Be warned!

[Scott]

kleinboet:

and if we DEMAND a 60 or 70% reduction in "rent" due to the canoeists,

Then the owner of the water will simply rent the water to canoeists, who will then ban angling on that water.

 

Scott.

[Nugg]

waterman1013:

Peter

 

(1)

Apathy will not allow this to happen, neither will the NAA and its constituent members, who have been involved in all the discussions with Government of this topic.

 

 

(2)

Progress Report – April 2003

 

 

(3)

1.1 What scope is there for providing shared access for canoeists at times when the water is of no interest or is unavailable to anglers (eg when a river is in spate or during the closed season).

SAA

(1)

Oh dear, oh dear, can I see another Lake District fiasco on the horizon. Will the N.A.A. be as strong as the last time?

 

 

(2)

A progress report even. Had anyone else heard about this proposal before now, or am I just ignorant?

 

 

(3)

Can someone [other than those that oppose it] tell me the exact reason why we have a closed season on Rivers? Especialy those that would have a gravel bottom like fast running water.

 

[ 13. November 2003, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: Nugg ]

[Peter Waller]

Nugg, one of the suggestions from the floor at the Waveney area was that canoists be restricted from using these waters during the close season. There are riffles and gravel beds that, during spawning times, would be disturbed by canoists portaging their craft through the shallows as there are on the Waveney. An alarming prospect.

 

Your comment re the Lake District Fiasco are apt. Like you I was not heartened by the effectiveness of the NAA at that point. Hopefully lessons were learnt. I live in hope . The NFA, rather than the NAA was cited by the university spokesperson as being the angling body with which they were negotiating. It could have been an oversight :confused: . Only time will tell.

[Nugg]

Here springs hope eternal.

 

Re the N.F.A., was that at you're meeting or in Watermans post, can't read that again?

 

[ 13. November 2003, 12:43 AM: Message edited by: Nugg ]

[kleinboet]

Sorry, but I am going to bang on a bit about this. If you work out that a day ticket will bring in between £1200 - £5000 per year. Which canoe organisation is going to pay this (or more!) for a SMALL stretch of still water when there are loads of navigable rivers available FREE all over England. :mad: :confused: :mad: :confused: :mad: :confused:

[Peter Waller]

Nugg, that was the first time that I have mentioned the NFA, so it must have been in Waterman's post. I mentioned in in regard to comments from the Chairman at the Waveney meeting. I have just spead through Watermans's post, must have missed it because I didn't notice the initials of the NFA. Either way, NFA or NAA, I'm not going to get overly excited, the old heart won't take it!!

 

Kleinboet, income from day-tickets is one thing, rent paid to a landowner might be a different thing. On the Waveney we are talking about creating a long distance haul between the Broads and the Ouse, thus connecting the Midlands and the Fens to the Broads system for canoes. In reality it means opening up about 24k of narrow, shallow river to canoe traffic. I doubt that the combined rents paid come anywhere near a total that would deter a major canoe association. Say that 1000 canoes a year use this link, and pay £5.00 each to use it. I would suggest that is very cheap for the beauty of the countryside that they are passing through. At the moment we are blessed with very cheap, by national standards, angling in the Eastern Counties. At best attention from the canoists will force these rents up. At worst we shall loose out.

 

R.S.S.G. R.I.P. but we really need you now! Pressure on our rivers is growing with the increase of leisure time. Anglers will increasingly be asked / forced to share this valuable resorce.

 

[ 13. November 2003, 08:52 PM: Message edited by: Peter Waller ]

[poledark]

I think you underestimate the buying power of anglers, they will pay to keep their fishing and they will pay to keep others off their water.

Definitely the canoeists will have to observe the close season which will wipe out the spring and early summer and hopefully messing about on a river in spate will wipe out a few more.

 

But they will win some of the battles BECAUSE THEY ARE ORGANISED

 

Join the SAA and add your money and your voice to the battle.

 

Den

[trent.barbeler]

Dear All,

 

In referrence to Peters closing quote of;

 

"R.S.S.G. R.I.P. but we really need you now! Pressure on our rivers is growing with the increase of leasure time. Anglers will increasingly be asked / forced to share this valuable resorce."

