Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 61 to 89 of 89

Thread: Access Rights

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    I dont think your theory falls completely apart but its been rejected twice now by the Welsh Assembly and once by DEFRA. You know its not just not enough to take to a judge, so keep slipping along under the far bank and hope to establish what Biddulph calls his 'tipping point'.
    The Welsh Government hve not rejected our legal argument but have failed to respond to it. Defra now has no recorded information concerning their policy on navigation on unregulated watercourses. They can only refger us to their answer to our petition to Paliament which contains nothing but waffle.

    The tipping point has already happened. Canoeists are ignoring the egregeous claims of fishermen and asserting their rights. That is why AT are doing a suicide run by threatening to take the BCU to court then complaining that they received a 14 page solicitor's letter in reply. Do you really think they will follow through or was it just window dressing for their own members who are seeing how feeble they really are. A lot of fishermen see AT as just trouble causers.

  2. #62
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,903
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    Last year when setting up the consultation process prior to the proposed Green Paper the Welsh Government said

    This year in relation to the Green Paper the Minister saidNeither of those statements were rejections.

    Defra said

    Sooner or later this will be resolved on the basis of the evidence. The evidence you have offered so far

    1. Magna Carta didn't really exist
    2. "All rivers" should be translated as "only four rivers"

    has been totally unconvincing, even you have not tried to defend it. So, lets avoid the circular arguments and opinions. Give us your best evidence, Robbo (or have we already had it?)

    Out of interest, I can see how the Magna Carta relates to rights of navigation in England. But how does it relate to Wales? Surely Wales was a separate country in those days (1215), with its own laws.

    Shouldn't we be looking at old Welsh laws, to see what applies? Do we have anyone here with knowledge of these? We seem to have plenty who seem to know a lot about old English law, but how about Welsh?

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    Out of interest, I can see how the Magna Carta relates to rights of navigation in England. But how does it relate to Wales? Surely Wales was a separate country in those days (1215), with its own laws.

    Shouldn't we be looking at old Welsh laws, to see what applies? Do we have anyone here with knowledge of these? We seem to have plenty who seem to know a lot about old English law, but how about Welsh?
    Section 6 of the 1536 Laws in Wales Act united the common law of England and Wales so any rights we had also became Welsh rights. Our case law became Welsh case law. English statutes became Welsh statutes. Old Welsh law is no longer valid.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    Shouldn't we be looking at old Welsh laws, to see what applies? Do we have anyone here with knowledge of these?
    The Romans described the law relating to flowing water as a "natural law" (so obvious that even animals understood it) and relating to public use of riverbanks as a "law of nations" (so obvious that all nations observed it, irrespective of time and place). The Romans were certainly familiar with Wales - they lived there for several hundreds of years.
    Keith

  5. #65
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,903
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Hmmm. Interesting.

    But could the laws of England and Wales start to diverge again, if the Welsh Assembly voted for new legislation in this area?

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post
    Hmmm. Interesting.

    But could the laws of England and Wales start to diverge again, if the Welsh Assembly voted for new legislation in this area?
    Any alterations in the common law would also affect the rights of the English. The PRN belongs to both populations. At the moment only the Parliament at Westminster can alter English rights in Wales. Only if Westminster set up a Hwl Newydd and granted powers to WAG would they be able to change the common law in Wales.

  7. #67
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,903
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD View Post
    The Romans described the law relating to flowing water as a "natural law" (so obvious that even animals understood it) and relating to public use of riverbanks as a "law of nations" (so obvious that all nations observed it, irrespective of time and place). The Romans were certainly familiar with Wales - they lived there for several hundreds of years.
    Well, I'm with the Romans on this one.


    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  8. #68

    Default

    What did they ever do for us!

    It's a blag, you've said as much. You want to give people enough confidence so that they boat on water they didn't previously and hope that in the end it will be just too much trouble for landowners to stop them. An interpritation of dicta from Lightman coupled with Caffyns selective cropping of 12 Edward IV, c7 instead of using the earlier and better representative Acts of 25 Ed,3 c4 or even 4 Hen,4 c11 gives some people the confidence to take without asking. That's your legacy.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Mid-Wales (River Wye)
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    What did they ever do for us!

