Canoe reply from HDYGO thread

[no-one in particular]

Ok Roger but that's a whole lot of trouble. There is another way of looking at this which I have done on reflection. There were a lot of kids here, on holiday, who were loving their little adventures down this river. They are on the campsite with not much else to do round there. The adults the same - All these people are just enjoying themselves, am I the one that's in their way! I am a small inconvenience to them and they are a big inconvenience to me but that's just the nature of the problem.
This belongs to a club I just joined, turning out to be a bit of a waste of money but that's by the by but they have other waters, I have other waters to fish. So, in some ways do I want to stick an oar in their fun so to speak or should anyone else. Should the club just give this bit of water up, they have plenty, these people don't. Just another way of looking at it.
I get more annoyed by the few that don't seem to understand any etiquette, if they just came through as quickly as the can and create as little splash as they could it would be just a bit better and quite a few said "you must be fed up with us" and did just that as I waved them through. But some , not many were just plainly ignorant and they annoyed me. But then the camp site should make them aware that this belongs to an angling club as well and teach them some etiquette before they set off.
However, I have always thought the two activities will never go well along side each other especially on such a small stream and it is a waste of time trying to change that, better I go elsewhere, bend with the wind and just accept that is the way life is sometimes and maybe the club should do the same, this should be for canoeists or anglers, not both and that's probably the best solution everywhere. It maybe that through several law checks, rights of ways etc and some long drawn out expensive battles with the help of other organizations it could get them banned but, to be honest I am not so sure I would feel chuffed about it.

 

[markcw]

I would have though a few pouches of misfires maggots would have helped or a few balls of mis aimed sloppy groundbait.
Like what used to happen to canal boats that didnt show any etiquette,especially in a match,
Seriously ,could the club not have a word with the farmer, do the club rent the stretch off the farmer ,? If so it should be that they have sole use unless otherwise specified in the lease agreement.

 

[peter crabtree]

It’s something we will all have to put up with as the gov plan to open up waterways to swimmers and canoeists.

 

[steve2]

We lost the exclusive fishing right to one of our waters when the owner decided to open it up to swimmers and paddle boarders for the summer.
He makes more money from them than he does from us. So it was a case of lose the water completely or go with it.
I saw a programme last week where paddle boarding along with wild swimming was said to be getting very popular because it's cheap and easy and you have the freedom of the water ways. So it could be coming to a water near you very soon.

 

[Roger Johnson 2]

MarkG In every way you’re absolutely right, why spoil people’s enjoyment and livelihood? I just wish I could always be so magnanimous it seems I’m getting more belligerent with age!
.......However......... laws of the land are usually in place for a reason, in the case of navigable rights in the modern world, I would like to think, to protect the right of the landowner/ leasee, the public at large and the environment. ( caveat: I have no legal training).
As always there are at least two sides to each argument, sadly our modern attitudes, despite our “progression” into combating countless ‘isms, appear to becoming ever more polarised.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[no-one in particular]

I would have though a few pouches of misfires maggots would have helped or a few balls of mis aimed sloppy groundbait.
Like what used to happen to canal boats that didnt show any etiquette,especially in a match,
Seriously ,could the club not have a word with the farmer, do the club rent the stretch off the farmer ,? If so it should be that they have sole use unless otherwise specified in the lease agreement.

I couldn't do that Mark, just not my nature and it is probably illegal anyway, is it assault and mostly they were nice people, I had a chat with a few of them and they were sorry they had to disturb my angling, just a few halfwits among them.
The fact is as I have said, in my opinion the two hobbies will never work along side each other, never have and never will, you cant mix oil and water. All you can do is fight and argue, go to courts etc etc and that's up to the club or clubs and where it is prime fishing I am sure this will happen a lot but a bit of little small stream fishing is it worth a club doing that.

 

[Philip]

Its a string that if angling pulls on too strongly it wont turn out well. Either we will lose the angling rights as other pursuits bring in more money or they will bring in some stupid new rules such as designating angling to small parts of the river e.g special "angling area" ...this being 1 wooden platform in a wider bit of river and limit all angling to that.