 

I'm absolutely sure we dont need the RSSG in any of its previous formats. But we do need some sort of national body that represents river systems anglers, their particular interests, AND the interests of the environments in which they fish. I still pretty sure of that in the short and long term.

 

At the moment, there are more committee's and consultatives than a river angler could poke a pole at. As such, the system mean't to safegaurd river anglers interests and the river environment is just too large and too fragmented. Rings a familiar angling bell, the word "fragmented" doesn't it?

 

Anyway, one undisputed fact are Peters words.

 

"Pressure on our rivers is growing with the increase of leasure time. Anglers will increasingly be asked / forced to share this valuable resorce."

 

All would do well to remember Peter's words above. Peter is actually spot on here. There is no doubt that the EA and BW regard the boating fraternity as the "growth industry" within our nations waterways. There is also no doubting that our river consultatives and committee's are also top heavy with boating interests sitting upon them so much so that in some cases, boating interests far outweigh those of angling interests. Obviously, not good for angling.

 

Then again, reality has to be grasped. Given that boating interests will always be listened to, and the fact that this branch of river use "is" growing in popularity, a "working" relationship beween all river users needs to be established. But any angling party within such a relationship needs to be a powerful one. Otherwise, we will always be outclassed and outgunned.

 

I dont care much for costly "studies" carried out by whoever when effected parties can do the job equally well for themselves. The trouble with "studies" in my experience is that their findings merely serve to establish the first stumbling blocks and hurdles for effected parties to begin fighting over, which ultimately results in the familiar stalemate situations occuring. Again, not good for angling in the long term.

 

Drum banging time again.

 

Now imagine a anglers national association (NAA?)that has individual membership. A membership that is "EFFECTIVELY" and "PROFESSIONALLY" promoted in such a way that anglers actually wanted to join it. From this membership flowed forth proper and effective funding. And this funding enabled our national anglers association to have its own team working for river angling and river environment interests, amongst a host of other angling interests as well.

 

None of this, is rocket science. Boating/rowing clubs and associations have been thus organised for years. So incidentally, have other sporting bodies and organisations. So have our arch enemy the PETA. Why not us then?? Especially given our numerical strength and our passion for our own sport. Why has not this passion been harnessed in the one open to all membership association before now?

 

Mike Heylins post was long and to some, informative. But to many, infact I'd bet the overal majority, its contents were overlong goble-de-gook.

 

You can cut this cake any way you will, but at the end of the day, only a properly self funded organisation will look after anglers interests efffectively.

 

Leisure and sport, in all its forms, is now big booming business. Leisure passtimes and sports practised on rivers/stillwaters is or will, be no exception. In the years ahead, only those water users/groups that boast belonging to a nationally run professional organisation, stand any chance of getting a slice of the shrinking water recreational pie. Don't believe me? Matters not really one way or another. But what "does" matter, is that when that nearing day DOES arrive when various water uses start to compete for shrinking recreational resourses, our so called national body will still be conducting angling business in their none funded way when everyone else around the table will be professionals representing "their" own memberships.

 

Amateur is Amateur. And amateur's can only run with the big boys in professional races for so long.

 

Otherwise, it won't just be the British Canoe Union that swallows us all up.

 

Unity, Unity, Unity?? Hogwash!!!

 

Membership, Membership, Membership!! For all, in a national organisation FOR ALL!! Properly and independently funded with professionals looking after our sports interests.

 

Then perhaps "sport world angling" can all move forward into this new Millennium, like every other major sport did in the last one.

 

Regards,

 

Lee.

[Peter Sharpe]

One of the reasons that fishing was restricted on The Ocean at Baston Fen was supposedly due to insurance problems caused by sharing the water with boats. I can't see how any owner of a private lake could possibly be held responsible if a canoist was injured while on his property without his wishes. I tend to think this is just a publicity stunt by the canoeing organisations.

[Peter Waller]

Lee. My sentiment re the RSSG was simple, we need a national body devoted to our rivers, especially from an anglers point of view. The RSSG was a disaster, and no, I don't wish it to be resurected, but it had the beginnings of a national body. The need for such a national body, with a membership and an elected committee, was there, it still is. No, lets not start a debate on the RSSG, thats over & done with, and as I said, R.I.P. But the rivers still need a united body, not a bevvy of disunited consultatives, associations, quangos, self elected committees, and clubs pulling in different directions.