    It's a blag, you've said as much. You want to give people enough confidence so that they boat on water they didn't previously and hope that in the end it will be just too much trouble for landowners to stop them. An interpritation of dicta from Lightman coupled with Caffyns selective cropping of 12 Edward IV, c7 instead of using the earlier and better representative Acts of 25 Ed,3 c4 or even 4 Hen,4 c11 gives some people the confidence to take without asking. That's your legacy.
    To change tack a little, what are the problems with paddlers using the Dee?

    The legal stuff is a bit boring, and irrelevant really. The Courts need to make a ruling - not the forum members, or some geezers on the Dee.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Keynsham near Bristol
    Posts
    3,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    An interpritation of dicta from Lightman coupled with Caffyns selective cropping of 12 Edward IV, c7 instead of using the earlier and better representative Acts of 25 Ed,3 c4 or even 4 Hen,4 c11 gives some people the confidence to take without asking. That's your legacy.
    The last time you referred to Acts like 25 Ed 3, c4 etc was to support your claim that there were only four Great Rivers where navigation was protected. This error has been conclusively disposed of without further resistance from you. So what precisely do you feel is the advantage of this Act over and above any other and why do you think that they all fail to bear witness to the common law public rights of navigation in all rivers, subject only to the physical constraints of the river and the size and nature of the vessels using them?
    Last edited by KeithD; 28th-September-2014 at 04:58 PM.
    Keith

  11. #71

    Default

    David, i second that question. I have genuinely been trying to establish what the issues are on the Dee.

    So far i have come out with a couple of things;

    1) The commercial use of the Dee is quite heavy at times, and this creates much noise and disturbance - HOWEVER - this is only during normal business hours so prior to 10am and after 5pm there are almost no commercial users. This leaves a significant portion of time for anglers without raft disturbance. From a town perspective, these are more often than not, over night visitors which makes them incredibly valuable to the local economy.

    2) Mile End Mill. For many years Michael Dalton (founder of Nomad Canoes) has made it quite clear that he sees the river as 'owing him'. He takes the view that because he arranged for planning to mess with the river bed for paddlers then he should be able to charge those using 'his' river as he sees fit. In the current format, it is him that has insisted that whitewater active/tubing have to charge users of their car park a 'river fee' and issue arm bands instead of just a parking charge. I am led to believe it is in their (as his tenants) contract!
    Essentially there isnt actually a 'problem' here, it is entirely down to a man wanting to make as much as he can from his piece of bank, whilst keeping his angling chums happy so has geared his views to theirs. (Its worth noting in fairness, that this view is equally applicable to Canoe Wales at present)

    3) Paddlers dont pay. To the angling clubs, its extremely difficult to charge their members and other public the fees they do when there arent that many fish to catch, and a huge number of non angling users of the river do so for free. They also wish do diversify and see 'permitting navigation' as a method to control paddlers, and later down the line earn from them - in the meantime they can get splash funding to pay them off.

    4) Some of the anglers, they see the paddlers as 'free loaders' because they dont pay. They dont much like that they have been sold 'exclusivity' by llangollen maelor (who never had that to sell) for high fees and we get more freedom for free.

    5) Exclusivity Exclusivity Exclusivity.

    I think thats it really? Can anyone add anything else?
    Promoting sustainable access on the welsh Dee from gradientfood.com - an outdoor sports themed sandwich bar in Llangollen

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlipT View Post
    David, i second that question. I have genuinely been trying to establish what the issues are on the Dee.

