Dealing with Water Bailiffs and Landowners?

[UnderOpenSky]

Had a glorious day kayaking today, with the mild irritation that some water baliffs/game keepers working on behalf on the landowner had tracked us down the river, parked there 4x4s and shouted at us to get of the river. Fortunately it was where were planning on getting out there anyway, so it was no great issue, although it fucks me of that in England we have access to 2% to 4% of the rivers and in the Peak District were I've moved to the total stretch of undisputed rivers is about 350m.

All a bit fitting as the Mass Trespass on Kinder Scout happened 80 years ago this week.

The British Canoe Union have also fucked me off, they've been trying to negotiate access agreements for the last 30 years and have achieved almost the square root of fuck all except maintaining the status quo of vested interests and rather then following the lead of the Welsh who are refusing to try and negiate any more agreements as they blatantly work against us.

I'm for all for just paddeling these rivers and saying fuck them. The whole concept that water is owened is dubious, although we may have commited a little bit of trespass to walk round the logs they'd placed across the river and fucking wires in place at head hight.

What sort of action can they take against us?

 

[toggle]

Had a glorious day kayaking today, with the mild irritation that some water baliffs/game keepers working on behalf on the landowner had tracked us down the river, parked there 4x4s and shouted at us to get of the river. Fortunately it was where were planning on getting out there anyway, so it was no great issue, although it fucks me of that in England we have access to 2% to 4% of the rivers and in the Peak District were I've moved to the total stretch of undisputed rivers is about 350m.

All a bit fitting as the Mass Trespass on Kinder Scout happened 80 years ago this week.

The British Canoe Union have also fucked me off, they've been trying to negotiate access agreements for the last 30 years and have achieved almost the square root of fuck all except maintaining the status quo of vested interests and rather then following the lead of the Welsh who are refusing to try and negiate any more agreements as they blatantly work against us.

I'm for all for just paddeling these rivers and saying fuck them. The whole concept that water is owened is dubious, although we may have commited a little bit of trespass to walk round the logs they'd placed across the river and fucking wires in place at head hight.

What sort of action can they take against us?

wires at head hight is a clear attempt to cause injury and is illegal. IMO, if they try to take action against you, they are risking you reporting them for something far more serious

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Trespass is usually a civil offence.
http://www.desktoplawyer.co.uk/dtl/index.cfm?event=base:article&node=A76076D34460

 

[peterkro]

Fuck all,see the queens chain in NZ,or the right to roam in Scotland or Sweden,a big fight I believe,you can pitch a tent north of Hadrians wall and nobody can do anything about it,south of you could get banged up.You can walk on the roof of Swedens parliament and they can't do anything. a big fight and I hope people support the "right to roam" movement.When I first came to the U.K. I was gobsmacked about the "we own the rights to this river",that kind of shit would get you shot in NZ.

 

[likesfish]

Its not like kayakers do damage or are very annoying

 

[Mrs Magpie]

wires at head hight is a clear attempt to cause injury and is illegal.

This. Sod the trespassing, you need to report this.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Fuck all,see the queens chain in NZ,or the right to roam in Scotland or Sweden,a big fight I believe,you can pitch a tent north of Hadrians wall and nobody can do anything about it,south of you could get banged up.You can walk on the roof of Swedens parliament and they can't do anything. a big fight and I hope people support the "right to roam" movement.When I first came to the U.K. I was gobsmacked about the "we own the rights to this river",that kind of shit would get you shot in NZ.

Well exactly. We've got the CROW act now and generally the public have pretty good access to the hills, but the rivers are another story.

It's really really not helped by the fishing loby who are way more powerful then us and often pay for their access. Apparently we upset the fish. Like sticking a fucking hook in their mouth doesn't.

Trespass is usually a civil offence.
http://www.desktoplawyer.co.uk/dtl/index.cfm?event=base:article&node=A76076D34460

Yes, but what can they actually do about it if we don't give our names? They've got our number plates for what it's worth, although nothing will be happening this time.

wires at head hight is a clear attempt to cause injury and is illegal. IMO, if they try to take action against you, they are risking you reporting them for something far more serious

They'd just claim it's for agricultural use or something and if you've got Lord in your name, this tends to be more belivied them some smelly paddlers. Anyway if you know about them it's not an issue, walk round or take some wire cutters, its when the rivers are fast and they catch the unwary.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

This is the cunt whose land it is for what it's worth

Lord Edward Manners

And much of the River Lathkill belongs to him apparently.