The underlying problem is that there are too many people and its getting worse.

For that little river I think winter offers the best bet. The campsite will close down and few people will brave paddling or swimming...allot less anyway.

 

[no-one in particular]

MarkG In every way you’re absolutely right, why spoil people’s enjoyment and livelihood? I just wish I could always be so magnanimous it seems I’m getting more belligerent with age!
.......However......... laws of the land are usually in place for a reason, in the case of navigable rights in the modern world, I would like to think, to protect the right of the landowner/ leasee, the public at large and the environment. ( caveat: I have no legal training).
As always there are at least two sides to each argument, sadly our modern attitudes, despite our “progression” into combating countless ‘isms, appear to becoming ever more polarised.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe I am too easy going but I can move on, the club involved on the other hand it may be a different matter and what other club members think I don't know. Personally, I won't be joining the club again but that's by the by. The wider issue of this as a bigger problem that's escalating around the country, that's another matter and one I don't see as a happy time coming, I just think that trying to fight for predominance or rights or pushing one groups enjoyment out or the other group is going to be such a long expensive drawn out thing. I think allotted areas should be given for one or the other and done with, if done proportionally and fairly. Forget navigational rights, that's some old laws that have not much to do with angling or flat boarding etc, sort it out for the modern world with new laws or agreements and done with.

 

[no-one in particular]

Its a string that if angling pulls on too strongly it wont turn out well. Either we will lose the angling rights as other pursuits bring in more money or they will bring in some stupid new rules such as designating angling to small parts of the river e.g special "angling area" ...this being 1 wooden platform in a wider bit of river and limit all angling to that.

The underlying problem is that there are too many people and its getting worse.

For that little river I think winter offers the best bet. The campsite will close down and few people will brave paddling or swimming...allot less anyway.

Winter is on my mind, maybe after September.

 

[108831]

Why is it that anglers get their day ruined by these people,but there is little we can do to naff theirs up,i'm unsure how that works,also on the tidal D.Stour at Christchurch,the owners get nothing from the kayakers,paddle boarders(hopefully not swimmers),yet get day ticket revenue and pretty expensive they are too,that's without quite expensive rents paid by the club,as for the govt wanting to open up waterways for these pastimes,perhaps clubs will ask landowners for greatly reduced rents and though fishing canals with barges and boats is ok,having swimmers walking on the bottom of your swim isn't,rivers that are under four feet deep and clear is absolutely impossible if canoes/boarders come through every ten minutes,hopefully I will be dead and gone before this idea kicks in properly,our tackle trade will be finished and more retail jobs will be lost....

 

[no-one in particular]

Another aspect of this that is worth a mention. I fished this many years ago a lot. It was a day ticket for a while and I never ever saw another angler, it belonged to a village club and no one hardly bothered, it was a bit further up then. Then some far away big club took it over from them but no one ever came and fished it, this club must have taken it off them in the meantime. I have been 4 times in the last month or so and only ever have seen one other angler and he must have been roving as I only saw him walk over the bridge with a rod., Odd I know for such a nice bit of river but this is my experience for a lot of rivers. I used to drive along some expensive trout chalk stream for miles for years that was all club owned and never saw one angler on it. I have visited other stretches of the same river system in the last few weeks and not seen one other angler, one club and one a free bit.
I must have seen at least over a 100 different people canoeing or flatboarding along here in the last month. Why are we so adamant we have the rights over them when we don't use those rights and clearly they have the majority more popular sport. Just a passing thought. I am not defending it, just looking at all angles because I am sure the legals will..

 

[steve2]

We are getting more swimmers on the River Chelmer what I don't think they realise is that they are only a few hundred yards from the main sewer farm outlet for Chelmsford. What I have seen floating down that river over the years it the last place I would swim.

