Mr Penfold, your statement stinks.
You've really missed the point here. The WCA rightly refused to accept an access agreement for a minority whilst consequentially denying access to the majority of its members. We (the recreational paddlers) didn't wish to ban slaloms (or Angling) on the Dee and were not using the slalom at all. The angling interests were using this as a tactic to limit watersports and the slalom organisers took this hook!
Whilst I agree the good people of Llangollen will be the loosers from less canoeing on the Dee, what's going to bring less of us. One Slalom or the majority paddling on most week-ends? The only 'stand' taken is not to agree to a devisive agreement. It looks as if you have not thought through the statement on the site very well. I would suggest you remove it as I guess it could be particulary offensive to the access officers of the WCA (who slalom organisers probably need to work with).
Let's hope the slalom can be reinstated in the future - but next time don't try to scupper the non-competitive paddlers for your own interests. Does you think we don't miss doing the Dee tours? I regulary went on them, and introduced club juniors to them, something that I can no longer do with the current access situation.
I'm not sure I want to encourage any more young people to take up slalom if they are going to develop an attitude like yours.
Llangollen races and Dee access - Constructive comments
Whoa guys, less of the tarring of everyone with the same brush from you lot over from www.ukriversguidebook.co.uk - I'll bet there's not one regular on this BBS who's not a playboat paddler too, and we'd all better realise there's a difference of opinion on this matter in the wider recreational community too.
Remember Nicks site is a personal one, not an official one. He's entitled to his opinion, although I for one don't agree with it.
For my 2p's worth, I think the only people with real influence in Llangollen are the local people and businesses - not us paddlers. Therefore if we want them to adopt a viewpoint that's accomodating to us, they need to see that it pays them to work with us. The issue has been publicised (see here and here for example), although maybe it needs more, and we need the locals to realise how desperately we want to come to Llangollen and spend our money. 'Cos we are, we really are - we love the place.
Steve
Remember Nicks site is a personal one, not an official one. He's entitled to his opinion, although I for one don't agree with it.
For my 2p's worth, I think the only people with real influence in Llangollen are the local people and businesses - not us paddlers. Therefore if we want them to adopt a viewpoint that's accomodating to us, they need to see that it pays them to work with us. The issue has been publicised (see here and here for example), although maybe it needs more, and we need the locals to realise how desperately we want to come to Llangollen and spend our money. 'Cos we are, we really are - we love the place.
Steve
-
magictom
Sorry guys but I reckon that even CONSIDERING running a slalom at Town Falls at the present moment is divisive and selfish, you deserved a slating. It's about time the UK slalomists pulled with the recreational boaters to campaign for increased ( unrestricted) access, I'm glad the slalom was cancelled.
As organiser of the Llangollen races and a member of the slalom executive we have been kept very much in the dark as to what was happening regarding the access issues, to be able to understand why the decision was made we needed information and that was nor very forthcoming until very recently. I still feel that playing into the hands of the fishermen by refusing the offered access is folly, how do you think this will put pressure on them into increasing the access, they now have the river to themselves and are very happy with this I am sure. Correct we cannot unfortunately run a bandit slalom, it was considered! bit rejected.Recreational paddlers cannot be sticking to the agreement if they are doing "bandit runs" so where is their support?
There was no consultation with the Slalom Committee regarding the decision to reject the access offer even though it affected the most important races on the calendar, is it any wonder slalomists are upset.
How pro-active have recreational paddlers been over the last year?? Have you written to the town council or the local MP or the Welsh Assembly or anyone else with some influence. I am now in the process of producing a list of relevent names and addresses so pressure can be put on the anglers/landowners to improve the offer. It is not practical to expect free access-that will only lead to no access, there has to be a compromise. We all must remember that those who are land owners and fisherment tend to be those making the laws so it will be nigh on impossible to change them. Also if there are "bandit runs" that means you are tresspassing on the property of the people you want to influence you might as well kiss the lot goodbye.
We plan to lobby hard to put pressure on those who make the access decisions to ensure the events take place next year. If any paddlers feel inclined to support this please send me and e-mail and I will send on the list as soon as I have got it together.
There was no consultation with the Slalom Committee regarding the decision to reject the access offer even though it affected the most important races on the calendar, is it any wonder slalomists are upset.
How pro-active have recreational paddlers been over the last year?? Have you written to the town council or the local MP or the Welsh Assembly or anyone else with some influence. I am now in the process of producing a list of relevent names and addresses so pressure can be put on the anglers/landowners to improve the offer. It is not practical to expect free access-that will only lead to no access, there has to be a compromise. We all must remember that those who are land owners and fisherment tend to be those making the laws so it will be nigh on impossible to change them. Also if there are "bandit runs" that means you are tresspassing on the property of the people you want to influence you might as well kiss the lot goodbye.
We plan to lobby hard to put pressure on those who make the access decisions to ensure the events take place next year. If any paddlers feel inclined to support this please send me and e-mail and I will send on the list as soon as I have got it together.
-
Keith Lyons
I have read with interest and sadness the discussion about Dee Access. Like many others I was hoping that the Llangollen slaloms and recreational paddling on the Dee would combine to create a unique canoeing environment.
In my time in Llangollen I honestly believed that recreational canoeing and competitive slalom were compatible and would draw strength from each other. The proximity of the WCA site at Tryweryn provided an outstanding back up facility.
For me the future depends on recognising that all paddlers have more in common than separates them. The Town site at Llangollen requires careful management if it is to host safe slalom events and this was one of the goals identified several years ago. Access to the Dee for recreational paddling has to be part of this! Canoe slalom benefitted from Dee Tours. On one memorable occasion over a thousand recreational paddlers came down the river over two days.
I believe canoeing has an unimpeachable case if disciplines join together. This does require information. I think it also requires legal, local and national political challenge.
Thanks for providing a forum for this discussion, Steve.
Keith
In my time in Llangollen I honestly believed that recreational canoeing and competitive slalom were compatible and would draw strength from each other. The proximity of the WCA site at Tryweryn provided an outstanding back up facility.
For me the future depends on recognising that all paddlers have more in common than separates them. The Town site at Llangollen requires careful management if it is to host safe slalom events and this was one of the goals identified several years ago. Access to the Dee for recreational paddling has to be part of this! Canoe slalom benefitted from Dee Tours. On one memorable occasion over a thousand recreational paddlers came down the river over two days.
I believe canoeing has an unimpeachable case if disciplines join together. This does require information. I think it also requires legal, local and national political challenge.
Thanks for providing a forum for this discussion, Steve.
Keith
-
Iain
Mrs H: As a recreational paddler I am keen to know what agreement we are not sticking to, as to the best of my knowledge there is no current access agreement on the Dee. I fully intend to take advantage of this fact and paddle the river as I would almost any other river in Wales or England when rain and time allow.
Some people seem to suggest that they feel that slalomists and recreational paddlers can't work together to obtain a suitable access agreement and with this I have to disagree. If enough people paddle the Dee the fishermen will eventually realise that having no access agreement, and paddlers passing by every hour to disrupt the tranquility of their day, is worse than agreeing to an access agreement which gives paddlers greater access to the Dee than we had before but still allows the fishermen to fish in peace at certain times/days/weeks/etc. This would hopefully allow slalomists and recreational paddlers to both benefit from increased access. I for one am prepared to forgo paddling particular rivers recreationally at times when the river would typically be too low to be enjoyable, in return to have greater access to paddle at optimum levels.
This will take time to happen and requires that enough people paddle the Dee to frustrate the fishermen into forcing their organisations into agreeing to an access agreement acceptable to all parties involved.
We must consider that whilst paddlers want the BCU & WCA to get better access to rivers the individual fishermen probably also want an agreement that gives them the knowledge that they can fish on certain days undisturbed. When they put enough pressure on their organisations as well things may start to move a little qicker.
Some people seem to suggest that they feel that slalomists and recreational paddlers can't work together to obtain a suitable access agreement and with this I have to disagree. If enough people paddle the Dee the fishermen will eventually realise that having no access agreement, and paddlers passing by every hour to disrupt the tranquility of their day, is worse than agreeing to an access agreement which gives paddlers greater access to the Dee than we had before but still allows the fishermen to fish in peace at certain times/days/weeks/etc. This would hopefully allow slalomists and recreational paddlers to both benefit from increased access. I for one am prepared to forgo paddling particular rivers recreationally at times when the river would typically be too low to be enjoyable, in return to have greater access to paddle at optimum levels.
This will take time to happen and requires that enough people paddle the Dee to frustrate the fishermen into forcing their organisations into agreeing to an access agreement acceptable to all parties involved.
We must consider that whilst paddlers want the BCU & WCA to get better access to rivers the individual fishermen probably also want an agreement that gives them the knowledge that they can fish on certain days undisturbed. When they put enough pressure on their organisations as well things may start to move a little qicker.
