Do we need a LOUD VOICE similar to that of The Ramblers Association ?

[Capt Popeye]

Well do we ?

I ask asked on line to join in with The Ramblers Association and contact my MP and others about reinforcing the Rights To Roam and Acess To Rights Of Way ; as I understand that OUR Govt is roposing to close the listings soon as possible so any Not Listed Rights of Way could go by default ?

So I signed up, not that I am able to Roam or Walk a long way these days, but I recall that in my younger days, I relished cycling on unmade tracks in the countryside, then later on, riding my Trials Bike off roads whenever I could manage it or find a good track, not yet fenced off or baracaded off, as is done by some living on the North Downs so I have had a natural affinity with saving our Rights Of Way for us to use.

So to my point, should we have our own Boating Association who would list, log and use slipways, beaches and quays etc where we as persons have free or ready access to them.
This Association forming a pressure group when its identified that we are in danger of loosing such facilities by stealth usually ie, Second Home Byers, Local and Regional Councils, Companies that want to expand, private indivdules who know someone on the council etc etc

I do wonder if we as a boating fraternatity have such persons of such quality these days, having read some posts in Forum where some apparently Boating Persons appear to state an opinion that someone has to pay for any facility so why not charge anyway; maybe these persons of little ilk are the actual culprits of the graduall stealth thieving going on ? who knows eh ?

So do we need an equivelant to The Ramblers Association now ?

 

[Poignard]

You start it and I'll join it.

If it works, count me in; if it doesn’t, I know nothing about it .

 

[penberth3]

Already got a voice in the RYA.

 

[Irish Rover]

Well do we ?

I ask asked on line to join in with The Ramblers Association and contact my MP and others about reinforcing the Rights To Roam and Acess To Rights Of Way ; as I understand that OUR Govt is roposing to close the listings soon as possible so any Not Listed Rights of Way could go by default ?

So I signed up, not that I am able to Roam or Walk a long way these days, but I recall that in my younger days, I relished cycling on unmade tracks in the countryside, then later on, riding my Trials Bike off roads whenever I could manage it or find a good track, not yet fenced off or baracaded off, as is done by some living on the North Downs so I have had a natural affinity with saving our Rights Of Way for us to use.

So to my point, should we have our own Boating Association who would list, log and use slipways, beaches and quays etc where we as persons have free or ready access to them.
This Association forming a pressure group when its identified that we are in danger of loosing such facilities by stealth usually ie, Second Home Byers, Local and Regional Councils, Companies that want to expand, private indivdules who know someone on the council etc etc

I do wonder if we as a boating fraternatity have such persons of such quality these days, having read some posts in Forum where some apparently Boating Persons appear to state an opinion that someone has to pay for any facility so why not charge anyway; maybe these persons of little ilk are the actual culprits of the graduall stealth thieving going on ? who knows eh ?

So do we need an equivelant to The Ramblers Association now ?

Based on what happens on this forum you could call it The Rowers Association given the number of rows there are about sweet fanny all.

 

[Bru]

A few pertinent points ...

The Ramblers Association is extremely unpopular with other rights of way user groups (not to mention officials and land owners). This is due to their complete disregard for the rights of other RoW users (cyclists, equestrians, trail riders and green laners etc), utter intransigence and unwillingness to come to sensible compromises on RoW issues etc (I could go on at some length but I'll stop there!)

There's been getting on for sixty years of updating the rights of way network definitive maps. It is not entirely unreasonable to say that we've reached a point where enough is enough

Throughout that period, since 1953, there has been a clear legal framework defining what is, and what is not, a public right of way. That framework was originally based on earlier legal definitions thereof. No such framework exists for things like slipways, quays or navigation related rights in general

Furthermore, a clear and definitive legal precedent was set that general public rights of way legislation (to wit footpaths, bridleways and byways) does not apply and cannot be applied to other ancient "rights" (Google the River Derwent legal case, with which i was peripherally involved)

So a Ramblers Association type body would lack the legal teeth the RA has made ample use of. Nor would it garner the large membership the RA enjoys, plus the celebrity endorsements, giving it considerable clout in the corridors of power.

The harsh fact of life is that very very few "public" amenities around the coast or on inland waterways have any legal status or protection. And it is extremely unlikely that any such protection will ever be gained

I can assure people that bodies such as the RYA and IWA, with others, have been fighting this corner for decades, often at great cost (the Derwent case for example cost millions but had it succeeded it would have set an invaluable precedent)

As is so often the case, when it seems like the existing representative bodies are doing nothing it's usually because there is, in reality, nothing that can be done

The only hope for such amenities when they are threatened is local action on a case by case basis. Getting access agreements, preservation orders, even village green orders etc.

