Results 1 to 46 of 46

Thread: Canoe England: Position Statement Access Arrangements for the shared use of non-tidal

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default Canoe England: Position Statement Access Arrangements for the shared use of non-tidal

    http://www.canoe-england.org.uk/medi...%202012%20.pdf

    Canoe England: Position Statement
    Access Arrangements for the shared use of non-tidal waters by manually powered craft
    1 Access to Water
    Canoe England fundamentally believes in the principle for access to and along unregulated (1) non-tidal waters and does not subscribe to the present assumption by some for these waters to be deemed private. Recently published research contests this assumption (2).
    Canoe England also takes a pragmatic view and believes that where Access Arrangements (3) are a means for shared use, they shall be on a joint local management basis that helps to protect the environment and respect the rights of other user interests.
    The legal situation in England and environmental use of the waterways is detailed in the Canoe England Waterways and Environment Charter (4) and document “You, your canoe and the environment” (5).
    From this position Canoe England will endeavour to:
    1.1 Work constructively with partners, agencies, the local community, interest groups and the “Big Society” concept to support and develop the shared use of physically usable waters when environmental conditions (especially water levels) are suitable.
    1.2 Develop acceptable management measures with partners to protect the environment and enable the wider use of waterways at all times as per the benchmark set by the Government access feasibility studies (2004): River Waveney - agreed minimum water levels, and no permit requirements; R Mersey – based on Dedication (6) for using waters.
    1.3 Dispense with formal signed documentation, and for Access Arrangements’s (AA’s) to be based on statements/memorandums of understanding and/or Dedication.
    1.4 Make these arrangements publicly available to all canoeists for self regulation.
    1.5 Encourage canoeists to follow the guidelines of such arrangements.
    1.6 Promote best environmental practice and responsible use and consideration for others on all waters.
    Canoe England cannot regulate or police AA’s or grant access to any waters with or without an AA, and will advise canoeists to only canoe when conditions are suitable (5). The decision whether or not to canoe is the responsibility of the individual canoeist(s).
    Canoe England acknowledges the different opinions on the legal position where public rights are not recognised. An AA shall be without prejudice to the views of the legal position of either Canoe England or the riparian owners and other interests. An AA shall neither confirm nor reject any party’s views or interpretation of the legal situation.
    2 Public Rights
    An AA shall not invalidate public rights to non-tidal waters physically usable by manually powered craft, to include canoes, should it be subsequently established:
    2.1 Such rights have not been extinguished.
    2.2 The historic use of usable waters is recognised to provide that right.
    References
    1 Use of non-tidal waters
    The position of public rights and the use of non-tidal waters in England are not straightforward:
    Where there is an active Navigation Authority or where historic rights are recognised, rights are defined.
    Where there is not an active Navigation Authority, waters are classified as unregulated and include abandoned navigations and other waterways on which there is a public right of navigation.
    There is an assumption by some that many unregulated waters are private and use is resisted or shall be by way of a structured AA.
    There is an overall lack of clarity for the shared use of non-tidal waters.
    2 River Transport 1189-1600, February 2011; The Rev’d Dr Douglas Caffyn, www.caffynonrivers.co.uk
    3 In the absence of a recognised public right to a waterway, the previous and present Government’s policy in England are for Voluntary Access Agreements (VAA’s). These can have conditions of use independently set by third parties, rather than being mutually agreed. Canoe England uses the terminology Access Arrangements (AA’s) rather than agreement.
    Historically VAA’s are without rights, insecure, being subject to termination at short notice. When arranged, the periods of use imposed can be limited to a few days or weeks per annum and make some provision for those requiring a greater certainty of access at particular times. VAA’s are few in number due to the difficulties as highlighted by the Government sponsored demonstration access feasibility projects (2004). The project schemes on the Rivers Teme and Wear were unsuccessful.
    The policy for VAA’s has been shown to have failed to meet an unmet demand when Canoe England has a remit to promote canoeing on all suitable waters in England. They may work well for some individuals or small organisations, however they cannot be used for securing public access.
    4 Canoe England Waterways & Environment Charter –
    http://www.canoe-england.org.uk/wate...ment/policies/
    The Charter takes into account the recently published research (2) that has established a strength of evidence for a historic public right of navigation to exist on all non-tidal waters that are physically usable. Canoe England believes the lack of certainty for public rights and the law has created tensions between user groups that can be resolved by a presumption in favour of a right of access; supported by appropriate local management measures.
    5 You, your canoe and the environment -
    http://www.canoe-england.org.uk/wate...nt/environment
    6 Dedication – leads to a public right of access. The Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000 has
    provisions for Dedication by landowners and relaxing specific restrictions in the Act.
    8 June 2012

