• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Lower Benyons mass canoe invasion

Pete Fox said:
I If left unchallenged they will be able to claim rights due to usage...hence their (false?) claim to have been using it for 25 years.

Pete
Click to expand...
I don't think that even if they have been using it for a period of time they can claim in some way a right to use it. That applies to rights of way on land and is nothing to do with River Navigation. If a river is classified as navigable and they have the landowners permission to launch then the can use the river. If the river is not classified as navigable then they must have the landowner on both banks permission to use the bit of river and any club leasing the fishing rights would have the right to object.
Obviously getting mutually sensible agreements with canoeists is always the way forward. Individual canoeists are not usually (their are some exceptions) a problem IMO, but commercial organisations bring large groups onto a bit of river that has not been classified as navigable is certainly not acceptable. How do they get insurance for such activity? Are the paying clients of such venture aware that they are trespassing and being put at risk by using water not considered safe for general navigation.
I have nothing against responsable usage of the rivers by canoeists, but this sounds irresponsible and needs stopping. I would suggest contacting the schools and local authorties who form their client base and raising your concerns as an 'Elf and Safety and Child protection issue...that will throw the cat amongst the pigeons.
Best of luck.
 
Last edited:
Haveing done a bit of research on this subject, Pete is spot on, also they are obliged to obtain a license for their craft to be on any river in England or wales, notwithstanding what Pete has just written about rights of way and access on non navigable rivers.

The problem is they assume that they have a right to go anywhere they like, which they most definatley do not.
What it needs is a couple of high profile prosecutions for tresspass that would bring them down to earth a bit.

Ian.
 
i think you will find trespass is a civil offence not a criminal one, these guys know that, that's why they do it.
when you see people getting arrested on private property, it's normally a section 4/5 offence.
 
Thats true Dave, but wouldn't it be good if a landowner waited for one of these events to pass through, and prosecuted every single one of them :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
 
Remember your personal safety though if anyone does decide to challenge canoeists whom you know to be in the wrong. Most of us fish alone, or in two's or three's at best, you could easily find yourself in an awkward situation if a debate got heated and you're outnumbered. Sounds daft but I think we've all seen people come to blows over silly stuff like car parking spaces or que jumping. That said, if we don't challenge the wrongun's no one else will.

Duncan.
 
Couple of points.
Firstly, I still don't know whether or not this is navigable water and, believe me, it's not easy to find out!
RDAA say no; Crooky (hope you don't mind) thinks yes; I would assume no.,,,Next stop British Waterways if they reply.

Duncan, normally I wouldn't say goo to a boose but I was so shocked by this unprecedented invasion that I just had to 'say something'. So perhaps lucky that they were from a respectable organisation or I could be feeding the crayfish!

In fact, their behaviour was mostly beyond reproach. After our initial exchange they offered to, and did, get out, carry their boats past me and re-launch just below...Public footpath as Crooky (hope you don't mind) pointed out. The few anglers below me, after being politely asked, allowed them to pass unchallenged. They did get a bit nervous when I tried to get photographic evidence of their passage through some of the obstructions, one of the group resorting to threats and insults...but they caused no visible damage.

I'm sure they don't appreciate the impact they have on the fishing. I've long been of the opinion that anglers worry more about boats than fish do but 15 kayaks on the Kennet??? They probably think that it's simply a matter of physical obstruction as they pass, without realising that they've probably spooked the fish for the rest of the day. And why should they?
Oh for a happy compromise!

Pete
 
This is a point of interest for my local club as well, we are on the Cherwell at Thrupp where the river runs parallel to the canal. BW have recently sold/leased there old works yard off, a coffee shop as turned up, cottages sold off but worryingly a canoe hire/club has taken over one of the units.....

Where this will lead I don't know, but after speaking to a mate who's a keen canoeist he says that they havent got a clue either on rights of navigation and the legality of the current laws and in a sideways manoeuvre they are sort of being invited to test waters to invite legal cases....to see and test the laws and the willingness to prosecute.

I've got nothing against canoeists but I'll definitely reserve judgement on it....one thing is for sure, they are more organised than us and have a sound argument and we rely on outdated laws to keep them from 98% of our rivers.

I think this is something anglers should be concerned about and Pete has every right to be a bit peeved with his encounter....but we are not in the arena talking to those concerned who want to change our ways and be on all our waters 24/7 very soon.


Slight smell of otters on this one in 5 years time....we'll never learn?

Cheers
Jason
 
Last edited:
Jason Bean said:
I've got nothing against canoeists but I'll definitely reserve judgement on it....one thing is for sure, they are more organised than us and have a sound argument and we rely on outdated laws to keep them from 98% of our rivers.

I think this is something anglers should be concerned about and Pete has every right to be a bit peeved with his encounter....but we are not in the arena talking to those concerned who want to change our ways and be on all our waters 24/7 very soon.
Click to expand...

