Jump to content

British Canoe Union Told to Put up or Shut up and Respect the Law

Anglers' Net

By Anglers' Net
in Angling Trust News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jim Roper Member

Jim Roper

Posted
Posted

"there are no general public rights of navigation above the tidal limit unless specifically acquired (usually by statute)." @@@@ In a case in 1889, it was decided that there was a fundamental right to navigate and take fish up any river as far as it is 'navigable', not 'tidal'. The river Derwent case may have changed this since. Ilchester v Rashley and Others August 10th 1889. There is a large book relating to the case in the Dorset County Archivist's department.

https://www.harbourbridgelakes.com/


Pisces mortui solum cum flumine natant

You get more bites on Anglers Net

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barry luxton Member

barry luxton

Posted
Posted

No and one QC's opinion does not a law make.

yes I see that bit, according to this one guy quote:

Would it be worth the fight? One barrister, Jonathan Karas QC, says the legal starting point is that there is no general public right to navigate on non-tidal rivers.

"They are owned as part of the land through which they pass," he says.

"The suggestion that there are general public rights of navigation dating from medieval times is a misunderstanding."

 

And also according to the trust the law is absolutely clear. Yet as far as I can see it's a kin muddle, unlike Scotland who have made it abundantly clear.

Free to choose apart from the ones where the trust poked their nose in. Common eel. tope. Bass and sea bream. All restricted.


New for 2016 TAT are the main instigators for the demise of the u k bass charter boat industry, where they went screaming off to parliament and for the first time assisting so called angling gurus set up bass take bans with the e u using rubbish exaggerated info collected by ices from anglers, they must be very proud.

Upgrade, the door has been closed with regards to anglers being linked to the e u superstate and the failed c f p. So TAT will no longer need to pay monies to the EAA anymore as that org is no longer relevant to the u k . Goodbye to the europeon anglers alliance and pathetic restrictions from the e u.

Angling is better than politics, ban politics from angling.

Consumer of bass. where is the evidence that the u k bass stock need angling trust protection. Why won't you work with your peers instead of castigating them. They have the answer.

Recipie's for mullet stew more than welcomed.

Angling sanitation trust and kent and sussex sea anglers org delete's and blocks rsa's alternative opinion on their face book site. Although they claim to rep all.

new for 2014. where is the evidence that the south coast bream stock need the angling trust? Your campaign has no evidence. Why won't you work with your peers, the inshore under tens? As opposed to alienating them? Angling trust failed big time re bait digging, even fish legal attempted to intervene and failed, all for what, nothing.

Looks like the sea angling reps have been coerced by the ifca's to compose sea angling strategy's that the ifca's at some stage will look at drafting into legislation to manage the rsa, because they like wasting tax payers money. That's without asking the rsa btw. You know who you are..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gozzer Member

gozzer

Posted
Posted

No and one QC's opinion does not a law make.

 

No, but IMO, it holds more weight than the opinion of "A N Other QC", who seems reluctant to divulge his/her findings.

 

John.

Angling is more than just catching fish, if it wasn't it would just be called 'catching'......... John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
snakey1 Member

snakey1

Posted
Posted

yes I see that bit, according to this one guy quote:

Would it be worth the fight? One barrister, Jonathan Karas QC, says the legal starting point is that there is no general public right to navigate on non-tidal rivers.

"They are owned as part of the land through which they pass," he says.

"The suggestion that there are general public rights of navigation dating from medieval times is a misunderstanding."

 

And also according to the trust the law is absolutely clear. Yet as far as I can see it's a kin muddle, unlike Scotland who have made it abundantly clear.

Yep Barry and when DEFRA make statements like "that there is no clear case law on whether a ‘common law right of navigation’ exists on unregulated rivers. This is widely accepted to be an unclear and unresolved issue.” It does nothing to help clear the muddied water.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.

  I accept