Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Martin Salter and Mark Lloyd fail to deliver again


  • Please log in to reply
176 replies to this topic

#171 andy_youngs

andy_youngs

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norfolk / Suffolk Boarder
  • Interests:Fishing

Posted 10 January 2012 - 09:45 PM

It was a private meeting so no they wonít automatically appear, it's just like the CEFAS minutes but they donít seem to have surfaced this time any suggestions why that might be Mr Luxton? Oh and for your information RSA-UK would have quit this steering group in any event there is no way I would be allowed to still sit on a group that is selling Sea Angling out.

Once again you drag this of thread off topic Barry if you feel you have a point then why not start a new thread. Sorry guys.
:wallbash:

I'm not so sure that Barry's dragging this thread off topic. I'm also not so sure that I fully understand the dynamics of the differences between you and Barry, so please correct me if I'm wrong Bob.

It seems to me that Barry would rather the RSA tell the AT to go and get stuffed, whereas you would rather affiliate the two organsations.

If that's the case then I'm with Barry. As one recreational sea angler to another, please tell the AT to stick it where the sun don't shine. I can assure you, you will get far more out of it in the long run if the RSA aligns itself with Canoe England. The management of the AT at the moment is fundamentally flawed because it is run by a small clique of puddle bashers that doesn't give a sh$t about the environment or the recreational interests of their fellow human beings.

Edited by andy_youngs, 10 January 2012 - 10:09 PM.

never try and teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and it annoys the pig

#172 gozzer

gozzer

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,217 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Leeds

Posted 11 January 2012 - 11:13 AM

I object to your objection to a freedom to roam. In case you hadn't noticed, canoeists are already doing it (albeit that they're not taking their kids out with yet for fear of verbal assault). My stance hasn't changes one jot over the course of this thread. It's not canoeists that are unwilling to bring a test case, it's anglers and landowners that are the reluctant parties. I think you would find that canoeists would welcome a test case. It would certainly be a hell of a lot cheaper than negotiating access agreements across the length and breadth of the land.



I'm sorry Andy, but this quote of yours from post 51, hardly fits in with your "no negotiations", and "the freedom to roam" demands.

I would expect the leadership of both organisations to reach a reasonable accommodation, ie, if there are specific locations where canoe access is contested, then both sides should negotiate, and reach a negotiated solution. That doesn't necessarily mean that the canoeists automatically get 12 month a year access. If there are sound environmental reasons why certain stretches of river should be left alone at certain times of year then ok. As long as it's fair.


I did have some sympathy for your predicament Andy, but now less. It seems to me that you are like many other boaters/canoeists I've spoken to, in wanting everything, and not prepared to give anything in return.
You and I will have to agree to disagree on this, because I can't see either changing the others position.
I'll wish you good luck on getting increased access to some waters, but not on complete freedom to roam.

John.
Angling is more than just catching fish, if it wasn't it would just be called 'catching'......... John

#173 Bob Shotter

Bob Shotter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cornwall
  • Interests:RSA

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:24 PM

I'm not so sure that Barry's dragging this thread off topic. I'm also not so sure that I fully understand the dynamics of the differences between you and Barry, so please correct me if I'm wrong Bob.

It seems to me that Barry would rather the RSA tell the AT to go and get stuffed, whereas you would rather affiliate the two organsations.

If that's the case then I'm with Barry. As one recreational sea angler to another, please tell the AT to stick it where the sun don't shine. I can assure you, you will get far more out of it in the long run if the RSA aligns itself with Canoe England. The management of the AT at the moment is fundamentally flawed because it is run by a small clique of puddle bashers that doesn't give a sh$t about the environment or the recreational interests of their fellow human beings.


I wouldnít for one moment disagree with your view of the Angling Trust indeed I would go much further but that would simply be put down as a crazy conspiracy theory by some and sour grapes by others.