The point is, they are not "our rivers", in most cases we simply lease the rights to fish, there is absolutely nothing in any leasing contracts I have seen which gives exclusive use of the water in question, how many still waters also have sailing clubs or water skiing clubs, etc........ Why, in the case of rivers do anglers feel they have soul rights of use.........if we are not careful, these organised canoists will be approaching land owners, paying more than the paultry amounts generally paid by coarse angling clubs and arranging exclusive use for themselves, where will we be then??
 
Ian would you like to grant them access on a shared basis to your club waters if they agreed to pay half your rent...they wont pay any rent and they wont be concerned about going straight over spawning grounds whilst your prime barbel are spawning on them. Unless you invite a local canoe club round educate them and share your concerns...nothing wrong with voluntary agreements as long as they know their responsibilities and abide by them

It's not about saying who's water it is...it's about the reality of an end result that we might have no input on....larger rivers can get away with it but the smaller more fragile ones wont

Cheers
Jason
 
Jason,

Believe it or not, I would rather have the river all to myself but I am unfortunately a realist.

I for one would sooner find a solution to the issue rather than get into confrontation with everything that interferes in any way with angling..............
 
Jason Bean said:
Ian would you like to grant them access on a shared basis to your club waters if they agreed to pay half your rent...they wont pay any rent and they wont be concerned about going straight over spawning grounds whilst your prime barbel are spawning on them. Unless you invite a local canoe club round educate them and share your concerns...nothing wrong with voluntary agreements as long as they know their responsibilities and abide by them

It's not about saying who's water it is...it's about the reality of an end result that we might have no input on....larger rivers can get away with it but the smaller more fragile ones wont

Cheers
Jason
Click to expand...

By the way, you are missing the point completely, unless my club owns the land, which in some cases it does, I do not have any say in who the landowner agrees to let use the river as I only pay rent for the fishing rights...........why would a canoe club pay towards the fishing rights, they don't wish to fish..........

Where does the share of use of say the middle Thames, where all manner of people and craft use the river, we still only have fishing rights, no right to tell the boaters to bugger off.............
 
Ian...you can just see it being another thing that just comes along and bites us on the arse. At the moment we have a few stern words from the AT defending our rights under current riperian law and navigation rights.

I've tried to make sense of it in the past and I can't and the canoers cant....they have a bit of momentum going on the back of increased members to there ranks.

I'm not being anti them just saying hold on lets talk to them and let them know what we are about and share waters that are suitible...if we dont go down that route I think we'll be alot worste off. Maybe?

Think that;s what your saying as well Ian ?

Cheers
Jason
 
Jason,

I think we probably are on the same page, or thereabouts, there certainly needs to be a common sense approach, maybe it needs to be done between the Angling Trust and the National Canoe Association (if one exists)..............In Jack Sparrow's words, they need to invoke the right of Parlez!!
 
For those not aware of the facts or legal status, this should be of interest:

http://www.riversaccess.org/pages/pv.asp?p=rac30&fsize=0

It spells out the legal status and is from a canoeing website, the rivers access campaign..............the point about aggravated trespass being a criminal rather than civil matter is interesting, initimidating anglers would class as aggravated trespass so you may call the police, good luck though, there rarely turn up for any minor crime reported!!

And here is the government commissioned report carried out in 2001 which has a section regards river access:

http://www.dragonpaddlers.org.uk/watersport.pdf

Again from a canoeing site...........
 
aggravated trespass is a law that's almost worthless, it comes down to gathering evidence, which in this case would be very difficult.
i doubt the police would act solely on this offence if called unless you say you are being threatened with violence.
 
Thames conservancy governs most of the navigation of the thames after teddington
this includes canoes.
not sure about who does on the kennet but if anyone does i am quite sure they would investigate a complaint if upon their checking prior permission
there was no application, no matter what a few bods with canoes think there is river controls in the uk and they have the power to stop things if illegal or causing a navigation danger.
anyone know what the controlling body for the kennet canal navigation is?
 
Hi

Controlled by British Waterways. The info they issue to boat users notes “All craft, whether powered or unpowered, including canoes and dinghies, must have a British Waterways Pleasure Boat Licence when navigating the Kennet & Avon between Reading to Hanham Lockâ€. The local waterway maps indicate that only the main channel as navigable (from lock 99 down to lock 100 at Lower Benyons) – all the connecting waters are identified as “unnavigable†(sic).

Waterways Manager: The Locks, Bath Road, Devizes, Wilts, SN10 1HB 01380 722 859

Head Office: Willow Grange, Church Road, Watford, Herts, WD17 4QA 01932 226422

Hope that helps

Rob
 
The other thing about canoeists is once established they start to take advantage (however GREEN they say they are). On one of my local rivers (Yorkshire Derwent), which is in the main an SSSI for most of its "interesting" lengths, they leave all sorts of paranphanalia about e.g. nylon rope from trees for slalom races - which contravenes the SSSI status. And they get aeriated once notified of it. BUT it is a means to minimise their presence legally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top