    2) Mile End Mill. For many years Michael Dalton (founder of Nomad Canoes) has made it quite clear that he sees the river as 'owing him'. He takes the view that because he arranged for planning to mess with the river bed for paddlers then he should be able to charge those using 'his' river as he sees fit. In the current format, it is him that has insisted that whitewater active/tubing have to charge users of their car park a 'river fee' and issue arm bands instead of just a parking charge. I am led to believe it is in their (as his tenants) contract!
    Essentially there isnt actually a 'problem' here, it is entirely down to a man wanting to make as much as he can from his piece of bank, whilst keeping his angling chums happy so has geared his views to theirs. (Its worth noting in fairness, that this view is equally applicable to Canoe Wales at present)
    No one may charge a toll through without statutory authority since only Parliament can agree to tolls on behalf of the public. I have already had this out with Canoe Wales so they should no tbe charging for the use of the river only the use of their facilities on land.. If they still are still charging for the river let me know. The fact that works have been carried out has nothing to do with tolls through. Even the canal companies who built the whole waterway needed an act of Parliament to charge tolls.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    What did they ever do for us!

    It's a blag, you've said as much. You want to give people enough confidence so that they boat on water they didn't previously and hope that in the end it will be just too much trouble for landowners to stop them. An interpritation of dicta from Lightman coupled with Caffyns selective cropping of 12 Edward IV, c7 instead of using the earlier and better representative Acts of 25 Ed,3 c4 or even 4 Hen,4 c11 gives some people the confidence to take without asking. That's your legacy.
    I do not understand what you hope to achieve. What you are doing by presenting hollow arguments which are easily knocked down is convincing everyone that there is no case against a PRN on all watercourses where there is "natural and visible capacity for use." Fishermen are not fools. If they see the case against canoeists continually failing they will draw their own conclusions. As a guy on a salmon fishing forum said, "I can't see what all the fuss is about. Ten minutes after they had passed I caught a 4lb trout."

    Do we get the exact words you wish to quote from all those cases you listed or was that just a blag?

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Robin Hood's Bay,Yorkshire
    Posts
    2,660

    Default

    He can charge for paddling, and I understand he does. You can do what you want if no one stops you.
    http://www.davidwperry.blogspot.co.uk/

  15. #75

    Default

    Andy, CT still heavily imply that a fee needs to be paid to use the water. They tie it in as a "facility" but become very evasive when challenged.
    Somewhat hypocritical when you consider the recent statement of how WDP needed to be clear on their terms and who is bound by them.
    Promoting sustainable access on the welsh Dee from gradientfood.com - an outdoor sports themed sandwich bar in Llangollen

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Perry View Post
    He can charge for paddling, and I understand he does. You can do what you want if no one stops you.
    Simple .. Don't pay and ask to see his statutory authority if he asks. If he threatens any action if you do not pay then he is demanding money with menaces and the police should be called.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlipT View Post
    Andy, CT still heavily imply that a fee needs to be paid to use the water. They tie it in as a "facility" but become very evasive when challenged.
    Somewhat hypocritical when you consider the recent statement of how WDP needed to be clear on their terms and who is bound by them.
    If you use any of their facilities on land, including parking, they can charge you. If you put in from the oposite bank or upstream of the chipper then they can not charge. The fact that NRW have installed a canoe/portage pass at the chipper proves they accept the PRN.

    Write to CW and ask for clarification. Weasle words are cheap. Nil by mouth!

    If they still say you have to pay then send me the letter and I will give them the ear ache.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Stone , Staffs
    Posts
    1,796

    Default

    I've paddled above the chipper quite a bit and I'm not aware of any right of way to the waters edge ... Its all private land and private tracks ...

    http://www.riverinfo.co.uk/index.php?page=Tryweryn

    I'm happy to pay for the use of this great facility and see the money charged would be needed to pay for the running costs of such a venue

    I've never been charged for unloading my boat in the bottom centre car park and shuttling car to Bala car park when running the Lower T ... But I still choose to pay when doing that as I don't like to freeload as its a private car park ...

    CW have gone public with regards to fighting access agreements and the WDP so they will get my support when it come to me using CT we are very lucky to have such a great venue which has allowed us to paddle WW pretty much all summer ...

