Lets put it in a box and leave it behind

[chesters1]

Final word from me- I practised law for almost 40 years and have fished for 50 plus. I have also read the literature of our sport - and have done so since I was a kid in the 60s. You may not like what I say but please do not accuse me of ignorance. Good luck with your crusading - you might get some more suppport if you tried to make at least a bit of sense....

 

i was replying to our other canoe hater not you.

having read the "literature of our sport" (sport not hobby?) then you will know full well the hazyness of the "trespass" laws ,where you yourself admit its not a criminal offence to canoe on a river all anyone can do is escort you off land.

 

also having read the "literature of our sport" you must also have seen the deliberate destruction of the waterways (that nasty financial thing i mentioned) and the "challenging " of the laws back then that forced the waterways people to about turn and buck their ideas up.giving us the angler as well as the boaters waters that by now would probably be housing estates

 

you would have also read the "literature of our sport" the same thing occurring with rivers

 

and ofcourse having read the "literature of our sport" you will notice it was the weight of angling pressure that stopped rivers coming under the right to roam legislation which no doubt annoyed a great deal.

 

i can see why they get annoyed as an angler and i can see why they get annoyed as just an onlooker wondering why some anglers are so greedy they want what is everyones for just themselves

 

 

 

you will also know laws are not set in stone and those that practice it make a great deal of money manipulating it for their clients benefits ,a law can be changed sometimes it has to be broken to do it

 

and a final note concerning this hysterical notion canoeists spend all their time having picnics and crapping on peoples frontages i can assure you you will find a hundred more times anglers rubbish and **** than canoeists and where canoeists fear to go it will be 100% anglers rubbish and ****

Edited April 11, 2012 by chesters1

[Phone]

Chesters1,

 

I am a champion of nonsense. Yours and mine is some of the best. Let me suggest, just a suggestion mind you, you talk more about privilege and responsibility and less about "rights". At some point, and, it was within our lifetime, canoes and anglers shared the river. Who's ox was gored will always be a matter of opinion. A look at the history doesn't even indicate anglers "STARTED" the current rules but only supported others. Perhaps today's canoes are paying the price for yesterday's transgressions. I don't know? It's pretty clear canoes cannot use the rivers in England unfettered - they don't have the privilege perhaps because they were irresponsible? I can't believe "the anglers" were responsible for such severe punishments as banishment. You believe that it's the fault of anglers??

 

Phone

[Phone]

All,

 

"Let's put a box on it" 'ell, I've see guys go to war in fewer than 10 pages.

 

Phone

[chesters1]

its a nice big box

having fun here and in tandem asking the EA to explain the difference in navigable and unnavigable the latter being a very uncommon term according to them despite only 2% of rivers being navigable

great fun who's next

 

will we see a scottish type land reform act in england?,if enough noise is made with a bit of "challenging" i'm sure it will ,an i hope i can see it sooner than later

Edited April 11, 2012 by chesters1

[Guest redfin2]

There has been at least one official stocking since then, it was probably late 90s or early 00s, a total of about 1500 fingerlings were stocked in the lower Avon in three phases, mostly at Winkton/Sopley.

 

These facts and figures are all from my crap memory and are subject to error but the basics are correct.

 

Someone at C.A.C. will have the exact details if anyone wants to follow it up for accuracy.

 

English Nature has since blocked any further stocking on the grounds that Barbel are not an indigenous species in the H.Avon.

 

Thanks for that, I got my information from the Barbel Society website, so English Nature has blocked any more stockings on the basis Barbel are not indigenous? Crazy, if any River deserved a good head of Barbel it is the HA, and to deny some folk their quarry is sheer bloody mindedness.

[Ken L]

A few rake heads were purchased from the tat shop and strategically placed under water in areas where the quads ran up river. Strangely enough after a few weeks they stopped coming down to the Dearne and nature is reclaiming the track.

 

I mentioned a similar tactic a couple of years ago when Andy Y or someone similar began a crusade to get anglers to accept canoes. All of a sudden those canoeists who advocated breaking navigation laws and committing trespass were aghast that someone might spike the rapids and ruin a few play boats.

 

Sorry Nicepix but that's right up there with the idiots who advocate casting leads at jet skis.

What happens when someone gets injured or killed as a result of this sort of idiotic behaviour ?

