Martin Salter and Mark Lloyd fail to deliver again

[Phone]

Andy,

 

Canoe guys are in your corner all right. Unfortunately (in their eyes), they must conform.

 

I'll stop posting to this thread with a true story. Happened in 2006 - maybe 07.

 

We have a huge carp tournament the Sunday before Mother's Day every year. (Big for the US anyway. this particular year "big fish" paid $250,000.00) We had 25pegs or so of two man teams. It is held in the City of Austin TX and is called the Austin Team Championship. The City and State of TX go OUT of THEIR WAY to accomodate us. You can look it up on the Texas Carp sites but trust me it is a big deal.

 

Anyway, The University of Texas is also in Austin TX. They have unfettered use of the lake because they ARE the University of TX in TX. Without consideration for any kind of "other use" they scheduled a Big 12 rowing competition. (the Big 12 consists of 12 major Universities in a joint conference). Transportation and lodging for 50+ students ea. and their long skinny boats alone from Colorado, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, etc., etc., etc., was easily $75,000 per school and probably more.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it is to net one of those "unpowered" crafts with 12 oarsmen if you have a 13 ft 2.5 TC carp rod with 50 lb Powerpro? Have any idea the damage they can do to one another when they crash into the next lane - and the next and the next? Got any idea how dangerous it is for those kids to get dumped into the water without lifejackets? Them damn boats are thousands and thousands of dollar apiece. I didn't know that!!??

 

The story has an end.

 

Mind you, on a regular Sunday this lake (because it is in downtown Austin TX) has a problem with pleasure canoes (mostly rentals). For exactly the reason you say, they, canoe users, don't feel obligated to stay out of your lines no matter how long you've been in the swim. And that's even the second or third time they come by after being ask nicely. The lake is plenty wide for them to use the "unfished" portion in the middle but the middle is a bit intimidating for the weekend canoe folks. Besides they have "rights" they would like to exersize for an hour. That's how long they rented the boat for.

 

They remind me of bicyclers on the motorways.

 

Phone

(but you are doing better in staying with what it is you want to say - - - - and say - - - - - - and

[andy_youngs]

I too can cite instances of my meetings with canoeists while fishing Andy. On the Yorkshire Ouse, the Ure, parts of the Wharfe, Trent, Witham etc, no problem. But on the rivers Whiske, Rye, Dove, Yorkshire Severn, (all of which are between 15 and 20 ft wide, and 2 to 4ft deep, much of the time), it has been a disaster. If you are fishing, and suddenly you see a bow wave heading downstream, and hundreds of fish scatter downstream passed you, driven by a couple of canoeists, that's your day ruined. They can carry on enjoying their day, but ruin it for every angler they pass. Hardly an equal sharing of the river is it?

John, it might put the fish down for half an hour or so, but I simply don't believe that it ruins your whole day. I can see that it is more disruptive for static bait anglers than it is for fly fishermen. But that's just a reason for greater dialogue and understanding.

 

Presumably, you have no problem with canoeists using these rivers during the closed fishing season? If so, instances of conflict are only likely to arise between June 16 and Sept 30. Canoeists generally only want to use the river in the summer, it's only anglers that are crazy enough to want to sit on a freezing river bank in the depths of winter. I really can't believe that as intelligent adults, it's beyond the wit of mankind for the AT to sit down with Canoe England and hammer out an arrangement whereby canoe access is restricted during the summer to certain days of the week. But that would take compromise from both sides, and the AT's current stance that 'there is no right of canoe access to these rivers' is hardly a constructive starting point.

 

I think the real culprits in this are politicians like Salter who have let us all down, canoeists and anglers alike, in the pursuit of shameless popularism because of the misguided notion that there more votes in angling than there are in canoeing.

 

What do you think was wrong about Leons post? We pay a license fee to legally use a fishing rod (2 actually), that's a fact. It doesn't entitle you to fish anywhere you please, also a fact. There has to be some negotiation, (and usually a payment on top of the license fee), with those who own the land and/ or fishing rights, that's also a fact. Without an agreement and/or payment we leave ourselves open to prosecution, for trespass and/or poaching.

I think there is a big difference between angling from a riverbank on someones private estate, and paddling down a river. The landowner doesn't own the water, but he does own the land either side of it. If I was fortunate enough to have a river flowing through my back garden, then I would be a bit miffed if got home from work one evening to find someone sitting on the riverbank wetting a line without permission. But if someone wished to paddle the river then it simply wouldn't bother me. I like to think that I would adopt the philosophical attitude that it's nice to see the river being enjoyed by others. I certainly wouldn't want canoeists phoning me up every 5 minutes asking permission to paddle through my property. I dare say that 99 times out of 100, I wouldn't even know that they were there.