It was a nice drop though

 

[toggle]

They'd just claim it's for agricultural use or something and if you've got Lord in your name, this tends to be more belivied them some smelly paddlers. Anyway if you know about them it's not an issue, walk round or take some wire cutters, its when the rivers are fast and they catch the unwary.

then take the wirecutters.

but i don't think it matters what they claim it is for. it is the danger it causes that is the issue.

 

[agricola]

Had a glorious day kayaking today, with the mild irritation that some water baliffs/game keepers working on behalf on the landowner had tracked us down the river, parked there 4x4s and shouted at us to get of the river. Fortunately it was where were planning on getting out there anyway, so it was no great issue, although it fucks me of that in England we have access to 2% to 4% of the rivers and in the Peak District were I've moved to the total stretch of undisputed rivers is about 350m.

All a bit fitting as the Mass Trespass on Kinder Scout happened 80 years ago this week.

The British Canoe Union have also fucked me off, they've been trying to negotiate access agreements for the last 30 years and have achieved almost the square root of fuck all except maintaining the status quo of vested interests and rather then following the lead of the Welsh who are refusing to try and negiate any more agreements as they blatantly work against us.

I'm for all for just paddeling these rivers and saying fuck them. The whole concept that water is owened is dubious, although we may have commited a little bit of trespass to walk round the logs they'd placed across the river and fucking wires in place at head hight.

What sort of action can they take against us?

Wires at head height in the river or on the bank? Did they have any legitimate use that you could see?

 

[Badgers]

Wires at head height in the river or on the bank? Did they have any legitimate use that you could see?

Hurt animals?
Hang sandwiches?
Kill people passing in small boats?

Bunting? It is the jubilee soon.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Wires at head height in the river or on the bank? Did they have any legitimate use that you could see?

I'm guessing they could be used to deter wondering sheep. Remember a kayaker is very close to the water, so not standing head height.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

I used to live in sheep country and never remember sheep wandering down a stream, let alone a river (or even wondering about it). A wire across a stream is not a measure to protect sheep.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

We are talking wire across the stream, or have I completely misunderstood?

 

[Glitter]

Hurt animals?
Hang sandwiches?
Kill people passing in small boats?

Bunting? It is the jubilee soon.

I'm going with this.

 

[agricola]

I'm guessing they could be used to deter wondering sheep. Remember a kayaker is very close to the water, so not standing head height.

Ah - if theres a legitimate use (or rather legitimate reason) that the landowner can reasonably point to then it would be difficult to prove any offence against them, though were someone to get injured then they would be civilly (and probably criminally because of the recklessness involved) liable. As to what they could do to you, beyond the civil offence trespass there isnt really anything.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

We are talking wire across the stream, or have I completely misunderstood?

Yeah a couple of them. I'd rather not overally focus on this tbh, I dealt with other hazards on the river today, like weirs and bridges you can't pass under the right way up (my roll still works though. )

More about talk about the wider point of access and the legal recourse they can take against me. I suppose what we really need is people willing to go to court to test about river access, but I dont have the funds for a civil case against me.

Other ideas about how we can sort access also greatfully received.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Ah - if theres a legitimate use (or rather legitimate reason) that the landowner can reasonably point to then it would be difficult to prove any offence against them, though were someone to get injured then they would be civilly (and probably criminally because of the recklessness involved) liable. As to what they could do to you, beyond the civil offence trespass there isnt really anything.

I'm sure they'd think of something.

So they find me by the road side loading up the van and take the plates. What can they do the next if they've recorded us a few times and want to make an example?

 

[Glitter]

I'm guessing they could be used to deter wondering sheep. Remember a kayaker is very close to the water, so not standing head height.

How tall are these sheep?

Just read the entire post I quoted

Sorry

 

[agricola]

I'm sure they'd think of something.

So they find me by the road side loading up the van and take the plates. What can they do the next if they've recorded us a few times and want to make an example?

If you arent on their property then nothing. If you were (or they thought you were going to) they could concievably go down the civil side of the law and try to get an injunction, but you would imagine (and I am not an expert on it) they would have to demonstrate some pretty more substantial grounds than just to stop named people going down "their" river.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

I got some shit about their being spawning beds for the trout, despite the river being in spate (way over the level to worry them). I politely asked when would be a good time to come back and was told never. This where access agreements fail. We're willing to compromise. They aren't.