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lochwinnoch, Scotland
    Posts
    17,244

    Default

    That sounds like a step forward.
    John

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    706

    Default P,f,l,o,p

    Thank's for posting this Quicky, I will need to read it though a few times to fully understand it !

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,902

    Default

    I guess CE don't have access to SOTP or ukrgb, shame, I'm sure they would find it usefull

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Oxfordshire
    Posts
    2,202

    Default

    That sounds much more encouraging
    Finally they are listening to the arguments.
    Bootstrap
    There's no such thing as inclement weather - you're just incorrectly dressed

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Somerset lad exiled in Surrey
    Posts
    1,949

    Default

    Would anyone like to summarise, in plain english, what this means....thanks

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    21,989

    Default

    Hmm. Sounds like progress in terms of their stated position anyway. At least I think that's what it says.
    Paddler,blogger,camper,pyromaniac: Blog: Wilderness is a State of Mind

    Paddle Points - where to paddle

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colchester, Essex
    Posts
    491

    Default

    It seems to be a small step in the right direction, but they still have quite away to go.
    I hope this is a genuine change in CE's position and policies on the access situation, but it will take actions rather than words to prove this.
    I think the main test of this statement will be what happens to Access Arrangements over the next year or 2, will they fit the terms of the statement, or will CE and their representatives continue to sign documents that don't represent canoeist's interests and rights.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Lochwinnoch, Scotland
    Posts
    17,244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sprout View Post
    Would anyone like to summarise, in plain english, what this means....thanks
    My quick take on this is that CE's position is that there is a right to canoe in all inland waters, pretty much. That canoeing reponsability is within the law. That acess agreements do not superceed the legal right to paddle responsibly. They will enter into access agreements to minimise enviromental damage but negotiated on the premise we have the right to paddle anyway, not that we are beholden to any agreement to give up that right.

    And of course it is up to the individual paddler to ensure they paddle within the law etc
    John

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    wicklow
    Posts
    8

    Default

    It seems you guys have it tough in England with regards to access. In 15 years of k*$@king on rivers mostly around the east coast of ireland, i have never had any issues. Generally we are encouraged to keep are arses covered while changing so as not to offend/excite ? the locals. when sharing a river with anglers ( of which i am one) they are generally bemused and courteous. Now that i think of it somebody did discharge a shotgun over us once , but that is another story

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Somerset
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    I think it's quite a step forward from their previous position, and seems to reverse some of their previous statements. It would seem that CE have actually taken notice of what is going on every day, every week on the rivers in this country.
    ​Change is inevitable; progress is optional.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,794

    Default

    Now that Canoe England have made this statement to whom are they going to send it too and what actions will they be taking.?
    or is it just a publication for the magazine just to state they way they feel about the situation.?

    Any body know ?...
    In the harsh marine environment, something is always in need of repair. Duct tape fixes everything

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,629

    Default

    At last a policy that makes sense, only one step forward but in the right direction. It legitimises what is happening on the water now anyway, we just need to carry on until it becomes the norm. The Anglers did it for years, we will play them at their own game.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colchester, Essex
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MagiKelly View Post
    My quick take on this is that CE's position is that there is a right to canoe in all inland waters, pretty much. That canoeing reponsability is within the law. That acess agreements do not superceed the legal right to paddle responsibly. They will enter into access agreements to minimise enviromental damage but negotiated on the premise we have the right to paddle anyway, not that we are beholden to any agreement to give up that right.