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    552

    Default

    I've paddled on the Dee a number of times and met with everything from sullen stares to shouted aggression with the very occasional, and I mean very occasional, civilized greeting from anglers. I spent 4 days paddling the Spey recently. What a staggering contrast. Yes they have the Land Reform Act which confirms access rights but the response from anglers without exception was friendly civil and co-operative. the river was being heavily fished with anglers every few hundred yards who up there are paying up to a grand a day for fishing. We drew the attention of each one and asked how they wanted us to pass, some on the far bank others tight up behind them if they were wading. We discussed the river, the weather, fishing, canoeing and bantered with many of them that we stood a better chance of a fish leaping into our boats than they did of catching one. Without exception the relationship was positive, two groups of enthusiasts sharing a common resource which only added another dimension to a wonderful paddling experience on a fantastic river. The only problem on the Dee is in the minds of a bunch of atavistic dinosaurs who aren't prepared to share. No other problems exist and if you need proof of that, whether you paddle a canoe or hold a fishing rod, then head north of the border for a few days!
    Mike

  20. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angut View Post
    he is demanding money with menaces and the police should be called.
    Anguts 115th Dream

    'I decided to have him arrested and I went lookin for a cop'

  21. #81
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,596

    Default

    This is a post from 20/1/2013 on facebook by Peter Carol from ProAdventure and a Director of WDP Ltd, it just gives a bit more background info that may be of interest.


    ProAdventure


    20 January 2013





    A quick update on the access situation on the Welsh Dee


    Peter Carol

    The Welsh Dee
    Time to break my silence here I think.
    I do sit on the steering group that Welsh Dee Fishing Ltd have organised for discussions on the permissions they have published.
    I have made it very clear from the start that I do not represent paddlers in this process and as far as I am aware no agreements have been made, there have been discussions over the terms of the permissions but only the angling clubs can vary their permissions.
    I arranged a meeting of all the commercial users of the river that I could get together, and the clear and unanimous outcome of that meeting was that the only person that could represent them in negotiations is Ashley Charlwood of Canoe Wales.
    I couldn't honestly sit on the Steering panel with my paddler hat on as my feelings are much the same as anyone else.
    The role I take on the panel, which fits in with my post of Vice Chair of the Llangollen Chamber of Trade and Tourism is do my best to help create and preserve local jobs involving the river without threat of injunction.
    I do not advocate that you follow the permissions or that you don't follow them but I want as much hassle free paddling on the river as possible, I want more local jobs and I want the river cared for and maintained.
    I have commercial interests on the river through two companies that I have set up and am a director of, one ProAdventure Activities Ltd a not for profit company providing high quality coaching, coach education and adventure experiences, the other is White Water Tubing UK Ltd, a provider of White Water Tubing on the river and hopefully soon rafting. Last year we had over 2000 people on the river, many new to paddlesport. It may sound like a gold mine, but one company is a not for profit and the other a start up in a difficult market, but job wise we create a lot of work locally, that is why I sit on the steering group.
    The steering group makes no decisions on the permissions, any possible changes are made by the angling clubs.
    Other people on the steering group include representatives from the CCW, Council, AONB, Angling Clubs, land owners, Canal and Rivers Trust, Mike Dalton (owner of Mile End Mill) Chris Charters and others. Not all the land owners are represented, nor are all the owners of fishing rights.
    I have received various letters from the anglers over the years with threats of potential legal action, the most recent accompanying the publication of the anglers permissions last year, and the most recent of these last Thursday, which was recanted after the anglers read their permissions. But they are planning to restrict the permissions come April fitting in with their three month term.
    I for one would like to get on with the anglers, they have worked hard on this process (yes it is in their own interests, as is my considerable work on this in my own interests and those I employ both directly and indirectly).
    I am also leading a group of companies who wish to raft the river from the Horseshoe Falls to the Ponsonby Car Park. We wish to raft commercially, put some cash in to a not for profit company to look after fences, car parks, access, egress etc, potentially employ a liaison officer to make things work smoothly, and do some paddler education on the environment etc. This would be a contracted agreement, without payment for canoeing and kayaking, and from the advice we have taken would not affect anyone elses rights. The potential for a lot of extra local jobs is obvious.
    So in conclusion,
    I don't represent or claim to represent any paddlers, either recreational or non recreational. Anything I have put to the anglers that could form an agreement for rafting and tubing is agreed by the bodies that would be party to a contract, and no payments would go to the anglers or anything for crossing on water over anyone's land.
    We do pay for parking, access across the land etc when we coach at Mile End Mill, we occupy the site all day and work there (much more could be done if the lease issues are resolved). A lot has been done there to make things better for paddling and coaching there .

