Access

[ned]

Just written this to answer try and answer some questions about rainchasers 'irresponsibility' regarding access.

"We do get quizzed about our stance on access. We don't have one. All I want is to have fun on the river, leaving no one annoyed, and no trace that I've been. If there is an 'access issue', then not going boating is not the way to solve it. Some accommodation with other river users (locals and fisherfolk) seems appropriate in the semi urbanised environment in which we kayak, but in essence I really can't see what the problem is, or why the small issues cant be managed at a personal/group level. Assume rights, take responsibility, go boating."

Thoughts?

[chris foster]

If there is an agreement where folk have worked hard to negotiate i will try to respect it ( e.g. Lune Eden Greta ) everything else is " fair game "

[Jon]

Why should RainChasers accept any criticism for people going boating? It's like Mars taking responsibility for people being over weight!

It's your readers responsibility to apply the information that RainChasers provides in a sensible manner, as you say:leaving no one annoyed, and no trace that I've been. Providing we try our best to do that, I don't think anyone should have any cause to complain.

On the wider issue of Boating Access verses fishermen, it seems to me that fishermen take a very out of proportion view of the effect (damage???) that canoeists cause. Perhaps this is because they know that canoeing will only get more popular and they fear this.

As Chris pointed out fishermen and canoeists can get along on the Greta, Eden and Lune, so why not everywhere.

Rather than taking issue with RainChasers they should view it as a means to get access information out to the wider paddling community.

[Poke]

Where does everyone stand on access when it comes to an agreement such as that on the Leven where "open" days (http://http://www.deathbeforeportage.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=155) are held.

Does this, even just by nature of the name, imply that the river is "closed" for the remainder of time? I've never found it to be?! :-)

I'm just wondering why open days are organised, when in reality the river can be (and is) used at "any" time (obviosuly being sensible with water levels/fishing season).

In fact, if I have understood correctly, the open days are more restrictive than a usual day on the Leven, as the agreement is for paddlers only to go down to the timber yard, and not do the full stretch?

Please correct me on any of the above, as all this is based upon is bits I remember from a conversation I think I had with someone a few years ago?!

Either way, enjoy the river! :-)

[ned]

I agree with Poke.
I dont 'get' leven 'open' days. I paddle the river without thinking about it in the non fishing season, and during the summer just paddle at times when I know its not going to be loaded with fisherfolk. This basically adds up to only a few days off the year that i elect not too paddle. I dont get any hassle, and seem to be on good terms with all that people that I meet regularly.
I have to also say that I refuse to pay the charge levied by paddlers. this is because i receive no services from them, and they have no right (IMHO) to ask me for money.

[Jacko]

Hi all, first post so bear with me....

'Open days'......The last time I was in the lakes I'm sure it was called a 'bib day' I know its just words but they do stick, this removes the reverse stance that it is 'closed' all other times. Also I have paddled on a 'bib day' paid my £1.50 (or what ever the small charge was) and paddled the full section, we were a small group of 5 and passed through with out any problems or hint that we were there. Obviously larger groups would have make there own mind up, but they would do that what ever river they paddle.

[callwild]

I am totally with Ned & Poke on access issues.
Is there an access issue?
Having paddled where & when I wish for 20 years being courteous and respecting other users i can count the number of times I have been challenged on one hand and never been asked to leave a river.
Rainchasers should remain completely access policy free and then it can not be criticised. It is purely a recourse for information on rivers and levels.

I know where Chris is coming from saying he respects agreements where people have worked hard to get them and in the past I have usually thought along these lines However a big BUT, I am beginning to now question the validity and time spent on agreements which impose unnecessary restrictions on canoeing.

Is any agreement which restricts paddling on the basis that
a) someone owns the river and has a say when boats are allowed
or
b) that it interferes with fishing
really an agreement or just reinforcing long held beliefs that we must go with doffed cap and be grateful for any short spell on the river.

Please read the Welsh Access Special (http://www.canoeingisnotacrime.org.uk/Access.pdf) which explains their re-evaluation of the worth of these so called agreements and why they have now given up all negotiations. For one it frees up all those man hours spent negotiating and puts the precedent back in the hands of the landowners to prove we do not have a right to be there.
If there is an agreement where folk have worked hard to negotiate i will try to respect it ( e.g. Lune Eden Greta ) everything else is " fair game "
Reply With Quote

To take Chris's examples.
Lune- The agreement is to avoid the fishing season. I question why restrict ourselves to a few winter months when it is proved canoeing has no effect on fishing. The Lune is one of the few rivers which holds water well and is a great summer paddle. I personally paddle it when ever I want without thought as to the agreement (Same as Leven)
Eden - One of the most restrictive agreements around. Who (apart from clubs) are that organised to apply in writing in advance to get permission to paddle a river. Why do we avoid the section from Armathwaite weir to the bridge, carry boats across two fields when there is easy access to a publiuc footpath at the bridge. Why is the pleasant section below Armathwaite avoided because of the agreement not to paddle 200m of river?
As Mark Rainsley (UKRGB) has said, generally about all agreements,"I don't remember agreeing to this".
When are the open days? They aren't even listed on Cumbria Canoeists.

Greta- This has turned out to be a reasonable agreement by default, not by hard work. (Although much hard work was done). The agreement is to not paddle during the spawning season when the water is below a certain level to avoid damage to the reds. This is really the only sort of agreement we should be negotiating. One that is in place to preserve environmental issues.

However it so very nearly went wrong as one particular BCU representative was quite happy to give away our freedom to paddle ALL the tributaries of the Greta in return for this agreement. This was totally against BCU policy, while the RAO of the time was bypassed as he was out of the country for a while. Amazingly (apparently) it was English Heritage who saved us here, because as one of the signatures to the agreement they pointed out that they could not find all the landowners along all the becks and so could not formalise such a blanket ban.
So those supposedly doing hard work on our behalf do not necessarily hold our best interests at heart.

It is really only ourselves which create an access problem. Believe it is not there and it goes away.
Stuart