Re: Welsh Government Wants to Improve Access to 'Responsible' Outdoor Activities
Here's the 'consultation' email I sent:
======
Re your webpage here:
Welsh Government | Improving opportunities to access the outdoors for responsible recreation
You write:
"Everyone should have the chance to experience parks, woodlands, mountains and the coast through a range of activities. Outdoor recreation makes a valuable contribution to Wales and creates a number of health, environment, social and economic benefits.”
Yes but these activities should all be conducted within the law.
"We are seeking views on:
ways to reduce the costs and burdens associated with administering public paths and wider access”
Consult with the owners of the land these paths and access points occupy.
“how we could better meet current and future recreational needs"
By ensuring that environmental impact is protected - that the volume of people engaged in these activities is strictly controlled to preserve the countryside. Many treat it as a tip.
"ways to tackle some of the practical difficulties of improving opportunities for all, not just for those who can afford to travel or those who are already enthusiasts about an activity.”
This would appear to be beyond the scope of a public consultation - unless you are asking if free transport would help? Simple economics. Everything costs money and everything has to be paid for by someone. If you can’t afford the bus fare, don’t get on the bus!
"The Welsh Government’s view is that the overall objective should be to create a framework which allows sensible and responsible use of land and water for non-motorised recreation”
The terms sensible and responsible are subjective. Banning canoes operating in narrow shallow rivers would be sensible and responsible to anyone concerned with the aquatic environment - but probably not to commercial canoe hire operators. Introducing any new rules is pointless without policing as the existing rules are already ignored by all canoeists on the Wye upstream of Hay.
"Anglers and netsmen argue that canoeists and wild swimmers disturb fish and can destroy spawning grounds. They also say that canoeists can create problems for river management by damaging the river banks. Canoeists argue that anglers and netsmen are keeping a significant resource to themselves and preventing the use and enjoyment of the water by others. There is only anecdotal evidence to support most of these claims. Both argue that common law finds in their favour.”
The opinion of lay-persons regarding the Law is immaterial. The Laws are clear. Only those with a political agenda argue otherwise in an attempt to muddy the waters.
Where a legal Right of Navigation exists, canoes are allowed. Where no Right of Navigation exists, canoes are forbidden. It is evident there are no grey areas here. But without the authorities policing the laws, the laws themselves are ignored and the authorities are laughed at and treated with contempt.
Re the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003
“ The introduction of this legislation has generated significant interest amongst recreation user groups in Wales, particularly groups who express frustration at what is seen as the restrictive nature of some of the current legislation, most notably for canoeing and off-road cycling. There has also been a reaction amongst landowner groups who are strongly resistant to the introduction of anything similar in Wales.”
Yes. What a red herring. Scotland has different laws to those in England and Wales. Rejoice! Thankfully we will not be dragged down the same route which has destroyed the salmon fishing on many rivers. The idea that introducing new access legislation will improve the economy is a false one - it robs Peter to pay Paul. The vast increase in traffic does significant ecological and environmental damage which benefits only a handful of canoe-hire companies (who pay nothing to use the amenity) at the expense of all other river users, many of whom pay huge sums in license fees and angling permits. Watch the lucrative angling revenue reduce in Scotland as canoeing destroys it.
The consultation should be aware that 1000’s of miles of canals were built in the UK with the express purpose of navigation. Canoeists are hardly starved of places to paddle, they most certainly should not be permitted on rivers with no PRN or any narrow shallow river. It is akin to operating a motorcycle scrambling track on a golf course!
"What are your views on the benefits and challenges of creating a right of responsible recreation to all land in Wales? "
All land? Including your back garden? This is an unattainable aspiration. We have laws to protect private property for a reason. Very careful consideration should be given to any decision of this sort.
Re: Voluntary Access Arrangements
"It is the Welsh Government’s view that access arrangements should be drawn up by landowners and riparian owners, consulted upon, and then put in place. Access under such arrangements could be all year round, at certain times of year or depend on water levels. They could also determine what types of activities can sensibly take place on any given stretch of water at any given time of year. These arrangements should primarily be focussed on three elements:-
protecting the natural environment;
having no detrimental impact on land management; and
having respect for the needs of other users.
The crucial word here is Voluntary. It should not be forced upon riparian owners and where VAAs are in place, their terms should be strictly enforced and policed, otherwise it becomes a free-for-all nightmare situation, as it currently is on the stretch of river I own. Without policing this is nonsense. Words are cheap, action rather more expensive but it is action we demand from our authorities not more empty words.
"Access arrangements along the lines noted above need not be perceived as an acknowledgment that rights do not already exist nor should they be perceived as acknowledgment that they do. The Welsh Government is of the view that such arrangements should not be seen as setting out the limits of use, but rather the opportunities available for responsible shared use of the water.”
This type of nonsense statement is already being used as a ‘get-out-of-jail-free’ card by the EA in an attempt to justify their lack of action in policing the navigation on the upper river Wye. It is frankly not worth the paper it’s printed on. Rights and laws either exist or they do not. Opinions and non-interpretations such as the one quoted above is double-speak political twaddle! Of course rights should be respected! Where a PRN exists, a right exists. Where it does not, then none exists!
Geoff Maynard
Llanthomas Fishery, River Wye above Hay.
(One of the most heavily canoed stretches of river in the country yet with no PRN and no policing from the authorities. )
