andy_youngs

Interesting perspective Phone. The english anglers are portrayed as the long bow archers at Crecy and Agincourt.... almost as if they were under attack by someone ....

Can I suggest we agree to disagree bluedun. I don't mind Benyon being a land-owning Tory. But as a Minister of the Crown I think he should at least administer his massive estate in a fair and impartial manner.

Good post Barry. Thanks for doing that. Particularly chuffed that David Bailey at the BBC credited my 'no canoeing' photo at Costessey Point to me. The BBC's just gone up in my estimation. For the record, the pic was taken in Nov 2012 on land owned by the Ketteringham family in Costessey, Norfolk. It's posted on their side of the river, but they don't own both banks. They're just trying to impose their intolerant agenda irrespective of the views of adjacent landowners or other taxpaying members of the public. I raised this very matter with Richard Benyon (Minister at DEFRA) a while back but it seems he doesn't want to get involved. I can't say I blame him. The reason, I imagine, is that he's a big landowner on the Kennet, and sections of his estate are apparently off limits to canoeists. Of course what this is really all about is keeping the great unwashed out of his private domain so he can fish his exclusive trout and barbel beats without being offended by the presence of passing canoeists. And the Angling Trust are lobbying him to do it. Hold my subscription for the time being ... I'm not quite ready to sign up to that organisation just yet.

The bluster has been about for many years see : http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/row_ov...tessey_1_483994, but it hasn't solved anything. We're still stuck in an impasse. I'm still requesting legal action to progress the claim, but instead all I've received is threatening 'bluster'. If the Angling Trust want to sue me then they should stop **** around and get on with it.

Barry, you've been a bastion of support over many years, for which I thank you, The River Wensum barbel population is not the result of natural recruitment. It's the result of a series of unsustainable, artificial introductions. I certainly sympathise with your concerns over the bass population. I've enjoyed fishing for bass over many years, and I consider them to be an excellent species, both for sport, and the table.

Yeah, of course it's me. But it's Youngs with an 's' John

I tried posting a link to the bloody thing John, but for some mysterious reason it took you through to a different EA posting. So I decided to post my download on Youtube instead (just to make sure). One of those nice people on a rival canoeing forum seems to have sorted the problem out now though, so here is the bloody link : http://www.apemltd.co.uk/DocStore/FileLibr...port%202009.pdf

Not castrated, castigated. The reason is because the video is criticising barbel fishermen on the Wensum. Phone, the Wensum produced a 21lb 2oz barbel a few years back. That's the biggest barbel that has ever ever been landed in the UK, so it comes with some serious political baggage. Perhaps I'm wrong, but my best guess is that sooner or later I will be ridiculed for posting these views.

I've just posted this link on a canoeing forum, so I guess it's only fair to post it here as well. I'm sure I'm going to get castigated for it ....

Yeah

No, the doctrine of HM should apply, She's our Head of State, so she gets the call. I'll transmit her response across the Atlantic to you. Free of charge ...

Erm, which question was that please?

It's taken from a Churchill quote about the Chinese Govt. Bloody Yanks, never could see where the next misunderstanding 'might happen again'.

I agree that a terminogical inexactitde might conceivably have contributed to an incorrect misunderstanding. Let us hope that this never happens again.

Phone, we are luckier in England, cos we got something older. It's called Magna Carta. It was written in 1215, and Article 16 states that Kydells (whicker fish traps) can only be laid on the bed of a river so as not to impede navigation. And as far as I'm aware, it has never been repealed. Therefore, I guess I get to appeal to HM, and you don't.

It would be foolish to ban shopping just because someone gets caught shoplifting. I'm sorry you had a bad experience with canoeists Rob, but I don't think you should use that as a reason to keep poeple off the water,

No that's fine sportsman, you are entitled to your views. I'm just trying to concentrate on the issues, and not to get drawn into personal acrimony.

This is a link to the second river signage video : I'll keep posting them on Youtube for as long as disgruntled members of the public keep sending them me the pics.

Thanks for posting. You've said it better than I ever could

Too true, I understand this approach works well in Texas.

Erm, my understanding is that virtually the whole world outside of England, Wales and Northern Ireland has a recognised right to paddle their waterways.

No, that would be dangerous. What I am saying is that if you were fortunate enough to own Breydon Water or Lake Windermere, then you would be entitled (and requested) to restrict jet ski access for the safety of the general public. But you would not be entitled to prohibit it completely. Paddling a canoe down a river is not quite so invasive. But I still object to my taxpayers money (and my rod license money) being spent on lining the pockets of a few wealthy landowners, who then promptly turn around and say "sorry, you can no longer canoe through here"

Rob and Barry, thanks for your comments of support. Brian, I've recieved several warnings from the mods to desist with certain threads. But I've never been banned. I'm also not sure whether posting on this forum constitutes membership of a private club. It's an open forum. Sure, I could post my views on canoeing forums, and I do that all the time. But at the end of the day I don't really see any point in pushing my point too hard there, because the people I'm really interested in influencing are anglers, not canoeists. What do you want from a forum : some sort of sanatised reality where everybody agrees with your point of view? The closest I've come to getting banned, is a warning to argue the issues, rather than getting bogged down in personal acrimony. Which I think is fair enough.

Nothing, other that the word itself is kinda hard to swallow in this context. Thanks to Steve for adding immesurably to my ever growing catalague of photo's of unreasonable over-regulation As a nation, we are grossly over-regulated. If you could just confirm where and when each photo was taken, then I will be happy to include them in my next youtube broadcast.

Nope, this is why :