    And of course it is up to the individual paddler to ensure they paddle within the law etc
    I think this is an optimistic interpretation of the statement.

    CE don't actualy state there is a right to canoe all inland waterways, just that they believe in the "principle for access to and along unregulated (1) non-tidal waters" and that the legal position is contested.

    They also state "Canoe England also takes a pragmatic view and believes that where Access Arrangements (3) are a means for shared use, they shall be on a joint local management basis that helps to protect the environment and respect the rights of other user interests."
    To be fair the 3 Access Agreements they have listed on the website do give full access with the only restrictions being for enviromental reasons, and they have said they will make all agreements public. But there doesn't seem to be anything in the statement to stop them agreeing to access restrictions on certain rivers for "pragmatic" reasons.

    As I said in my previous post, while this does appear to be a step in the right direction, we need to see what CE actualy do before we can tell if they have really changed policy.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,902

    Default

    This looks like a dramatic change from their stance in April. Wonder when they will change it back again.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sprout View Post
    Would anyone like to summarise, in plain english, what this means....thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Hyperion View Post
    I will need to read it though a few times to fully understand it !
    The Plain English Campaign will edit documents for a relatively modest fee. This could be a very sound investment. It's worth a modest investment to avoid any ambiguity or lack of clarity.

    But IF I understand the statement correctly this is progress - Where CE enter into discussions on agreements/ arrangements it seems

    • it will be on the basis that we are not asking to be given permission to paddle because we/they believe we already have the right to navigate based on Douglas Caffyns research although they are prepared to offer specific advice to paddlers on how this should be done in a responsible way to take account of valid environmental considerations.
    • They will publicise such arrangements and advice.


    They key thing however is what do they believe paddlers should do when there have been no such discussions and none are expected (which currently covers the vast majority or rivers in England) and how will they support paddlers that do it? This new position from CE will change nothing in the face of entrenched attitudes from some angling and riparian groups - unless we can get further recognition from the courts of what rights of navigation already exist or new legislation such as in Scotland to clarify the situation going forward. After many years lobbying there still seems no appetite in government or parliament for clarifying legislation but CE may know more than they have so far told us.

    So, "Well done for a promising start!" to CE. What's the next move?
    Keith

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    If there are parts of the statement which are unclear, it is worth asking the CE to clarify them. Although it took a while, we did eventually get CE to answer most of the questions we posed about their access campaign, by exerting pressure through Facebook.

    My guess is that they will respond fairly quickly to questions this time round. Especially given the generally positive response to the statement. They have promised a revamped Access Campaign web site. I wonder when this will appear.
    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Well it seems like a massive step forward to me, looks like they've re-visited the issue of VAA's (AA's) and concluded that over the last 40 some years the policy has been innefectual at least. I think the focus on "responsible" use and fair sharing of waterways is a positive one, there will always be irresponsible anglers AND paddlers, to be fair these people are likley to be outside their relavant fishing / paddling governing bodies so any policy never has or never will affect their values and attitudes.

    I think this is similar to the Canoe Wales's position? (not quite the same but close?) so it looks as though CE/BCU are saying paddle responsibly, don't get into fights on the river bank, share the water and look after the precious and ever dwindling (due to drought!) waterway networks. Where AA's exist respect them but make your own descions weather to paddle or not.

    At least i THINK that's what it's saying?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    184

    Default

    It is a step forward indeed. Now, if some sort of action follows the rhetoric, it would be almost dream come true.
    There's madness to my method.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Now that CE have amended their position many of their past statements and publications will need changing and updating. It's in the nature of the internet that many out of date publications will persist causing a lack of clarity and embarrassment for many years to come. So lets help CE by identifying things on their website that do not reflect this new position and therefore need changing and updating quickly to reinforce the changed position.