 

I did ask you if you thought the BCU, (and I'll add canoeists in general), would agree to the same restrictions and payments. You didn't say what you thought.

I don't think canoeists would accept payments on a landowner-by-landowner basis because it's totally impractical. They would probably accept payments to a Govt agency, and if they weren't given any choice then they'd have to. Anglers don't pay for a rod license because they want to, they do it because they don't have any choice. It's a matter for Govt. Unfortunately, as I have pointed out above, the Govt have conspicuously failed in this regard due to the extensively documented New Labour adherance to shameless popularism.

Edited January 5, 2012 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

on a regular Sunday this lake (because it is in downtown Austin TX) has a problem with pleasure canoes (mostly rentals). For exactly the reason you say, they, canoe users, don't feel obligated to stay out of your lines no matter how long you've been in the swim. And that's even the second or third time they come by after being ask nicely. The lake is plenty wide for them to use the "unfished" portion in the middle but the middle is a bit intimidating for the weekend canoe folks. Besides they have "rights" they would like to exersize for an hour. That's how long they rented the boat for.

 

They remind me of bicyclers on the motorways.

Blimy Phone, you ought to try fishing the Congo. It's big (even by American standards), over 3 miles wide, and the prevailing winds blow up the river at certain times of year. The local traders take advantage of this natural phenomenon by running sail boats upstream. They tend to stick to the edges of the river because that's where the wind is strongest. Problem being, that if you're fishing from the bank then you run the risk of catching something even bigger and nastier than a goliath tigerfish. Out there, they don't mess around with shouting abuse at you. You run a very real risk of being shot by the locals. Not wishing to sound racist, it's just a fact of life.

 

The other risk of course, is falling in the river ... the tigerfish have a predaliction for slicing your genitals off.

 

but you are doing better in staying with what it is you want to say - - - - and say - - - - - - and

Yes my friend, and I shall continue to say it, and say it ....

Edited January 5, 2012 by andy_youngs

[Bob Shotter]

All excellent stuff and a good few points but are we forgetting this is all to do with a supposed public debate with Martin Salter and as yet I’m still at a disadvantage to see what might be gained from that.

[seafoods]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivers_Access_Campaign

 

 

http://brighton.academia.edu/PaulGilchrist...ways_in_England

Edited January 5, 2012 by seafoods

[andy_youngs]

All excellent stuff and a good few points but are we forgetting this is all to do with a supposed public debate with Martin Salter and as yet I’m still at a disadvantage to see what might be gained from that.

I think what might be gained from it is a fairer use of our rivers for everyone. I'm just at the disadvantage of not knowing where he is.

Edited January 5, 2012 by andy_youngs

[barry luxton]

Taken from seafoods link.

 

^ The Common Law and the Right of Navigation. Rev’d Douglas Caffyn. Presented to the Sustainability Committee, National Assembly for Wales. "Summary. 1. There was a public right of navigation on all rivers prior to 1750. 2. This right still exists..."

[Dick Dastardly]

Didn't want to waste space quoting it all but I think your post #122 is very good.You've put over your points really well. I agree in principle with all you say but sadly dont think it will ever come about in reality. I'm not really a paddler as such but to be fair must say I have come across far more "rude"/inconsiderate to canoeist anglers than I have rude/inconsiderate to angler canoeists!

 

Trouble is I think the canoeists in most (but not all) cases actually disturb the angler more than the fish!

 

I do bulk a bit when canoeists come across as though they think they have a "right" of acsess (as indeed I do with walkers or similar)

[Dick Dastardly]

All excellent stuff and a good few points but are we forgetting this is all to do with a supposed public debate with Martin Salter and as yet I’m still at a disadvantage to see what might be gained from that.

 

Yes I agree there Bob. Several reasons why I to fail to see what can be gained,the AT has never listened to US (the people it claims to represent members or not) before so why do we think they would now? and also I think that "pandering" to them by even discussing/attempting to discuss with them just adds a strange kind of credance to them!

 

I as one who doesnt accept that they represent me see no reason why I should discuss anything with them full stop! First they need to convince me they do represent me and are interested in my veiws/wishes rather than just trying to apear to to apease me/get my support/dosh!

[Phone]

Andy,

 

For sure BUDGIE makes a good point. Them funny little injun boats don't bother the fish.

 

Phone