What I have been at odds to say is in all forms of government be it parliament right down to a parish council the political divide will be crossed with things like all party committees, without them government would no longer work anymore than it would it remain a democracy.

So in short we at RSA-UK will and indeed do sit at the same table and the way forward is to keep the pressure on the Angling Trust, if and only if they were to shift away from what we know to be a group with ideas about angling representation that are to make money rather than do what they should be doing then I might well look at some form of alliance, it should however be remembered Iím just one voice and just one vote so one should never say never Andy.

As for the difference between Barry and I that I believe is down to how we go about what we do and how we do it, Barry prefers diplomacy where as Iím far more outspoken as a result Barry has resigned from the org.
Publication2_zpsthmtka6c.jpg

#174 andy_youngs

andy_youngs

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norfolk / Suffolk Boarder
  • Interests:Fishing

Posted 11 January 2012 - 09:06 PM

Bob / John, I suspect this thread is probably nearing the end game now. Unless someone else revives it, then I'll be happy for it to slip to the bottom.

John, I agree that we will probably just have to agree to disagree. As a parting shot, I would just leave the thought that if the default legal position was to shift in anglers perception towards a right to roam, then you may well find that the canoeists would be quite amenable to identifying certain stretches of river where the quality of the angling was such that they would agree to restricted access at certain times of the year, and a hell of lot of agro would be avoided. From the canoeists point of view, the biggest problem at the moment, is that they can never be sure when and where militant anglers are going to show up on the riverbank shouting abuse.

In any event, thanks for the discussion guys, it's been interesting and informative.

Thanks also to the mods for allowing the thread to run without blocking it or banning anyone.

Edited by andy_youngs, 12 January 2012 - 10:34 PM.

never try and teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and it annoys the pig

#175 Bob Shotter

Bob Shotter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cornwall
  • Interests:RSA

Posted 12 January 2012 - 04:57 PM

It has indeed been a good debate Andy and I wish you luck in getting a public debate with Martin Salter, you could also test the water now by having a vote on whether the posters on AN support your idea for canoeist to have the right to roam. There has after all been a lot of interest in this thread.
Publication2_zpsthmtka6c.jpg

#176 andy_youngs

andy_youngs

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norfolk / Suffolk Boarder
  • Interests:Fishing

Posted 12 January 2012 - 10:22 PM

A public vote is an interestering idea Bob. I think what we've got to bear in mind is that as a result of the legislative framework, a large number of freshwater anglers are convinced that canoeists have no right to access our inland rivers (many thanks to Salter and Lloyd for that constructive state of affairs).

But there is a greater proportion of the freshwater angling community that are fairly ambivilant. There are many that would simply prefer to reach an accommodation with canoeists.

Then of course, we've got the Recreational Sea Anglers. It seems that there's no love lost between them and the Angling Trust at the moment.

On top of all that, we need to bear to bear in mind that the total number of anglers in the country is probably not that different to the total number of canoeists.

As I told Salter, I'm happy to have a fair public debate.

Edited by andy_youngs, 12 January 2012 - 10:45 PM.

never try and teach a pig to sing .... it wastes your time and it annoys the pig

#177 Leon Roskilly

Leon Roskilly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,436 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rainham, Kent
  • Interests:Fishing (Coarse, Sea & Game), Conservation & Cycling

Posted 20 January 2012 - 11:56 AM

Interesting that in a document produced by the EA, explaining to anglers where their rod-licence money is spent is this

8 Working with other recreational users

We work closely with all recreational users to ensure shared outcomes that manage the different uses to allow them to take place without impacting on each other or the environment.

An example of these shared outcomes is the new fish and canoe passes on the River Medway.

These have been installed to allow fish passage, addressing WFD issues, and have helped with the development of a canoe trail along the Medway by creating easy passage for canoes.

Figure 8. River Medway fish and canoe pass


http://www.environme...ort_-_final.pdf

RNLI Shoreline Member

Member of the Angling Trust