Benyon Rejects Canoeists’ ‘Right to Paddle’ Campaign

[sam vimes]

Why did I bother going to all the trouble again to invite people from a different field for an intelligent discussion about a current hot topic , that is the very last time I bother putting in that effort to get a meaningfull civilised dialogue going.

i have been treated with the utmost civility on the song of the paddle forum , yes we have different views but none of this childish points scoring rubbish , really you lot need to grow up.

The bottom line is that there's nothing to discuss. Until the law is changed or at least clarified, paddlers will be tolerated, at best. There has been civilised dialogue, plenty of questions answered and, for the most part, totally ignored. I may have had greater tolerance for paddlers, despite thinking that they are breaking the law as it stands, if they hadn't ignored pretty much everything said to them. They still persist in the belief that they aren't doing anglers any harm. Materially, that may be true, but it's patent that they don't give a stuff about spoiling our day. Essentially, paddlers don't want to listen to us, they just want us to say that what they do is ok by us. Why should I care about their cause and enjoyment when they don't give a monkey's about mine?

I'm quite sure that you will have been treated with civility. To me it looks like you have more sympathy and understanding of their cause than you do with the river angler. Perhaps that's no surprise when you admit to not fishing rivers. It's quite easy to have every sympathy with the paddlers cause if you have little interest in the flip side of the coin.

If the laws change or are clarified, I'll obey them and respect the right of paddlers to do as they will. Until that occurs, I'll retain the right to be justifiably annoyed when they paddle by on a stretch of water that they have no proven right to be doing so.

 

[Jeff Woodhouse]

Benny, you don't even fish rivers!!........how can you possibly take it on yourself to go on to another site and claim that you have the means to get a meaningful dialogue going???

I have to agree with Paul here, Benny. By not being a river fisherman you would have had no idea of the problems we have suffered over the years of illegal paddling particularly in the shallower smaller rivers. And Paul is also right in that to draw someone who is intent on breaking the law, even if he is unclear about it, into a meaningful discussion is impossible because they just don't want to believe us. They'd be the people that would never buy the record 'Black is Black'.

I realise you thought you were doing it for all our good, but it rarely works out that way with wrongdoers. (tried to avoid 'anarchists' that time but they are.)

 

[Berty]

I have never claimed to represent you and have made clear that I have not fished a river since the early seventies , however I do know how to conduct a civilized conversation.

You went on to a site and invited them to debate something you have no idea of?......after reading the response of the paddlers who totally ignored the VERY learned section of us i made my own CIVILISED assessment of what i thought.

I then applied a little more decorum and settled for knob.

 

[bennygesserit]

Oh well each man is an island separated by language and forums only exacerbate that.

I was asked twice in this thread to relay posts to sotp which I did , and twice I was congratulated for being such an effective go between , all I am saying is I won't do it again.

i thought it was interesting and fun and made for good reading to get some paddlers in here but it obviously backfired , no hard feelings then I will stick to the subjects I know ... Who wants to talk about PSN frameworks ?

 

[richiekelly]

Oh well each man is an island separated by language and forums only exacerbate that.

I was asked twice in this thread to relay posts to sotp which I did , and twice I was congratulated for being such an effective go between , all I am saying is I won't do it again.

i thought it was interesting and fun and made for good reading to get some paddlers in here but it obviously backfired , no hard feelings then I will stick to the subjects I know ... Who wants to talk about PSN frameworks ?

Are they the things that tomatoes can be grown up

 

[david perry]

If the law is conclusively proven in your favour, good luck to you. ...

I'm bemused to know what concessions an angler would require from paddlers, I can't think of any that would be asked for or given..... I have few qualms if you win or not. Alternatively, start offering pots of cash to landowners and riparian right holders.

Well, Sam, I'd guess for a start that if the canoeists won - after a bitter dispute, they may not be interested in paddling restrictions of ANY kind other than those that suited them. So you'd forget about any discussion of not paddling during the closed season, passing anglers and asking which side or anything else which may occur to you after the event.

Indeed many canoeists may well start to recall the campaign to ban angling because of it's alleged cruelty to fish, ban ground baiting because of it's alleged pollution, ban lead weights because....(sorry thats been done), ban artificial line because of the birds it traps, ban digging pitches in banks, ban cutting paths to the banks and all the other relatively inconsequential stuff (to this discussion)we've been trying to discuss and filter out of the argument.

 

[bennygesserit]

Are they the things that tomatoes can be grown up

No its a shared services initiative that allows the conglomeration of a group of MPLS networks to access the gsi and other services while maintaining coco or even psn coco compliance , sorry I am still smarting from being called a thick t@@t

 

[david perry]

Geoff

Ironic isn't it. In an earlier post you mentioned how canoeists in North America or Canada spoilt your fishing.

America and Canada are the origin of both open canoeing and kayaking. Its the spiritual home of both disciplines.

Long before Izaak Walton knew his barbel from his barb there were hunters and travellers in the American continent using both craft. This is the continent where the pm of Canada created 'heritage rivers' to be preserved for the national interest. Pierre trudeau the pm who did this was a canoeist. He didn't ban anglers.

But you went and the paddlers spoilt your fishing.

