Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: interesting article

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007

    Default interesting article

    Interesting article about access -

  2. #2

    Default Interesting article

    Personally speaking, I have no problem with paying for access. However in the case of a river, that's what I would be paying for - access to - not use of. Historically there is firm evidence that use of the rivers was free to all and sundry. So no, I'm not willing to pay for it. Access is another matter entirely, if it's from private land and not from a public place.
    Chocolate Fish Merino
    Mae'r defaid wedi bwyta fy brechdanau!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Middle Earth


    Quote Originally Posted by samB View Post
    Interesting article about access -

    Good find there Sam.

    Also interesting on the same site, this made me smile. Is this CRACK group still going?
    If not then ......

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    North Devon


    Thanks for posting Sam. A very well written piece with some valid and sensible points for consideration. I'm with Amanda in so far as I'm happy to pay for parking and access to the river over private land (as long as I'm not ripped off) but if as seems to be the case, I have a legal right to be on the river and I use public land for access and egress then any costs incurred have already been paid in the form of tax, and I seem to pay plenty of that.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    West Sussex.


    One of the more common arguments put across by the fishing lobby is that they pay for their hobby through the rod license scheme and by being members of fishing syndicates etc. This money is then used to stock the rivers and provide environmental stewardship.

    Whilst figures from the EA suggest that much more tax payers money is spent supporting fishing than the exchequer receives through the license scheme.

    This simple retort makes a good sound bite for mass consumption. Paddlers seem to have an issue with payment to paddle yet all members of the BCU already pay for a British Waterways and EA licence.

    Whilst I understand that the canal network is a man made structure and costs considerable funds to maintain few people object to the EA license scheme.

    Some people argue that paying a annual fee would be all right as long as the money was ring fenced to provide better access to the rivers and provide canoe and fish passes around obstacles such as weirs.

    The argument against a fee is often that we pay enough in this country in taxation and no one owns the water.

    I was affronted the other day to pay 5 to launch a canoe above Symonds Yat on the Wye. Whilst the slip way was very nice I felt 5 was excessive just to place a canoe on the river and drive away. The site was well used and people didn't seem to mind.

    Therefore I conclude that we all have a tolerance to paying for our chosen activities its more a question of perceived value than a clear objection to handing over cold hard currency.

    Bushcraft Survival and First Aid Training.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts