Breadcrumbs
Improving access for canoeing on inland waterways: A study of the feasibility of access agreements
Research undertaken for DEFRA and others in 1999 (Water based sport and recreation - the facts) concluded that although there was no overall shortage of water resources in England and Wales, the volume and type of water resources and their availability for recreation vary between regions.
The research recognised that while latent demand is currently low, more promotion and improved facility development could stimulate participation in some activities, including canoeing. Canoe clubs and stakeholders were reported to desire more whitewater stretches and longer stretches for touring. In response to this, the Minister for Rural Affairs wrote to the Countryside Agency in July 2002 to ask it to take the lead in setting up some pilot projects in England to examine the feasibility of extending access for canoeing by voluntary agreement.
Project brief
The Countryside Agency developed a project brief requiring consultants to:
- review existing access agreements
- gather further background
- propose case study sites
- identify landowners and managers, other proprietary interests, potential users and others with an interest in more canoe access
- explore factors and issues with local stakeholders
- establish costs involved for compensation, improving access infrastructure and facilities, and for present and future management
- identify sources of funding
- negotiate outline agreements (using the Angling and Canoeing Liaison groups guide ‘Agreeing access to water for canoeing’)
- report on the feasibility of improving access for canoeists by access agreements.
The University of Brighton, in association with Roy Hickey, was appointed to run the feasibility project for the Countryside Agency on 10 March 2003. The project is managed by the Countryside Agency, with a project steering group, made up of representatives from the Countryside Agency, DEFRA, the Environment Agency, British Waterways and Sport England.
Progress
Progress on the study to date can be split into a number of key areas of work:
- Review and site selection
- Stakeholder and expert group meetings
- Case studies
- Review and site selection
The consultant’s first area of work has been to gather together information and refine their database to help draw up a long list of potential sites for further exploration. Using different weightings for factors such as existing fishing rights, evidence of ‘non-official’ canoeing, proximity to environmental designations and urban areas, and relationship to existing navigations and negotiated rights, the team reduced an initial long list of approximately 100 waterways to 25 potential case study sites. These exhibited good geographical spread, covering the NE, NW, Midlands and SW of England.
From this short list of 25, the Steering Group have chosen four case study areas, which demonstrate demand for canoe access, potential for access along stretches of water suitable for around 2 days touring or more, and a range of water types. The sites chosen also aim to match the geographic gaps in provision identified by the earlier research and have the potential to deliver economic benefits to landowners and rural communities and encourage under-represented groups of countryside users to participate in canoeing.
The team has written a report on the development of the long list of suitable rivers and how this list was reduced to the four case studies. The report is currently being considered by the Steering Group, and will be made available later in the year.
Stakeholder and expert group meetings
The consultancy team has met with individuals and groups with different interests, experience and expertise, to advise us on how to proceed with the work and the particular issues of which we need to be aware. To date the consultancy team has met user groups with sporting, recreational, farming and landowning interests. The team has also met with English Nature to discuss the national level MoU between English Nature and the National Angling Alliance, which has already been published, and the MoU between English Nature and BCU, which is currently being drafted.
The project team also report to the following committees and groups: Environment Agency’s Regional Fisheries, Ecology and Recreation Advisory Committee (via the Chairmen’s group); Countryside Recreation Network; DEFRA’s recreation inter-departmental group; Angling and Canoeing Liaison Group; and the Central Council for Physical Recreation.
Case Studies
The four case study areas chosen for further study are the:
- Mersey (including the Irwell, Goyt and Etherow)
- Little Ouse, Dove and Waveney
- Wear
- Teme, Onny and Clun
Case study (1): Mersey (inc Irwell, Goyt, Etherow)
Objective: To consider the potential of this site for achieving agreement which will increase participation in canoeing. This site was selected on the basis of its proximity to urban areas, the current existence of some canoeing activity and the potential to link new access into the Mersey Navigation.
Following extensive discussion with local stakeholders, the proposal is to concentrate on the entire length of the River Mersey, from its confluence with the Rivers Tame and Goyt in Stockport to its entry into the Manchester Ship Canal at Carrington. This will provide a 30km length of flat water suitable for beginners and intermediate paddlers, close to major conurbations and linking a number of key water recreation sites close to the river. This proposal will further develop the BCU’s concept of the ‘Mersey Passage Canoe Trail’, and has the support of a number of local authority stakeholders.