    https://www.facebook.com/proadventur...46278522193275

    Info from DueDil website.

    Welsh Dee Partnership Limited was registered on 09 Jan 2013 with its registered office in Denbighsire. The business has a status listed as "Live" and it currently has 4 directors. It was founded by Mr Gareth Huw Evans, Mr Michael Anthony Dalton, Mr Christopher Philip Thomas Charters, Mr Paul Thomas Stafford. Welsh Dee Partnership Limited has no subsidiaries.
    Last edited by cloudman; 2nd-October-2014 at 01:27 AM.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  22. #82

    Default

    Thanks for finding that!
    Promoting sustainable access on the welsh Dee from gradientfood.com - an outdoor sports themed sandwich bar in Llangollen

  23. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,596

    Default

    This is a post from 20/1/2013 on facebook by Peter Carol from ProAdventure and a Director of WDP Ltd, it just gives a bit more background info that may be of interest.
    My mistake, I said Peter Carol is a director of WDP Ltd this is not correct, Sorry.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  24. #84

    Default

    Well, if you've no more questions I'll head off but I will be looking in from time to time to keep an eye on you all. There will always be a small minority who seem to be able to pick a fight with themselves and who must just live in a miasma but I don't think most believe the blag really. You should remember that our rivers aren't the battle grounds some would have us believe.

    Stay cool, Robbo. Leek.

  25. #85
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    1,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robbo11 View Post
    Well, if you've no more questions I'll head off but I will be looking in from time to time to keep an eye on you all. There will always be a small minority who seem to be able to pick a fight with themselves and who must just live in a miasma but I don't think most believe the blag really. You should remember that our rivers aren't the battle grounds some would have us believe.

    Stay cool, Robbo. Leek.
    It's a bit like the trenches in WW1, the regular soldiers started to contact each other and became quite frendly, the famous xmas football match was not a one off. This off coarse was stoped by the generals, so they had to start killing each other again. There has been less agrivation on the rivers this year due to both sides starting to get used to each other, so what do AT do, start the fighting again. Nothing changes.
    "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
    Grp Cpt Sir Douglas Bader CBE,DSO,DFC,FRAeS.

  26. #86
    Crow's Avatar
    Crow is offline こんにちは。私はカラスと私はスコットラ ンドの出身で す。
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Third stone from the sun
    Posts
    15,903
    Journal Entries
    10

    Default

    Who was he? Where did he come from? Where did he go?

    Is it important?

    Sounds a bit like the Lone Ranger.

    "I stepped up on the platform. The man gave me the news. He said - you must be joking, son, where did you get those shoes?"

    Crow Trip Log

  27. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Maidstone, Kent
    Posts
    306

    Default

    Just read this thread - I've signed it (bit late, but signed) - well done!

    Would you consider helping my cause? http://www.songofthepaddle.co.uk/for...o-river-access!


    Quote Originally Posted by pritch1 View Post
    Great work from Phillip Thomas!

    Please join this campaign: http://www.change.org/p/natural-resourc ... e_petition

    "Since their first application for funding in 2012 under the name 'Welsh Dee Fishing Ltd' the Welsh Government have stated that the Law is 'unclear' regarding navigation of our rivers as a blanket statement. In this light, it can not be considered appropriate to award public funding to an organisation made up of angling interests whom independently have made it very clear they wish to reduce and heavily restrict the main water users (canoes and kayaks) without the legislation to support them.

