Free Angling Coaching On The River Wensum In Norwich

[andy_youngs]

Andy Young, Magna Carta applies to rivers affected by a diurnal tide, e.g. a tide from the sea. If that is not the case with the upper Wensum then you have no right of navigation.

Fundamentally wrong. That's not what it says. It refers to all rivers and streams in the realm. And the name is Youngs with an 's'.

Edited November 2, 2009 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

I can quite understand now why canoeists are so unpopular if they are all as ill informed and ignorant as Andy.

That comment might be considered valid if I confessed to being a canoeist. But I am not.

I've been a fisherman all my life, but on 4 occasions I have chosen to go canoeing. On the last canoeing trip I encountered such hateful behaviour by a small number of barbel fishermen, that it profoundly altered my perception of both angling and canoeing as a sport.

So, Mark Barrett, I can quite understand why anglers are so unpopular when they are as ignorant as bigoted as you appear to be.

[Peter Waller]

Andy Youngs, sorry and all that, but I am right.

[mark barrett]

Fundamentally wrong. That's not what it says. It refers to all rivers and streams in the realm. And the name is Youngs with an 's'.

 

Sorry Andy, but your the one who comes across as arrogant, firstly because you are quite patently wrong. The Magna carta relates to tidal parts of rivers only, because if your assertion was correct then there would be no principle by which angling clubs could own waters or lease them.

 

Wind your neck in and take your canoe somewhere where it wouldnt be both an annoyance to other people, or where there are navigation rights, such as the Bure, Thurne, Yare etc etc.

[lutra]

That's a load of ****s. Anyone, even Elton, could figure that one out. It's a no brainer. I haven't jumped to this astounding conclusion, it's a fact that anyone with half a brain can establish. I've put loads of evidence forward.

Firstly, I've put forward Magna Carta. The most profound constitutional document in the history of our country.

Secondly, I've put forward evidence from the Environment Agency that barbel are considered by them to be non native to the Wensum ... for anyone who doubts me, I've got it in writing from them and will publish if necessary.

Thirdly, I've put forward evidence from two eminent fisheries experts, Messrs Jordan and Wheeler that this whole idea of barbel in the Wensum is extremely tenuous.

Finally, I submit the defence of basic common sense.

I think you guys are all in denial.

 

 

Im sorry Andy but i still stand by my post.

 

“You seem to have jumped to the conclusion that barbel have been introduced into an alien environment. Why? There is no evidence in what you have put forward to back that up, only that their population may have been small and vulnerable.”

 

To make it worse, having read what you put forward from Messrs Jordan and Wheeler again. I’ve just realised its not even referring to the Wemsum, its just a generalisation of “small lowland rivers” and is just a “load of ****s” really.

 

Maybe it would be a good idea if you could show us some of this evidence from the “Magna Carta” about lack of barbel in the Wensum 150 years ago. Wasn't it written a few hundred years to early for that?

 

If your going to put forward some evidence from a modern day source like the “Environment Agency”, can we have an idea of how they sourced it and also see things in full not just snips that can be taken out of context. That way we can study the facts and maybe come to some “basic common sense” about what the real facts are.

Edited November 3, 2009 by lutra

[Anderoo]

No, I think I choose to paddle there. And in order for there to be a test, there first needs to be a prosecution .... good luck ....

 

Fair enough, but going through stretches of a small, intimate river that you know is inhabited with grumpy barbel anglers does sound like an invitation for stonze to be thrown

 

As an angler I am quite surprised that you can't see the other side of this. It does sound as though the anglers you came across could have handled the situation better though.

 

Actually, if that encounter you had with those anglers had gone differently - if they were polite, friendly and courteous and explained their point to you and asked that you avoid certain bits of river in your canoe - would you be as angry and determined and you are now? Or would you have seen their point and paddled elsewhere? I might be wrong, but revenge seems to be the main motivation...

[Elton]

Anyone, even Elton, could figure that one out.

 

What did I do to merit that comment?

[Waveney One]

What did I do to merit that comment?

 

It's because you come from Suffolk mate

[Elton]

It's because you come from Suffolk mate

 

But I don't. I now live in Suffolk

[John Weddup]

Hi Elton

 

I did not understand the comment either.

 

For a person so accurate with his statements I don,t know where he got that from.

 

Anyway Andy YoungS has gone quiet till the twilight hours so perhaps someone should poke him with a sharp stick to wake him up again with a fresh torrent of pro canoe access c**p.

 

I am yet to see a good post about angling from mr YoungS.

 

I could go on about similar problems on the Suffolk Stour where Canoe antagonists continually want to go further than the allowed rights are.

 

They have most of the river with navigational rights but still insist on going to the very shallow upper sections when they want. that is until I am there.

 

Perhaps I should try the wensum for some fun filled moments.

 

regrads

 

John