Case study (2): Little Ouse, Dove and Waveney
Objective: To consider the potential for achieving agreement over a distance of more than 24 km for touring, where there are potential tourism-related benefits to the local economy. This system has the potential for linkage into navigations in the Broads and the Great Ouse, which could create a significant touring resource in an area that is readily accessed from the major South Eastern and Midlands conurbations.
The original rivers identified for further study included the Waveney, Little Ouse and Dove. Upon initial inspection, the Dove was discounted as being unsuitable for canoeing, while the River Thet was added, as the Little Ouse becomes narrow and weed infested north of Thetford. As a result, it is proposed that the case study involves the River Thet upstream of Thetford and the Little Ouse downstream of Thetford. This will offer good touring potential (about 32 kms to the Ouse navigation) with 3 play sites.
There would be 6-7 places where boats would need to be transported over land, depending upon water levels and one of these places, where the rivers meet, is relatively long, but could be improved through good management. There is considerable local support for this proposal, from canoe clubs, local authorities and some landowners. It is also reported that some angling clubs feel that more canoeing would not harm their sport. This is consistent with a broader history of co-operative working in the Waveney Valley and with wider initiatives to develop water-based recreation in the area.
Case study (3): Wear
Objective: To consider the potential for achieving agreement within an area with fish/nature conservation interest. This river also includes some white water.
It is generally accepted that the Wear can be canoed from its source (Wearhead) to the North Sea at Sunderland, a distance of 110km. At present, canoeing is restricted to the tidal waters downstream of the tidal limit, south of Washington. Although an access agreement for the entire 110km is seen as desirable, practical considerations (for example, the number of riparian owners in the upper Weardale area) mean that a more limited objective is necessary for this case study. As a result, the proposed study area is from Bishop Auckland to the A182 Washington Highway bridge (the tidal limit). This is a distance of 51km, and includes grade I to III water, depending upon the conditions (with the tidal waters, a canoeable length of 67 km would be achieved).
With the exception of one weir in Durham City, there are no major hazards on the case study stretch (and with bankside improvements a means of transporting boats across the weir could be developed). While there is some current unlawful canoe usage, there are no legal agreements on the river. There is a history of conflict between canoeists, anglers and landowners, and we are aware that some landowners do not currently allow access to their water.
Case study (4): Teme, Onny, Clun
Objective: To consider the potential for improving access while balancing the needs of nature conservation evidenced by SSSIs.
Although it rises in Wales, the study is concerned with the river west of Knighton (the England/Wales border), through Shropshire and Worcestershire, to its confluence with the River Severn at Worcester. This is a distance of approximately 100 kms. The upper reaches of the river are characteristically steep, with fast flowing but relatively shallow waters. There are also mills and weirs. Below Tenbury the river is more tranquil but still quite shallow, with strong cross currents. Water levels in the river are highly variable, exacerbated by increased water extraction for agriculture in recent years. The Teme is designated as a SSSI on account of its natural character.
There are no formal access agreements for canoeing on the Teme. However, unlawful canoeing does occur and there are many claims about the resulting conflict. As a result of its character, the demand for canoeing is seasonal, when there is enough water in the river, and is more in the upper reaches where the faster water can be found. However, this part of the river is also the most valuable for fishing, with riparian owners keen to protect their interests and prevent canoeing, on the grounds that the Teme is not suited to canoeing under any circumstances. While there is probably less conflict below Tenbury, there is also less interest in canoeing, and probably less opportunity, given the water levels.
Next Steps
Open meetings in each area for landowners, farmers and their representatives, and separately for anglers and canoeists, are currently taking place. Following these meetings, and others with individual stakeholders, the consultants will recommend to the Agency and the steering group the agreement they think possible in each area. The consultants will then develop a draft outline agreement for each area, which will form the basis of extensive discussion and negotiation with stakeholders in each area. If the feasibility is encouraging, the Environment Agency has agreed to move to an implementation phase in years 2 and 3.
WENDY THOMPSON September 2003
