welsh canoeists are calling for public access rights along inland water to be clarified and for there to be a statutory right of access in line with what has already happened in Scotland.

After a short inquiry, the Committee has formed the view that the Land Reform (Scotland) Act has clarified the situation in Scotland.

“We believe that the clear balance of rights in Scotland has inherently moved the access debate forward onto a more productive footing,” the Committee Chair added.

“Different parties in Scotland have been able to leave behind cul-de-sac positions concerning who has which legal rights on their side.

“We therefore suggest it provides a useful basis from which a unique Welsh model may be developed.”

The main recommendations of the Petition Committee’s report are:

* that a further more wide ranging inquiry be carried out by one of the National Assembly’s Scrutiny Committees with a view to bringing forward legislation in this area, to which all stakeholders would have the opportunity to submit evidence.
* that a full scrutiny inquiry should also consider introducing a mandatory code to accompany the legislation in order that a new right of access along inland water in Wales can be managed and regulated, including some attempt to develop an identification system for regular water users.

The Petitions Committee will now be writing to the Chairs of both the Sustainability Committee and the Communities and Culture Committee to ask whether one of them wishes to take forward the suggestion of a full scrutiny inquiry.

Full report - Petitions Committee’s short inquiry into Access along Inland Water

User avatar
andya
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: Mendip
Contact:

Next steps ...

Post by andya » Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:43 pm

andya wrote:Do we know the next steps? and when we can expect a decision from WAG??
quicky wrote:They said something at the end about deferring a chat with the Minister till a later date and having a round table chat with other interest groups.
Yep just listened to that .. "papers to note".
Chair of the committee wrote:Our scrunity of the Minister on this issue of access will now take place in the next session ...
Because included now instead will be two round table discussions, that will be open to a wider body to come here and discuss with us the whole issues. Because I am aware of the organisations, but I do think we have to take evidence from a boarder group of people as well.

I wonder if its selected people invited from those who commented, or if anyone can rock up ...?
quicky wrote:Also I wonder if dear old FG was watching.
Funny enough I was thinking of him too ...

User avatar
ChrisS
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: Warwickshire

Re: Responses required

Post by ChrisS » Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:53 pm

The Sustainability Committee's timetable

They are seeing the CCW and Federation of Welsh Anglers on 8 October.

User avatar
andya
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: Mendip
Contact:

The Sustainability Committee's timetable

Post by andya » Thu Sep 24, 2009 6:55 pm

ChrisS wrote:The Sustainability Committee's timetable
They are seeing the CCW and Federation of Welsh Anglers on 8 October.
Good spot Chris,

Then the Minister on 15th Oct
CLA & Farmers on 5th Nov
Then they discuss Inland water on 12th Nov and 3rd Dec

Then recess until mid Jan. Hope they decide on it before then!


User avatar
MikeB
Posts: 8048
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:44 pm
Location: Scotland
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Responses required

Post by MikeB » Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:13 pm

No change I see!

User avatar
Rhod
Posts: 449
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 8:35 pm
Location: Blandford Forum

Re: Responses required

Post by Rhod » Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:34 pm

Ash really did represent our case very well, an excellent communicator who's answers were well considered, through and honest. Does he have a background in politics? Far better answers than many I hear from politicians on radio 4.

Did Angela D.....(?) realise that the rivers were not built by fishermen? and that their fees were for re-stocking?
Rhodri Anderson

User avatar
Jim Pullen
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 11:21 am
Location: Darlington
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Responses required

Post by Jim Pullen » Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:25 pm

Watched/listened through most of it now and I must say Ash did an excellent job of representing our case!

I think whether or not we get primary legislation on this something will come about in terms of a good kick from above to get a more level playing field when sorting out any future agreements. Good job all round!

I'll be very interested in seeing how the committee handle their questions for the fishing/landowners lobby.
Done any NE/NW rivers not on the site? PM me!

mcneilljamie
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: Nuneaton, Warwickshire

Re: Responses required

Post by mcneilljamie » Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:41 am

If any of you are missing Tony (aka fishbye)... hes still here:
http://cpwf.co.uk/home/?page_id=382/the ... ge-3/#p473

I gave up on that forum. It didn't seem to matter how well presented or structured your comments were what you received back from some of the users was of little use. I truly hope that the petitions committee view that site and see that as an excellent example of why access agreements dont work. Anglers want us to sit in the palms of their hands and we are no longer willing to do it.

If you all fancy a giggle then have a read through it.

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:03 am

He did seem a little less irate than he did not here but does seem to have others that do not seem to listen to what you were saying Jamie.

User avatar
andya
Posts: 573
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:24 pm
Location: Mendip
Contact:

Some Canoests allready think that they have won!

Post by andya » Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:04 am

andya wrote:Been scanning the angling forums for any feedback from them on this. Only found this:
http://www.flyforums.co.uk/showthread.p ... 58&page=24
In a bizarre twist there is now a link in the flyforum thread above, back to this thread ... so returning the favor ...
wnion wrote:Some Canoests here allready think that they have won!
<Waves hello to wnion>

User avatar
shanclan
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Monmouth
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Responses required

Post by shanclan » Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:11 am

...and yet there is no mention of this inquiry on the Rivers Access site or the BCU site as far as I can see. Another cunning plan?

http://www.riversaccess.org/pages/pv.asp?p=rac2&fsize=0

http://www.bcu.org.uk/

User avatar
morsey
Posts: 6275
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:36 pm
Location: West Country :-)
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Responses required

Post by morsey » Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:32 am

The Canoe Wales submission to the Sustainability Committee to establish public rights to inland waters in
Wales is fully supported by Canoe England.