 

[Rappey]

, I relished cycling on unmade tracks in the countryside, then later on, riding my Trials Bike off roads whenever I could manage it or find a good track,

Then the ramblers association got really greedy and decided no motorised vehicle should be allowed off road, got many great trails closed which then overgrown and now no one can access them.
Not content with succesfully removing lots of vehicular rights the cyclists and horse riders now have to fight against the power of the ramblers association.
But that's another story.
I can think of at least 3 public slipways where marinas/boatyards have been built but they have had to make public access to these slipways for all to use without charge.

 

[prv]

riding my Trials Bike off roads whenever I could manage it or find a good track, not yet fenced off or baracaded off

Most of which was probably illegal, or at least would be now, those tracks not being vehicular rights of way. And from what I understand, your beloved Ramblers would like to remove those few that remain.

Pete

 

[Capt Popeye]

You start it and I'll join it.

If it works, count me in; if it doesn’t, I know nothing about it .

Yea quite so Pike, oh dont tell them your name, Pike {'

 

[Rappey]

I've chatted to farmers whilst off roading and many of them would love to remove the ramblers !

 

[FlyingGoose]

Thank goodness I live in a free thinking country that has the best access laws in the country and sea and water,
These issues hardly happen and if they do , just ignore the landowner,
Were is this nirvana this free thinking society , this break from the tyranny of ye old barons and English fiedoms, look no further my English friend , look North to your Scottish brothers and see how the free man lives.

 

[Capt Popeye]

Thank goodness I live in a free thinking country that has the best access laws in the country and sea and water,
These issues hardly happen and if they do , just ignore the landowner,
Were is this nirvana this free thinking society , this break from the tyranny of ye old barons and English fiedoms, look no further my English friend , look North to your Scottish brothers and see how the free man lives.

Oh yes, Scotland you say, cripes dont they wear Skirts up there, so free Man eh, does not look like it to some of us ?

 

[FlyingGoose]

Oh yes, Scotland you say, cripes dont they wear Skirts up there, so free Man eh, does not look like it to some of us

Kilts my good fellow , keeps the parts nice and cool, and did you know that the testicles need to be slightly cooler to the body to produce sperm, and you call kilts silly.
One should also experience the freedoms we have in Scotland , no farmer or land owner or even a Duke shouting get off my land, and when we come across such persons , who are usually english owners not accustomed to our freedoms we politely point to them to the Scottish access code.2003 , and smile and wave as we traverse the land, use the beaches sea fish or put out kayak into a loch or river even trot our ponies across the land
A bloomin marvel ye old Scots

 

[Easticks28]

So long as it doesn't have 'Royal' in its title it may have a chance!

 

[FlyingGoose]

So long as it doesn't have 'Royal' in its title it may have a chance!

I heard Prince Andrew is free for royal roles

 

[Capt Popeye]

Ah well given up trying to repost Flying Goose replies so yes I did not know that in Bonnie Scotland you or one as the case may be had those right, you Sir Mc ? are indeed very lucky to have them, just wish we in the Lower GB area had similar rights to enjoy.
Not far from me, about 6 miles away, there is a very small dirt lane that leads down to the River Teign, crossing under a Low Railway Bridge with a solitary house with forshore access directly to its gardens /land; photos of pre war show boats, mainly fishing etc plus small barges on the forshore, nowadays its has 'Keep OUT and Off' notices in the area, 'No Trespasing' signs etc ; any form of boating there, including landing, is frowned upon and discouraged by the Householders. I have tried a few times to encourage the local villiagers to walk the lane at regular intervals in order to maintain its citizens rights to travel that lane onto the foreshore and fundus, without much sucess, so I now plan to get the The Ramblers Associon involved and see if we can restore those rights of access ?

 

[Capt Popeye]

I heard Prince Andrew is free for royal roles

Quite but think you have to post that info in the American Forum, if there is indeed one ? just to catch his, oops very nearly wrote HRH {:-(#

 

[FlyingGoose]

Ah well given up trying to repost Flying Goose replies so yes I did not know that in Bonnie Scotland you or one as the case may be had those right, you Sir Mc ? are indeed very lucky to have them, just wish we in the Lower GB area had similar rights to enjoy.
Not far from me, about 6 miles away, there is a very small dirt lane that leads down to the River Teign, crossing under a Low Railway Bridge with a solitary house with forshore access directly to its gardens /land; photos of pre war show boats, mainly fishing etc plus small barges on the forshore, nowadays its has 'Keep OUT and Off' notices in the area, 'No Trespasing' signs etc ; any form of boating there, including landing, is frowned upon and discouraged by the Householders. I have tried a few times to encourage the local villiagers to walk the lane at regular intervals in order to maintain its citizens rights to travel that lane onto the foreshore and fundus, without much sucess, so I now plan to get the The Ramblers Associon involved and see if we can restore those rights of access ?