 

[steve2]

Another aspect of this that is worth a mention. I fished this many years ago a lot. It was a day ticket for a while and I never ever saw another angler, it belonged to a village club and no one hardly bothered, it was a bit further up then. Then some far away big club took it over from them but no one ever came and fished it, this club must have taken it off them in the meantime. I have been 4 times in the last month or so and only ever have seen one other angler and he must have been roving as I only saw him walk over the bridge with a rod., Odd I know for such a nice bit of river but this is my experience for a lot of rivers. I used to drive along some expensive trout chalk stream for miles for years that was all club owned and never saw one angler on it. I have visited other stretches of the same river system in the last few weeks and not seen one other angler, one club and one a free bit.
I must have seen at least over a 100 different people canoeing or flatboarding along here in the last month. Why are we so adamant we have the rights over them when we don't use those rights and clearly they have the majority sport. Just a passing thought. I am not defending it, just looking at all angles because I am sure the legals will..

It's a case of use or lose it. Very few now fish rivers so why not open them up for all to enjoy in what ever way they want. I am surprised that many clubs still keep paying big rents for river sections they don't use.

 

[108831]

It is sad,but some rivers are too small for swimmers,boarders and kayakers,they simply disturb the river environment too much,the fish must be continually pooping themselves...

 

[mikench]

Mark I think you are being far too generous. In my view a lease of fishing rights on a small river should( and in law usually does) give exclusive occupation. The swimmer was a nutcase and I would have thought a size 12 hook in his trunks would have deterred him. Paddle boarders are using an idiotic and most inefficient form of propulsion that can only annoy anglers. Your club is paying a rent to enable fishing and that does not include canoeists. They should give members bailiff powers to stop them. It might be fun for kids and louts to throw stones in your swim but it is unacceptable behaviour and you wouldn't tolerate it so why allow the swimmers, canoeists and paddle boarders to ruin your legitimate and exclusive right to fish?

 

[tigger]

It's a case of use or lose it. Very few now fish rivers so why not open them up for all to enjoy in what ever way they want. I am surprised that many clubs still keep paying big rents for river sections they don't use.

I have no idea where you reside but the rivers round these parts are stuffed with anglers.
Infact all the rivers I know up north of here or down south are all heavily fished.

Deff'o do not need scrotes swimming and boating !

 

[mikench]

Legally the water itself is not owned, but ownership of the lands include stream bed ownership. Under common law, the presence of water does not provide a right to use the space occupied by, or immediately above the water. This is a civil offence, and may incur a fine or possibly a court injunction to prevent further trespassing. This applies to any member of the public, be they canoeists, rowers, swimmers, or anglers.

Your club are paying for these rights, the other clowns are not. They are trespassers.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

They say that there is nothing like a quiet day fishing . . . and looking at those photos, that fishing is nothing like a quiet pastime.

Personally, I'd have packed up and found somewhere else to fish rather than tolerate that sort of behaviour. If it is a club water then I'd be asking the committee to have a word with the owner as these "sports" are mutually exclusive, IMO.

Failing agreeable resolution then I'd be looking for a different club where excusive rights are available for rented locations.

 

[markcw]

There are paddle boarders on the Oxford canal. It's only about 11 metres wide, I am waiting for a couple of narrow boats come towards them and see what happens.
As for clubs owning/renting waters whether rivers ,pools or canal. The angler is paying twice to use these, Club Membership,and in some cases an extra few quid as a stocking fee. And The EA licence, depending on how much club fees are the angler can pay a lot of money out, Canoeists ( as far as I am aware need a licence same as a canal boat ,but they never buy one) and paddle boarders and swimmers can just rock up and use the waterway for nothing, there are no checks made on them ,but there are on anglers.
I still say the club should have a word with the farmer,if they rent that stretch off him, They are paying X number of pounds a year for what should be exclusive rights.
Can you not get a few anglers together and fish in what could be a mini match but no keepnets and refuse to budge when these swimmers etc come through.

 

[tigger]

Many rivers are "non navigable river" where no boats are allowed beyond the tidal areas.
They still try it on and often have fishing rods protruding from their boats, so obviously fishing anywhere they pleease.
Talking nicely to these idiots doesn't cut the ice i'm afraid, so to send them on their way a more direct approach is needed.