-
Dr Repper
' "Shafted - by Paddlers
Llangollen wants the event. The fishing lobby offered a (yes, mean) deal that allowed it. The WCA are only doing what they must - follow the wishes of a large group of members. It's recreational paddlers who have stopped the Town Falls races, because they want wider access to the Dee and believe that the slaloms, and the money they bring to Llangollen, can be used as a lever to get it.
If I thought they were right, I'd support them. Losing the races for a year would be justified. But Llangollen isn't the fishing lobby. The people who'll lose income are not the people who can offer access. Taking this "stand" is just throwing the toys out of the pram. Slalom - and canoeing - will be the losers.
Slalom is a minority sport, even within canoeing - we must be outnumbered 100 to 1 by recreational paddlers. But slalom is the only aspect of whitewater canoeing that - sometimes - gets big-audience TV. Town Falls is not just an event that's rather special to us; it's the one event where spectacular canoeing takes place in the heart of a tourist town and gets us seen by the public. It's canoeing's best showcase, and it's probably gone for good."
unfortunatly what i feel is sad, is the opinion expressed above, canoe slalom is the one branch of OUR sport that has a public voice at the moment, i could see media items on how our medal hopes next year could be short, due to the countrys draconian access laws. but instead they blame other paddlers, is it just me or is this incredibly short sighted. If people cant paddle on our local rivers, how can we expect to find new olympic medallists, increasing access will increase participation, its a no brainer.
As a sport we have two olympic medallists (which everyone is proud of) to stand up and shout, wheres the bcu using the most powerful tool they have.
and then to suggest that we are throwing our toys out of pram, because "we" recreational paddlers are not letting "them" slalom paddlers to paddle the river in a front page editorial from the above site, beggars belief.
sad '
Just thought I'd copy this over from a related discussion on another board.
Llangollen wants the event. The fishing lobby offered a (yes, mean) deal that allowed it. The WCA are only doing what they must - follow the wishes of a large group of members. It's recreational paddlers who have stopped the Town Falls races, because they want wider access to the Dee and believe that the slaloms, and the money they bring to Llangollen, can be used as a lever to get it.
If I thought they were right, I'd support them. Losing the races for a year would be justified. But Llangollen isn't the fishing lobby. The people who'll lose income are not the people who can offer access. Taking this "stand" is just throwing the toys out of the pram. Slalom - and canoeing - will be the losers.
Slalom is a minority sport, even within canoeing - we must be outnumbered 100 to 1 by recreational paddlers. But slalom is the only aspect of whitewater canoeing that - sometimes - gets big-audience TV. Town Falls is not just an event that's rather special to us; it's the one event where spectacular canoeing takes place in the heart of a tourist town and gets us seen by the public. It's canoeing's best showcase, and it's probably gone for good."
unfortunatly what i feel is sad, is the opinion expressed above, canoe slalom is the one branch of OUR sport that has a public voice at the moment, i could see media items on how our medal hopes next year could be short, due to the countrys draconian access laws. but instead they blame other paddlers, is it just me or is this incredibly short sighted. If people cant paddle on our local rivers, how can we expect to find new olympic medallists, increasing access will increase participation, its a no brainer.
As a sport we have two olympic medallists (which everyone is proud of) to stand up and shout, wheres the bcu using the most powerful tool they have.
and then to suggest that we are throwing our toys out of pram, because "we" recreational paddlers are not letting "them" slalom paddlers to paddle the river in a front page editorial from the above site, beggars belief.
sad '
Just thought I'd copy this over from a related discussion on another board.
What is this them and us stuff? It does not really exist. Slalom is recreation and a small competitive part of a very diverse sport. Slalom paddlers run rivers and are playboaters too. There are, however, different views on whether cancelling the Llangollen slalom races will help to reach a satisfactory access agreement.
GB has international success in canoe slalom but not without hard training and access to good slalom sites. Llangollen happens to be the best of those and for this year it is lost. This will profoundly affect the progress of our promising paddlers. Others will lose interest in the sport as Town Falls was the pinnacle of the season.
By cancelling the events it is certain that slalom and the progress of its paddlers will suffer. It is not certain that the cause for improved access to the Dee will benefit. We will only miss a golden (well silver and bronze) opportunity to promote canoeing in general, slalom in particular and the need for better access to British rivers.
GB has international success in canoe slalom but not without hard training and access to good slalom sites. Llangollen happens to be the best of those and for this year it is lost. This will profoundly affect the progress of our promising paddlers. Others will lose interest in the sport as Town Falls was the pinnacle of the season.