    By providing SPLASH funding to a group with published interest in reducing access as recently explored in the media - including the BBC One show, you are effectively providing a government seal of approval to their viewpoint, which may in due course be proven incorrect in law. We would ask that you take a neutral stance in this matter and seek another method of encouraging fair usage of our rivers until the law is clarified.

    All members of public, including those who take their children to the river to feed the ducks, paddle in the water, canoe, swim or kayak in/on the river anywhere in Wales should take interest in this petition.

    Welsh Dee Partnership Ltd rules (which are not supported in law) prohibit all non angling users from the water for the majority of daylight hours, and have been given government support in order to publicise and police their rules.

    If we do not stand against such elitist schemes whose aim is to restrict our rivers for exclusive use by a minority there is chance for them to pop up all over the country - paid for with public funds."
    ...Sometimes it's good to put the paddle down and just let the canoe glide...


  28. #88
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Poole, Dorest
    Posts
    240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crow View Post

    Sounds a bit like the Lone Ranger.
    Maybe it is a bit like the Lone Ranger. In the recent Lone Ranger movie Johnny Depp said, I cant decide if this horse is stupid or pretending to be stupid.

    Sometimes I drop in to read posts on access but of recent times I'm often left with the type of question John Depp voiced.

  29. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Burton on Trent
    Posts
    452

    Default

    Back to the Dee.

    The Ombudsman has refused to investigate my complaint against WAG on the grounds that WAG say they have not been given a chance to address my complaint. This is in spite of stonewalling me for over 12 months. Never mind, the rules of the game have now shifted. Saying they have nothing to add to previous statements that said nothing sends the complaint straight back to the Ombudsman with no reason for him not to follow up.

    The overall situation with governments is now:-
    1) Defra have washed their hands of the issue and have weeded their records so that there is no longer any documented policy on navigation on unregulated watercourses. Unfortunately for them, in the good old days when Benyon was rooting for the AT they answered a petition to Parliament so it is there in Hansard. Defra are still vulnerable on the legal status of VAAs but I am not pushing because Defra is taking no action while WAG are.
    2)WAG, bless them, have listened to the blandishments of SMS and financed VAAs with WUF and WDP. Caveat Actor. They now have to show that their actions are lawful and within their powers and that WUF and Welsh Dee Fishing had the power to make agreements or arrangements concerning navigation. The answer to my FOI request on the 7th August said WAG had made no attempt to check the lawfulness of their actions. It seems that when Sauron MS, the Dark Lord of Mordor, rides forth from his fastness in the Welsh Marches to give them their intructions their minds go numb and they can see no need to question what they must do.
    3)Neither the EA or Natural England from which NRW devolves have any statutory remit for navigation on unregulated watercourses. By what statutory powers did NRW administer SPLASH funding on behalf of WAG? Westminster did not legislate to give them such powers and as far as I am aware there has been no legislation in the Welsh Assembly. A nod and a wink from a WAG minister is not granting of statutory powers which only an elected assembly can do. Can someone who is already dealing with NRW press them on this issue? Anyone who has suffered loss due to ultra vires actions by NRW would have a claim against them and should seek legal advice.

    We are well into the end game now. In England, there is no longer government support for the anti-canoe lobby. The only thing left is the AT's legal action against the BCU which has not actually started yet. The latest was AT has sent a letter and BCU solicitors returned a 14 page letter. That is, the first pre-action exchanges have been made. My guess is there it will fizzle out. AT's grandstanding was for the benefit of their members. In spite of lengthy research they could present no legal arguments to support their case when I took them to court. There has been no new legislation or case law since. In Wales, it is WAG that will get fried and hopefully in the glare of publicity in the run up to an election. There comes a point when all objections to the rights of the British public just fade away.
    Last edited by Angut; 27th-October-2014 at 06:27 PM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

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