    For Example - http://www.canoe-england.org.uk/our-...le/ivel-river/

    "The Ivel is extensively fished and no formal access agreement exists. Avoid paddling at weekends (particularly Sundays) during the coarse fishing season as fishermen use the places that you will want to use to portage."

    Presumably this type of subservience and deference to the rights of anglers at the expense of the rights of paddlers is now a thing of the past. Of course we would like to be good neighbours and partners to those who share our rivers but such forelock tugging only encourages the continuance of outdated attitudes.

    It's unrealistic to expect CE to deploy the resources to identify all these statements that are now out of step with their policy (I suspect there will be hundreds of them!) so lets help them. Their resources can then be focus on updating such issues.
    Keith

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Hoo-bloody-ray!!

    It's what most of us do anyway! Paddle the waters RESPONSIBLY!
    A good step in the right direction


    Quote Originally Posted by Quicky View Post

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    Anyone seen any comment on this on Fishing Forums?
    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    2,016

    Default

    About time too!

    CE seem to be heading in our direction at last.

    We just need to gag the bigots, so that we can pass along rivers in peace.

    I hate having to fight every inch of our paddling rights but I will!!!! The CE seem to have strengthened our corner.

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,794

    Default

    I just don't see where it states yes you have a right to use all waters.

    I would have thought this would have to be a change in the Law for this to come into effect. And I just cant see that happening for a while yet.
    The river wear was mentione in the statment I am more than sure that the owner of approx 20 miles of it will not allow canoes on it unless the law of the land is changed.

    And again even though this policy or statment has been made will it be presented to goverment or not.
    In the harsh marine environment, something is always in need of repair. Duct tape fixes everything

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonar View Post
    I would have thought this would have to be a change in the Law for this to come into effect. And I just cant see that happening for a while yet.
    Not if the law already reflects the general right of navigation on our rivers as Douglas Caffyn has argued. The problem of course is to gain general recognition that this is the law. CE now recognise it -
    "Canoe England fundamentally believes in the principle for access to and along unregulated (1) non-tidal waters and does not subscribe to the present assumption by some for these waters to be deemed private. Recently published research contests this assumption (2)."
    The anglers and landowners who have opposed recognition of the general right of navigation still have to be convinced and will not be influenced by a simple change of views by CE. There is no reason to believe that the government & Defra have changed their views in anyway so the key questions remains "What are CE doing to gain general recognition of rights of navigation on our rivers and how will they support canoeists who act on the belief that there is already a general right of navigation?"
    Keith

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colchester, Essex
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    Not if the law already reflects the general right of navigation on our rivers as Douglas Caffyn has argued. The problem of course is to gain general recognition that this is the law. CE now recognise it -
    "Canoe England fundamentally believes in the principle for access to and along unregulated (1) non-tidal waters and does not subscribe to the present assumption by some for these waters to be deemed private. Recently published research contests this assumption (2)."

    The anglers and landowners who have opposed recognition of the general right of navigation still have to be convinced and will not be influenced by a simple change of views by CE. There is no reason to believe that the government & Defra have changed their views in anyway so the key questions remains "What are CE doing to gain general recognition of rights of navigation on our rivers and how will they support canoeists who act on the belief that there is already a general right of navigation?"
    I don't mean to be negative, but all CE have said, is they " fundamentally believes in the principle for access....."
    Surely this is not the same as saying they believe it is a legal right. Many people believe things in principle, but know they are not legally enforced e.g. I believe in the principle that we should be able to wild camp beside all rivers in the UK, but I know that there is no legal backing for this.

    They also say that Caffyn's research contests the belief that some rivers can be deemed private, they aren't saying they believe Caffyn's research has disproved this belief.