Try public rights of way, the path must have been used for 30 years or more by the public to determine the right of way, like an old drovers path, sometimes older maps will show a right of way, perhaps a library visit to determine any paths existed before the house can help
Also you local council access official may help.
The use of keep out no trespassing or any signs deterring free movement are banned in Scotland.
The wording must be better understood by all .
Like public footpath please no cycling

 

[RupertW]

A few pertinent points ...

The Ramblers Association is extremely unpopular with other rights of way user groups (not to mention officials and land owners). This is due to their complete disregard for the rights of other RoW users (cyclists, equestrians, trail riders and green laners etc), utter intransigence and unwillingness to come to sensible compromises on RoW issues etc (I could go on at some length but I'll stop there!)

There's been getting on for sixty years of updating the rights of way network definitive maps. It is not entirely unreasonable to say that we've reached a point where enough is enough

Throughout that period, since 1953, there has been a clear legal framework defining what is, and what is not, a public right of way. That framework was originally based on earlier legal definitions thereof. No such framework exists for things like slipways, quays or navigation related rights in general

Furthermore, a clear and definitive legal precedent was set that general public rights of way legislation (to wit footpaths, bridleways and byways) does not apply and cannot be applied to other ancient "rights" (Google the River Derwent legal case, with which i was peripherally involved)

So a Ramblers Association type body would lack the legal teeth the RA has made ample use of. Nor would it garner the large membership the RA enjoys, plus the celebrity endorsements, giving it considerable clout in the corridors of power.

The harsh fact of life is that very very few "public" amenities around the coast or on inland waterways have any legal status or protection. And it is extremely unlikely that any such protection will ever be gained

I can assure people that bodies such as the RYA and IWA, with others, have been fighting this corner for decades, often at great cost (the Derwent case for example cost millions but had it succeeded it would have set an invaluable precedent)

As is so often the case, when it seems like the existing representative bodies are doing nothing it's usually because there is, in reality, nothing that can be done

The only hope for such amenities when they are threatened is local action on a case by case basis. Getting access agreements, preservation orders, even village green orders etc.

You’ve convinced to join. If they are against that lot then I am for them. If they could just be against dogs too then it would be my perfect list of undesirables in the countryside.

 

[AndrewB]

A few pertinent points ...

The Ramblers Association is extremely unpopular with other rights of way user groups (not to mention officials and land owners). This is due to their complete disregard for the rights of other RoW users (cyclists, equestrians, trail riders and green laners etc), utter intransigence and unwillingness to come to sensible compromises on RoW issues etc (I could go on at some length but I'll stop there!)

There's been getting on for sixty years of updating the rights of way network definitive maps. It is not entirely unreasonable to say that we've reached a point where enough is enough

You are being unfair to the very difficult position of the Rambler's Association in the past. Go back 40 years, to a time when agriculture was becoming much more intensive, and there was very little protection of historic footpaths and bridleways. I recall paths that had been used for centuries , that overnight were criss-crossed with barbed wire. When we complained about one particular path where not only this had been done, but an apiary had been installed at one end and a bull at the other, the local council told us nothing could be done.

In 1984 (or thereabouts) our council (Kent), under pressure from the Ramblers Association, appointed its first footpaths officer with responsibility for maintaining a list of definitive footpaths. This did shift the balance, but it was still difficult. On one occasion, a landowner threatened to prosecute me because I had strayed 10 yards off the definitive footpath in order to get round a stretch of barbed wire worthy of trench warfare. Thereafter we took wire-cutters and were considered militant.

Another trick was to suggest it would be better if a footpath was re-routed around the edge of a field rather that across the middle. This seemed reasonable enough, and for a while the RA would support such proposals at public enquiry. But when the closing of the old public right of way was legally finalised, several landowners then declared that the new route was permissive only and not historically established, and promptly closed it. We lost a number of routes that way, until the Ramblers Association decided to oppose all such requests - and of course was branded obstructive.

 

[Rappey]

Ramblers Association decided to oppose all such requests - and of course was branded obstructive.

I would say its not the association but some of its members that are obstructive!