Being totally sarcastic I could ask you why you didn;t go else where. It's late, I've had a couple of wines so forgive me. I won't mean it in the morning.
Says a lot about your attitude doesn't it. ( sorry it's been a looooong xmas):wh

 

[sam vimes]

Well, Sam, I'd guess for a start that if the canoeists won - after a bitter dispute, they may not be interested in paddling restrictions of ANY kind other than those that suited them. So you'd forget about any discussion of not paddling during the closed season, passing anglers and asking which side or anything else which may occur to you after the event.

Indeed many canoeists may well start to recall the campaign to ban angling because of it's alleged cruelty to fish, ban ground baiting because of it's alleged pollution, ban lead weights because....(sorry thats been done), ban artificial line because of the birds it traps, ban digging pitches in banks, ban cutting paths to the banks and all the other relatively inconsequential stuff (to this discussion)we've been trying to discuss and filter out of the argument.

Go for your life, I really couldn't care less. If the law turns out to be on your side, good luck to you. Until then, everything you have to say is a load of hot air. As I've said before, you had more sympathy for your cause before the participation in this thread. Purely on the David v Goliath front, I quite like the idea of you taking on the big landowners and winning (please try to remember that it's these and not individual anglers you'll be taking on). Now, you have very little sympathy because you've demonstrated time and again that you just don't actually give a stuff about what anglers have been saying to you. You don't really want to share a resource, you just want your own way. I can't say I blame you particularly, just stop acting surprised when individual anglers do the same. You bemoan anglers being intractible yet you are doing just the same. The only answer is to take it to the courts. Good luck, but don't be surprised when I suggest that I hope you lose.

 

[richiekelly]

No its a shared services initiative that allows the conglomeration of a group of MPLS networks to access the gsi and other services while maintaining coco or even psn coco compliance , sorry I am still smarting from being called a thick t@@t

Yes I thought it was

 

[geoffmaynard]

I did go elsewhere David. About four rivers in total and all the smaller ones had paddlers which interfered with angling. They weren't breaking any Canadian laws though so there was no option but to put up with it.
Here in England and Wales it's a different story, whatever you might want to think. We have clearly defined areas with PRN and others where there is no PRN. Paddlers don't seem to accept the difference but I do, therefor I feel quite within my rights to demand a no compromise policy and to expect existing laws to be enforced. If those laws ever changed to permit you to paddle anywhere I would have to put up with it - but until they do, having seen the disregard for others by canoeists, I am totally against any increase in the waters available to paddle. There's nothing wrong with my logic here, any 'attitude' of mine you might detect is merely justified outrage against the flagrant disregard paddlers so often show for the existing and prevailing laws of our country.

ban ground baiting because of it's alleged pollution,

I wonder if the law would also consider canoes in rivers with no PRN as being pollution? The definition of pollution being putting something into a river which shouldn't be there?

 

[david perry]

Geoff

I'm sorry you had such a disappointment with paddlers across the pond. And equally I'm not impressed by the behaviour of some of the English ones you mention either.

Sam
I surprised you don't think I've listened to anything that you've pointed out. I have I believe tried to demonstrate that I've heard what you and others have posted here and simply responded as politely as I can to comments.

 

[sam vimes]

Sam
I surprised you don't think I've listened to anything that you've pointed out. I have I believe tried to demonstrate that I've heard what you and others have posted here and simply responded as politely as I can to comments.

David,
I wasn't meaning you in particular and I'll acknowledge that you (personally) have been polite enough, even if I do feel like you aren't really that interested.

 

[Lord Paul of Sheffield]

If you driving in a 30 mph zone and you think it's ok to do 40mph - should you just drive 40mph and that's ok?

 

[david perry]

David,
I wasn't meaning you in particular and I'll acknowledge that you (personally) have been polite enough, even if I do feel like you aren't really that interested.

Not interested? That's why I came on here in the first place.
I think I've asked a few questions and answered those put to me. And I've expressed my concerns over some badly behaved canoeists.

You must be a hard task master Sam

 

[jasonbean1]

Not interested? That's why I came on here in the first place.
I think I've asked a few questions and answered those put to me. And I've expressed my concerns over some badly behaved canoeists.

You must be a hard task master Sam

dave, all you are doing is digging you and fellow paddlers a deeper hole.

 

[sam vimes]

Not interested? That's why I came on here in the first place.
I think I've asked a few questions and answered those put to me. And I've expressed my concerns over some badly behaved canoeists.

You must be a hard task master Sam

The "you" in the second part of the quoted passage was a collective you.

 

[barbelboi]

Not interested? That's why I came on here in the first place.
I think I've asked a few questions and answered those put to me. And I've expressed my concerns over some badly behaved canoeists.

You must be a hard task master Sam

Dave, at the end of the day you've joined a fishing forum - why not post on a few of the angling topics now that this one is well past it's sell buy date?
Jerry

 

[david perry]

Well, I think I've done that already http://www.fishingmagic.com/forums/pre-june-2009-venue-reports/280138-redwings.html Jerry.

 

[waterways]

To summarise this thread:

1 Many anglers believe that canoeists are committing act of Civil Trespass when they canoe on the 96-98% of English and Welsh rivers that are disputed.

2 Many canoeists believe they already have a legal right to canoe on these rivers and are not committing an act of civil trespass when they do so.

3 This issue is attracting growing attention because of Internet forums and social media

4 Some canoeists intend to paddle on disputed rivers, despite veiled threats of violence from some anglers, if they do so.

5 No one has shown how any significant legal impediment can be used to stop canoeists who paddle on disputed rivers.

Does that sum it up?