    I maybe wrong (and I hope I am), but I don't believe CE have stated they believe in the legal right to navigate all waterways.
    I have emailed CE to ask them to clarify this position and am waiting for there response.
    Last edited by KeithD; 24th-June-2012 at 01:00 PM. Reason: add quote from CE position statement

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,629

    Default

    We should give a big thank you to the Rev Caffyn for this step forward, it was his work that gave the paddlers the confidence to go out and reclaim the rivers. Without those paddlers sticking their necks out in the early days Canoe England would not have made this change now. The power of passive resistance is very effective, we just need to keep doing it. It worked well for Gandhi!
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    Not if the law already reflects the general right of navigation on our rivers as Douglas Caffyn has argued. The problem of course is to gain general recognition that this is the law. CE now recognise it -The anglers and landowners who have opposed recognition of the general right of navigation still have to be convinced and will not be influenced by a simple change of views by CE. There is no reason to believe that the government & Defra have changed their views in anyway so the key questions remains "What are CE doing to gain general recognition of rights of navigation on our rivers and how will they support canoeists who act on the belief that there is already a general right of navigation?"
    Well, yeah, that's true, but until this statement CE looked more like a special submissive branch of the British Gerontological Society (no offence to anyone personally, it relates to CE's official stance). The old position was more along the lines of "We know you don't like us paddling here, but please please please, could you let us do it when you're not fishing anyway?".
    Now they're saying that they have reasons to believe that non-regulated waters are public, so OK let's talk agreements, but not because you can do whatever you like.

    Pav
    There's madness to my method.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Nr Hampton Court, West London
    Posts
    3,084

    Default

    I have just received my Canoe England mag (whatever it is called at the moment). In it, and the longest article, is one on access.

    It would seem to me to be a radical revision to their stance, and even allowing for the fact that others do not always interpret what one has written in the manner one intended, seems to me to be pretty positive. Am I alone in this belief or in reading the mag, (which has quite a bit on single blade stuff) or am I the only CE member on this site?

    Impcanoe

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    184

    Default

    I am receiving it, but always found it too much like any other Quango-issued magazine. A remotely interesting bit here and there, standard ads, compulsory nods towards "community engagement", a tribute to political correctness and inclusivity, lots of stuff on the Olympics and other professional or "amateur", in the Olympic sense, sport of little relevance to virtually any recreational paddlers, and an occasional article along the lines of "holding paddles with your feet: pros and cons" by a self-proclaimed expert I've neither heard of nor care to find out about.

    And no, it's not off-topic, before you ask: the content of Canoe Focus is an epitome of what CE is all about. A bit too broad and focussed a bit too much on things I personally don't give a rat's about. The only thing of interest (apart from the mercantile stuff like the insurance and the canal license) that they could, in principle, make a difference in, is the access, yet until this latter change they were - in my personal and probably horrifically wrong opinion - just chewing fat neither here nor there.
    That's why I think it's a small, but important change.
    There's madness to my method.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colchester, Essex
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Impcanoe View Post
    I have just received my Canoe England mag (whatever it is called at the moment). In it, and the longest article, is one on access.

    It would seem to me to be a radical revision to their stance, and even allowing for the fact that others do not always interpret what one has written in the manner one intended, seems to me to be pretty positive. Am I alone in this belief or in reading the mag, (which has quite a bit on single blade stuff) or am I the only CE member on this site?

    Impcanoe
    I am a CE member too, and you are not alone in your belief, I think the magazine article and the above statement do represent a change in their stance on access. But I am not sure that it goes as far as some people think it does, and the real proof of a change in stance will be seen in their future actions rather than words.