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Fri Sep 25, 2009 11:40 am

Will be interesting to see if they give the fishing representatives they same hard time they gave to Ash.

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9688
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Responses required

Post by Adrian Cooper » Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:01 pm

shanclan wrote:...and yet there is no mention of this inquiry on the Rivers Access site or the BCU site as far as I can see. Another cunning plan?

http://www.riversaccess.org/pages/pv.asp?p=rac2&fsize=0

http://www.bcu.org.uk/
Way back when access on the Dee was the hot topic, I was advised by the BCU that 'this was a matter for the WCA'. Hopefully they will have revised their stance with the rivers access campaign.

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:38 pm

The just mean they cannot do anything in Wales as they are not the welsh governing body.

(and I am not sticking up for anyone here).

User avatar
Grumpy old man
Posts: 1165
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:44 am
Location: By the kitchen sink

Re: Responses required

Post by Grumpy old man » Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:44 pm

quicky wrote:The just mean they cannot do anything in Wales as they are not the welsh governing body.

(and I am not sticking up for anyone here).
Hi
No but they could have advised it's members what was going on or even about the "responses required" as it has a massive impact to it's recreational members. Oh.. but I forgot was it not the same when the WCA/CW changed their access policy CE forgot to mention it.

Lloyd
PS- Keep your members in the dark and feed them on S...lalom
Paddle well, Have fun.

Lloyd Allin

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:07 pm

Well who knows what goes on in the Ivory towers.

Personally I get out and paddle :)

User avatar
Grumpy old man
Posts: 1165
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:44 am
Location: By the kitchen sink

Re: Responses required

Post by Grumpy old man » Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:13 pm

quicky wrote:Well who knows what goes on in the Ivory towers.

Personally I get out and paddle :)
I do occasionally, I've got kids:-(
Paddle well, Have fun.

Lloyd Allin

User avatar
morsey
Posts: 6275
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 12:36 pm
Location: West Country :-)
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Responses required

Post by morsey » Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:32 pm


User avatar
shanclan
Posts: 1026
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:57 pm
Location: Monmouth
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Responses required

Post by shanclan » Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:34 pm

Hadn't spotted that one. Thanks.

User avatar
Adrian Cooper
Posts: 9688
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 2:26 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Responses required

Post by Adrian Cooper » Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:34 pm

quicky wrote:Personally I get out and paddle
The argument closer

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:47 pm

I do occasionally, I've got kids:-(
me too and he always wants to come along. Trying to explain to an 8 year old that daddy wants to go and play on the white stuff is tricky sometimes. Just have to tire him out first on the places he wants to go :)

User avatar
Mark R
Posts: 24129
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 6:17 pm
Location: Dorset
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 10 times
Contact:

Re: Responses required

Post by Mark R » Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:16 pm

I tuned into the process at 11 last night, expecting to reach my boredom threshold within 8 minutes.

To my surprise, I was gripped all the way through, watching all 2+ hours of it into the night.

Well done Richard and Ash - you've done an extremely creditable job on behalf of all of us and frankly, I have never imagined it likely that this is a process that would actually happen, let alone one I'd be witnessing unfold from my sofa.

If only the BCU could give even the merest hint that the issue engages and motivates them as much as Ash did - yes, I'm sure that they think of nothing else all day long, but they hide it well.
Mark Rainsley
FACEBOOK

mcneilljamie
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 12:10 pm
Location: Nuneaton, Warwickshire

Re: Responses required

Post by mcneilljamie » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:34 pm

Does anyone know when the Angling groups voice their concerns?

User avatar
quicky
Posts: 2986
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: Wirral,

Re: Responses required

Post by quicky » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:39 pm

See Andya above:

Then the Minister on 15th Oct
CLA & Farmers on 5th Nov
Then they discuss Inland water on 12th Nov and 3rd Dec

Then recess until mid Jan.

User avatar
Kayak-Bloke
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:56 pm
Location: (Ever Wet) South Wales

Re: Responses required

Post by Kayak-Bloke » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:48 am

I followed one of those links to a fishing forum and read the debate.

Is it correct that SAFFA has been succesfully used against canoeists refusing to leave a river?

Does anyone have any details on this case?
I appreciate that the answer probably lies in the SAFFA lose your will to live thread but I'm not looking through 35 pages!


Back to the fishing forum comments: Particularly liked the comment about how crazy it would be to even entertain: "changing the law to suit a minority."
The chap that wrote that should have a little look outside his window. I can see 30 examples of that having previosuly happened, without leaving my office and dam right too.
Imagine a world where the majority in "whatever" were the only voice. :-{

User avatar
mole
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sunny Yorkshire, Its not actually that sunny

Re: Responses required

Post by mole » Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:58 am

It was successfully used against a group of canoists on the Seont in the late 80s but... It appears the prosecution was carried out using an EA bailiffs testimony (not just some fisherbloke). The EA official had asked the guys to leave the water and they refused. They were wading not floating.

Caveat: All the above is internet hearsay from the other post and may not be true or partially true.

What is important is the EAW statements on the WA access submission to the sustainability committee which states there is no detrimental effect to fish spawning or otherwise as long as the water level is sufficient, esp the bits about how the big T fish stocks are going up and no negative environmental impacts arising from the increased use of the lower section.

So paddle with consideration and no silly scraping over gravels and all "should" be well.

Neill

I'm gonna get that EAW paper laminated and put in my boating kit, bound to come in useful ;)
Sometimes it's just too much effor......aughhh

Post Reply