They told us to get of the river and then talked to us on the side of the road, so we were sort of on their land. I don't know if anyone saw us get in, but if they didn't then they invited us on to the land get off and I don't think anyone has every been done for trespassing on water (proper legal grey area that's not been sorted out).

Assuming it's another river and they do find me on their land accessing, could they get my details from the plates and if they could what would an injunction mean in real terms?

 

[agricola]

In the circumstances described they wouldnt be able to get details from your plates unless they had already got a solicitor on it. As for an injunction, they can have powers of arrest attached which may lead to prison if the terms are breached, though as I said above its hard to see how they could get one just to prevent a named person from floating down a river every now and then (though again I am not that familiar with civil legislation, an actual solicitor should be asked for their advice).

 

[UnderOpenSky]

In the circumstances described they wouldnt be able to get details from your plates unless they had already got a solicitor on it. As for an injunction, they can have powers of arrest attached which may lead to prison if the terms are breached, though as I said above its hard to see how they could get one just to prevent a named person from floating down a river every now and then (though again I am not that familiar with civil legislation, an actual solicitor should be asked for their advice).

Good good. I'll tell them to go fuck themselves next time.

 

[agricola]

Good good. I'll tell them to go fuck themselves next time.

Get some proper advice first, people who own rivers are usually both loaded and ligitious.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

Yeah, we are going to try and do something about this, I sort of deferred to the folks I was paddling with seemed a little to humble for my tastes, but I'll roll with it for now, I'm new to these parts, but it's not like we've got any agreements to jepodise lol.

Someone really does need to go to go and get a clear ruling about if you can trespass on water though mind.

 

[Kingsway91]

Someone really does need to go to go and get a clear ruling about if you can trespass on water though mind.

There is clear ruling, but it isn't one that paddlers like.

The current position of the law is settled in that no general public right to navigate in non tidal
rivers exists in England and Wales. While the public has the right of navigation in tidal waters (e.g. Gann v Free Fishers of Whitstable (1865) 11 H.L.Cas; Blundell v Caterall (1821) 5B & Ald. 268), this depends on the presumption of the Crown's ownership of the land beneath the water. This presumption is rebuttable and there are some instances where the tidal riverbed is under private ownership.

The presumption of rights of navigation on tidal rivers contrasts with the very limited right on non-tidal rivers. The default position is that there is no such general right of navigation. Above the flow of tide the land beneath a river or stream is privately owned so that while the public can acquire navigational rights over such waters they cannot have them as of right. It has been held that rights of navigation on inland waterways are not analogous to rights of way on land (Wills' Trustees v Cairngorm Canoeing and Sailing School (1976) SLT 162 and AG
ex rel Yorkshire Derwent Trust and Malton Town Council v Brotherton [1992] 1 All ER 230).

 

[SpookyFrank]

Do famers get to sue these landowners when 'their' rivers burst their banks and flood adjacent farmland?

I think I know the answer to that question somehow.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I never heard of a 'water bailiff' before reading this thread. Does this mean there are really people whose entire purpose in life is to stop folk from going for a swim in a lake or paddling a canoe down a river? Do they evict fish when there are no humans around to pick on?

 

[past caring]

Had a glorious day kayaking today, with the mild irritation that some water baliffs/game keepers working on behalf on the landowner had tracked us down the river, parked there 4x4s and shouted at us to get of the river. Fortunately it was where were planning on getting out there anyway, so it was no great issue, although it fucks me of that in England we have access to 2% to 4% of the rivers and in the Peak District were I've moved to the total stretch of undisputed rivers is about 350m.

All a bit fitting as the Mass Trespass on Kinder Scout happened 80 years ago this week.

The British Canoe Union have also fucked me off, they've been trying to negotiate access agreements for the last 30 years and have achieved almost the square root of fuck all except maintaining the status quo of vested interests and rather then following the lead of the Welsh who are refusing to try and negiate any more agreements as they blatantly work against us.

I'm for all for just paddeling these rivers and saying fuck them. The whole concept that water is owened is dubious, although we may have commited a little bit of trespass to walk round the logs they'd placed across the river and fucking wires in place at head hight.

What sort of action can they take against us?

Depends, try to paddle through the bit of river that I'm fishing without so much as a by-your-leave and I'm liable to see if I can stick my fly in your head.

 

[Frances Lengel]

How the fuck can anyone own a river? Which bit do they own, the flowing water or the bed? The entire idea of owning land is, at best, flawed, but owning a river? Jesus.