What you are describing (I wont go quite so far as to say "suggesting" or "advocating") may be passive rather than active like casting a lead but it could still see an innocent (although annoying) person injured or killed and it could still see whoever placed the spikes spending a very, very long time in prison.

[andy_youngs]

There has been at least one official stocking since then, it was probably late 90s or early 00s, a total of about 1500 fingerlings were stocked in the lower Avon in three phases, mostly at Winkton/Sopley.

 

These facts and figures are all from my crap memory and are subject to error but the basics are correct.

 

Someone at C.A.C. will have the exact details if anyone wants to follow it up for accuracy.

 

English Nature has since blocked any further stocking on the grounds that Barbel are not an indigenous species in the H.Avon.

 

Why thank you ayjay, finally a bit of honesty. My hunch is that the 1500 fingerlings are just the tip of the ice berg that is visible to you at the moment. And English Nature gave us on the Wensum a written assurance that there would be no more barbel introductions into the Wensum way back in 2001.

 

But they broke their promise. That's how it works. A controversy blows up, the EA say OK, end of, no more introductions. And then 5 or 10 years later the stocks start to dwindle barbel fishermen start to lobby intensly, the Govt changes, and a new policy emerges.

[andy_youngs]

The fact that you have stated your intent to trespass and contempt for the law using what is presumably your real name on a public forum isn't exactly going to do you any favours either if your activities ever land you in court.

I wish your interpretation of "the law" would either put up or shut up. Because until they do I shall continue to break it (with impunity).

 

As for 'fascist', just as with 'xenophobic', I think you need to spend a bit more time with the dictionary.

I've withdrawn the "fascist" comment, on condition that Nicepix withdraws the "hypocrite" comment (not that he's done that yet). The "xenophobic" comment, I agree, is a little harsh because it was directed at an individual rather than a public figue or organisation. I'm happy to issue a public apology for using the word in this way, but at this stage, I am not yet ready to issue a retraction, because I still think it's true and in the public interest.

 

You may recall from post #76 that the other word the mods were concerned about was "lying". I agree that it's not a nice word. But I've only used it in connection with Govt organisations. I've never used that word against an individual.

 

It's true, Ive accused the Environment Agency of lying. But I see no difference between that and accusing the British Govt of lying over the Iraq war.

 

It's also true that I could have mollified them with a euphomism like "mistaken", or "spoken in error".

 

But in view of their inactivity on the canoe access front, coupled with their enthusiasm for stuffing our rivers with non native fish, I chose not to employ a terminoligical inexactitude.

Edited April 11, 2012 by andy_youngs

[andy_youngs]

"Let's put a box on it" 'ell, I've see guys go to war in fewer than 10 pages.

But we're only on page 10 here and now.

 

This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end.

 

(I think you know what comes next)

[andy_youngs]

The 'official' line on Barbel re stocking is vague, however it seems pretty much clear that the last stocking of Barbel in the Hampshire Avon was some time ago in the '60's

However there has been an active effort to the the Avon back to where it was as far as Roach are concerned.

 

Yes I fish for Barbel more than any other species at the moment, and I do come in contact with Kyaks and canoes on a regular basis on my local Warks Avon, however apart from a couple of incidents where the Kyaker went out of his way to ruin the anglers enjoyment I have found them to be considerate.

 

However the Wye is a different matter, the problem is the day trippers who have no regard for others and are a nightmare, but this is well known and an effort to make the operators more culpable is a yearly feature, but sadly put a any Brit in a situation like that and they behave like idiots. I no longer enjoy fishing the Wye below Ross, and if I want to fish the River I am forced to pay upwards of £20 a day to escape these pests. To me that is a real impact on my rights, and pocket.

 

You are doing yourself no favours in your stance on here, you come over as divisive, and the very fact that there is a Kyak Forum on AN should tell you how tolerant AN is of everyone.

But surely the Wye is a public navigation? I thought it was enshrined in statute law? I think the problem you're experiencing redfin is that the Wye has become a 'honeypot' site for canoeing. Similar to the Waveney.

 

And the reason for that is a few selfish bar stewards on the Hampshire Avon and the Wensum.

 

If you want a debate why don't you put this up on BFW?

Because they wanted me to buy something from their shop in order to join the forum. And I don't want to give them my money. They can talk to me on here, or You Tube if they want.

 

But I am not going to pay for the privalege of being banned from another forum.

Edited April 12, 2012 by andy_youngs