    Pav,
    I think canoeing is a very broad ranging activity with lots of different subsections, so I doubt anyone who receives the magazine has a genuine interest in all the articles, but other organizations, eg the RYA, represent a wide range of activities quite successfully, so there is no reason why CE can not deal with the access issue while still carrying out it's other functions.
    Last edited by Barney; 24th-June-2012 at 07:46 PM.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lancaster, Lancashire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barney View Post
    Pav,
    I think canoeing is a very broad ranging activity with lots of different subsections, so I doubt anyone who receives the magazine has a genuine interest in all the articles, but other organizations, eg the RYA, represent a wide range of activities quite successfully, so there is no reason why CE can not deal with the access issue while still carrying out it's other functions.
    Yep, Barney, you're right, and that's in a way almost exactly my point. On one hand, given their present resources, they're spreading themselves too thinly: it's a lot like trying to represent 'British sport', and as a result they try to give everything a bit of attention, and nothing really gets what it deserves. Just a lack of - funnily enough - canoe focus On another hand, I would think the other reason for not enough pressure put on access is that it takes los cojones to assume a potentially conflicting stance, and being a public benevolent fund as they are, they seem to feel obliged to keep a pleasant face even when violated with a big fishing rod
    And RYA... well, similar. Meh, I am a former member, and the only thing I've seen from them were the courses, all of them heftily priced, the accreditation of which the RYA has quite frankly monopolised. Other than that, nothing, really.
    There's madness to my method.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    When I met CE they told me I would like this article in Canoe Focus when it came out. They did not tell me it was already on the website so this is my first reaction.

    Let's all play semantics while carrying on business as usual.
    The public has no power to relinquish its common law rights so no one can appoint themselves to relinquish those rights on our behalf. Any restriction on navigation agreed by CE means they are acting beyond their powers. It does not matter whether it is called a VAA (voluntary access agreement), an AA
    (access arrangement), or PSB (playing silly b*****s.)
    The whole idea of dedication is a legal can of worms. What is being dedicated?
    It can't be the water, it is neither fixed nor quantifiable so may not be property.
    It can't be a way over the soil of the river since a way under water may only exist at a ford or causeway.
    It can't be the right of navigation because that is ours anyway. The public would be dedicating its own property to itself.

    They told me I would like this article when it came out. Just shows how wrong they can be. If this is a call to arms we had better find out our plastic Lone Star cap guns.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    so nothing changes, they keep geting sport england funding for competition and forget their members....

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quicky View Post
    so nothing changes, they keep geting sport england funding for competition and forget their members....
    Is even worse than that because the fishermen say they will not talk to CE unless they agree that there is no public right of navigation so AAs can not even get off the ground. Why aren't they telling us this?

    Quote from a Nottingham tram "A dream without a plan is just a wish."

  36. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    West Sussex.
    Posts
    3,240

    Default

    All the time paddlers like lemmings send off their membership fees to the BCU every year they will continue to focus on what they perceive as important. Money is what counts and their careers so Elite sport will continue to get the majority of their attention and we will get the occasional bland leaflet delcaring a new canoe trail on one of the few rivers you could always paddle as long as you have paid for license.

    Bushcraft Survival and First Aid Training.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colchester, Essex
    Posts
    491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wayne View Post
    All the time paddlers like lemmings send off their membership fees to the BCU every year they will continue to focus on what they perceive as important. Money is what counts and their careers so Elite sport will continue to get the majority of their attention and we will get the occasional bland leaflet delcaring a new canoe trail on one of the few rivers you could always paddle as long as you have paid for license.
    Unfortunately BCU (or in this case their English division CE) do provide a couple of services that represent good value for money.
    Firstly the waterways license and third party insurance which are included in the membership fee are in themselves worth at least 4 or 5 times the individual member fee (most members won't use all the areas covered by the license, but it still represents a saving on the navigation licences they would need). Plus the option to buy comprehensive insurance at very good prices.

    If people were to leave CE to protest at their policys/actions, it would cost the canoeists more than it would cost CE. Or there would be a large increase in the number of unlicensed canoes which would not help our case with the Goverment, Landowners, Anglers, Environment Agency, Canal and River Trust, etc.

    I think the best way to get CE to change their attitude and actions (and not just their vaguely worded policy aspirations) is to stay a member and protest from within. Attend the meetings they are starting to hold, email/write to them etc. If we do this enough, it will become clear to them that they need to change.

