Free Angling Coaching On The River Wensum In Norwich

[lutra]

There is obviously no way of veryfying the EA position that barbel are not native to the Wensum. If anyone had been able to prove such a claim then they would have done so by now, and we would not be having this debate. But to suggest that just because nobody has been able to verify it, therefore it might just have existed at some point in the past is as absurd as claiming that UFO's might just exist because nobody has been able to disprove their existence.

Given the geographical location of the Wensum which makes it odds on for barbel to have had access to it as the ice sheets retreated like other east flowing rivers in the area. Also that its said barbel can be vulnerable and only have small populations in slow flowing lowland rivers.The amount of change to its flow the Wensum has had over the last few hundred years that most likely would have seen the end of barbel. Then no I wouldn't consider that barbel might have lived in the Wensum years ago to be "as absurd as claiming that UFO's might just exist", but i can see why you would like us to.

Edited November 4, 2009 by lutra

[andy_youngs]

Just for the record, Andy, I spent considerable time presenting evidence to a House Of Lords Select Committee on the very subject of access to tidal and non tidal waters. I have scoured the evidence papers and conclusions of various barristers and their learned friends from both Houses. As far as English law is concerned I am right, which, as my wife can confirm, is exceedingly rare.

Well ok Peter, I repect your views and your evident considerable practical experience on this issue.

My problem with the commonly percieved reality of riparian landowner laws is that they're all based on the views of lawyers, rather than lawmakers.

 

One of the most pursasive presentations which I've seen recently was compiled by the Rev'd Douglas Caffyn as part of his Msc thesis on the subject, and which is currently subject to deliberations by the Welsh Assembly. I've posted the link on a previous thread, it is this : http://www.assemblywales.org/202.pdf.

 

Your reaction to this document on the first time of posting was state that Magna Carta is no longer applicable, therefore navigation rights no longer exist. But just maybe, I suspect, you, the Select Committee, and the House of Commons were wrong.

 

I've thrown a gauntlet down to NACA to issue me with a Court Injunction. That was a calculated move. I will obviously step up to the plate and take the medicine if they follow through. But it's my judgement that they probably won't. There are 3 reasons for this :

 

1) NACA don't own the land.

2) Court Action would be prohibitively expensive for them

3) I think if this issue was tested in a Court of Law then NACA would probably lose anyway based on the arguments put forward by myself and Rev'd Caffyn.

 

I'm sorry if I come across as arrogant. I don't mean to be. But if NACA had replied to my first letter with a brief apology and a confirmation that they would not seek to enforce riparian landowner rights during the closed fishing season in future, then that would probably have been good enough for me and the whole issue would have gone away. But they didn't.

 

They have not replied to any of my correspondence to them.

 

In fact, the only feedback I have had from them is when I managed to persuade the BCU to write to them on my behalf. I am not a member of the BCU, and never have been, so there was absolutely no obligation on the BCU to do this. Nevertheless, I think perhaps they felt sympathy with my plight. The reply that they received from NACA quite frankly beggers belief. They accused me of being an environmental vandal and a criminal. According to NACA, I single handedly managed to ruin the barbel spawning prospects on the Wensum for another year. It is one thing when a few over zealous members of the rank and file get a bit a bit carried away. But when the leadership of the organisation backs them up, then I suggest there is a very serious problem.

 

At this point the BCU requested a meeting with the EA, in which I understand that they read the riot act, and then withdrew from local negotiations to pursue a settlement at a national level.

 

On 21 Sept, the EA took pity on my plight and offered to broker a meeting between myself and NACA to search for common ground. I accepted, but nothing further has happened, and I suspect NACA are now trying to riggle out of it.

 

So, where do I go from here? Well, I guess the next port of call is the Angling Trust and Fish Legal.

[Peter Waller]

Re Fish Legal, a least one prominent NACA member is a director of the Angling Trust. I don't think that NACA would fund any legal actions on this one, Fish Legal would. So unless you have the bottomless pit of legal aid behind you then I would back off if I was you!

 

Andy, the Rev Whatsit is in reference to Welsh law so I can't comment with any authority on that one. In reference to Magna Carta it is accepted in both Houses that it is not now sacrosanct.

[andy_youngs]

Most of England is covered by Keep Out signs! Whether we agree with the motivation behind them or not, it's not up to us which to respect and which to ignore, is it?

Erm, yes

 

As an angler I have access to a very limited amount of free fishing. There are lots of clubs or day ticket waters I can join to get access to water via private property, and there are some syndicates that I will never have a hope of joining, however much I want to.

My sympathies with your plight

 

How much do the NACA members pay to fish that bit of the Wensum?

No idea, but I'd be interested to know whether they lease the land on an exclusivity basis. Do they really have the right to kick other people off the river under the terms of their lease?

 

Would you be willing to match it and accept limitations on techniques, movements and times/dates of access, like them?

No, but I don't mind them suggesting certain periods when passage would be stress free.

 

Whether barbel are 'native' to the Wensum is entirely irrelevant.

No it isn't, it's absolutely fundamental to the debate.

Edited November 7, 2009 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

Re Fish Legal, a least one prominent NACA member is a director of the Angling Trust. I don't think that NACA would fund any legal actions on this one, Fish Legal would. So unless you have the bottomless pit of legal aid behind you then I would back off if I was you!

 

Andy, the Rev Whatsit is in reference to Welsh law so I can't comment with any authority on that one. In reference to Magna Carta it is accepted in both Houses that it is not now sacrosanct.

Nah, you'll have to do better than that if you want me to back off. I want a Court Injunction, in my hand. Then I'll undertake not to canoe through NACA controlled stretches of the Wensum.

 

Out of interest, which NACA member is a directer of the Angling Trust? I understand John Wilson might have had past affiliations with NACA and that he is now on the Angling Trust Advisory Committee, but I thought NACA got rid of him?

Edited November 4, 2009 by andy_youngs

[Peter Waller]

I understand that Dave Batten is.

[mark barrett]

I understand that Dave Batten is.

 

There are others too that also consult on an informal basis Peter.

 

Andy,

 

all through your rather tenuous argument you have made NACA as the bad guys here. In fact in your first post you called the club "Environmental vandals" a phrase that I take great umbridge with seeing as if it were not for the NACA a lot of the upper Wensum would be a barren canal, I wonder if you would still want to fish and canoe it if it was still as was? I think you know the answer to that one.

 

At the end of the day there are places all over the country that I would love to go. I would love to shoot pheasents on the Sandringham estate, but I respect the fact that its private property. That doesnt mean that I go out and get a microlight and shoot them from above. Canoes are not welcome on that part of the river, because its too small for navigation and would be disturbing to any waterborne wildlife. END OF.

[Anderoo]

My sympathies with your plight

 

That's OK, I just fish elsewhere rather than poaching private waters! It's not like I don't have plenty of choice.

[andy_youngs]

There are others too that also consult on an informal basis Peter.

 

Andy,

 

all through your rather tenuous argument you have made NACA as the bad guys here. In fact in your first post you called the club "Environmental vandals" a phrase that I take great umbridge with seeing as if it were not for the NACA a lot of the upper Wensum would be a barren canal, I wonder if you would still want to fish and canoe it if it was still as was? I think you know the answer to that one.

I do not agree that any of the arguments I have presented are tenuous. True, I referred to NACA as envirnomental vandals. But please bear in mind that that's how they referred to me, a term that I also take great umbridge with. Agreed, I've made NACA out as the bad guys, because that's what I think they are. Narrow minded, intolerent, and spoiling it for everybody else.

 

At the end of the day there are places all over the country that I would love to go. I would love to shoot pheasents on the Sandringham estate, but I respect the fact that its private property. That doesnt mean that I go out and get a microlight and shoot them from above. Canoes are not welcome on that part of the river, because its too small for navigation and would be disturbing to any waterborne wildlife. END OF.

OK, you think you own the river. You think you have the right to close it down to others, because you want it all to yourself. I understand what you are trying to do. But you're wrong. You do not own the river, and from what I've seen, you do not respect it either.

My only comment is get a Court Injunction mate, I think you're gonna need it ....

Edited November 6, 2009 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

I understand that Dave Batten is.

Never heard of him. I thought the Angling Trust are as listed on post 4 of this link : http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/maginif...l-t2206502.html

Edited November 6, 2009 by andy_youngs