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Southport, really in Lancashire, UK
    Posts
    2,016

    Default

    The views expressed above indicate an unwillingness to support Canoe England and probably Canoe Wales. But as Barney says, members we should be making enough noise to ensure they respond to our plight.

    Canoe England and Canoe Wales are our organisations and the democratic constitutions they have should be used to empower them to act positively for the good of canoeing in our countries. They are not perfect but when is any elected group? Our backing and prompting should get them going, they realise that matters are heating up and it would be better for the CE and CW to help their members rather than lose them.

    On the other hand we have nowhere else to go! Or do we?

    Doug
    When there's trouble on shore, there's peace on the wave,
    Afloat in the White Canoe.
    Alan Sullivan


  39. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    I think it was Lenin that said people get the government they deserve. Leaving the BCU would be a bad move because the third party insurance alone is good value for money. That is without the licenses. The current leadership tells us they do not have the knowledge and skills for the job but have not done anything about it in the last 12 months. As an excuse for failure they tell me that Kevin East has built good relations with government departments and agencies. As an example take Wanda at Natural England. CE contributed to a NE internal document which never left Wanda's desk. In response to one e-mail Wanda gave me everything I wanted ( details on andybiddulph.co.uk ) and then sent me an e-mail of thanks and appreciation for circulating her letter to all interested parties. Effectiveness and good relations are not mutually exclusive categories.
    Richard Atkinson tells me that CE can not do what I do because they are a non-government body. After listing all the material advantages of Roman occupation, Tacitus wrote in his history of Briton, "These things the foolish Britons regard as marks of civilisation when in reality they are the tokens of their enslavement." Are respectability and good relations marks of civilisation or tokens of enslavement?
    The BCU is a membership organisation and the members need to take responsibility. It is down to us to ask the hard question, can the current leadership be reformed or do we need to wipe the slate clean and start again? If we can not ask and answer that question we will get the leadership we deserve.
    Last edited by Angut; 12th-September-2012 at 07:15 AM. Reason: typo

  40. #40
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,921

    Default

    +1.

    Except for the bit about Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph de Maistre
    Every country has the government it deserves (Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite)

  41. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Bucks
    Posts
    6,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DougR View Post
    +1.

    Except for the bit about Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov.
    Каждая страна имеет то правительство, которого он заслуживает

  42. #42
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Deepest darkest Wales
    Posts
    3,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adrian Cooper View Post
    Каждая страна имеет то правительство, которого он заслуживает
    The next time Dave from Tech support - the guy with the Mumbai accent - rings to tell you that your computer has a virus - try explaining that your keyboard has taken to speaking Russian.

    Double points if you can get the conversation onto youtube.

  43. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default


    Chúng tôi biết nó là các yếu tố con người, và nguồn tài nguyên không vật chất, mà quyết định kết quả của chiến tranh.
    -Vơ Nguyên giáp

  44. #44
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Basingstoke
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DougR View Post
    The next time Dave from Tech support - the guy with the Mumbai accent - rings to tell you that your computer has a virus - try explaining that your keyboard has taken to speaking Russian.

    Double points if you can get the conversation onto youtube.
    Is this the SOTP equivalent of 419 baiting?

  45. #45
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angut View Post

    Chúng tôi biết nó là các yếu tố con người, và nguồn tài nguyên không vật chất, mà quyết định kết quả của chiến tranh.
    -Vơ Nguyên giáp
    The Vietnamese... These are a people who take shit from no one... Americans? Chinese? Go back to where you came from!

    "You come here with guns? We will meet you with guns! You come here with smiles? We will greet with you with smiles!"

    A Vietcong veteran told me that. I've never forgotten it. We need some Vietcong spirit.
    Doug Dew
    "The best is yet to come" My Father


  46. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire
    Posts
    69

    Default

    I'm a BCU member, good insurance & EA water license rolled into one. Beggared if I need theirs nor a riparians approval to paddle anywhere though

Posting Permissions

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