By cancelling the events it is certain that slalom and the progress of its paddlers will suffer. It is not certain that the cause for improved access to the Dee will benefit. We will only miss a golden (well silver and bronze) opportunity to promote canoeing in general, slalom in particular and the need for better access to British rivers.
-
Dr Repper
I agree entirely that there is no real 'us and them' divide. I think the original poster of this point was aiming his comments at the statements a specific individual rather than a general paddling clique. The part of his post which I feel is most pertinent is the one about using the loss of a key event in the slalom calender (which, as you rightly point out, would be pivotal in our preparations for international competition) as case in point for publicising the general access situation in the UK. The public care about the Olympic successes of Campbell Walsh and Helen Reeves in Athens, and rightly so. If the current access situation can be shown to be jeopardising similar future successes, I believe that our case could be significantly strengthened.
-
Gareth Evans
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:48 pm
- Location: bucks
i posted the reply originally with the "us" and "them" quote.
my point is that the rant posted up originally (and now i see mysteriously disapeered) WAS a seperatist point of view, it stated that the wca was following the views of the majority and that recreational paddlers where throwing their toys out of pram. Instead of saying that yes we support increased access FOR ALL PADDLERS it was saying that we should have excepted a restrictive agreement for the sake of the SLALOM.
as for the fact that many people who have posted on this board, who seem to be involved with the organisation of slalom and the dee slaloms in particular - claim to have no knowledge of the acess agreements and the details issued - well i dont believe that for an instance.
funny thing is that as soon as the river comes up, im going to paddle it. unfortunatly slalom paddlers wont be able to compete on it and i am sad about it.
However you reap what you sow..
gareth.
p.s as far as im concerned as long as this site has bcu, icf, and slalom logos on the front page. then it is affiliated to the slalom executive/commitee.
my point is that the rant posted up originally (and now i see mysteriously disapeered) WAS a seperatist point of view, it stated that the wca was following the views of the majority and that recreational paddlers where throwing their toys out of pram. Instead of saying that yes we support increased access FOR ALL PADDLERS it was saying that we should have excepted a restrictive agreement for the sake of the SLALOM.
as for the fact that many people who have posted on this board, who seem to be involved with the organisation of slalom and the dee slaloms in particular - claim to have no knowledge of the acess agreements and the details issued - well i dont believe that for an instance.
funny thing is that as soon as the river comes up, im going to paddle it. unfortunatly slalom paddlers wont be able to compete on it and i am sad about it.
However you reap what you sow..
gareth.
p.s as far as im concerned as long as this site has bcu, icf, and slalom logos on the front page. then it is affiliated to the slalom executive/commitee.
-
Mr Logic
I thought the WCA was negotiating the access agreement for all paddlers. There are no updates on this on their website since February. How come they did not capitalise on the successes in Athens?
Also, some of you are going to run the river anyway and annoy fishermen because there is no agreement, but you want slalom cancelled. Where is the logic in that?
Also, some of you are going to run the river anyway and annoy fishermen because there is no agreement, but you want slalom cancelled. Where is the logic in that?
There seems to be an attitude of "i'm alright jack" from the recreational paddlers because they can paddle the Dee when they want as there is no agreement, the support of slalom was wanted, now they have it it seems to be being thrown back in the face of slalom.
As regards those involved in the organisation of slalom that are posting on this board, the only one in that catagory is me, as Llangollen organiser i'm sure you can understand how upset I am after our decisions and the "i'm alright jack" attitude of other paddlers. If people had the courage to revealed their identities we would all know where they were from.
The loosers here seem to be is the people of Llangollen and the slalom paddlers.
As regards those involved in the organisation of slalom that are posting on this board, the only one in that catagory is me, as Llangollen organiser i'm sure you can understand how upset I am after our decisions and the "i'm alright jack" attitude of other paddlers. If people had the courage to revealed their identities we would all know where they were from.
The loosers here seem to be is the people of Llangollen and the slalom paddlers.
-
Dr Repper
Here we go again, more oik smashing. Perhaps you've forgotten about the recent Dee Tour cancellations? At least the competitions cancelled on the dee have been moved to HPP (inconvenient for some, certainly not for others) and not lost altogether.Mrs H wrote:There seems to be an attitude of "i'm alright jack" from the recreational paddlers because they can paddle the Dee when they want as there is no agreement
Anyway, nobody is expressing smug satisfaction that slalom paddlers have lost out, only expressing the opinion that the loss of two important slalom events could be used as political leverage in the much, MUCH wider access struggle, seeing the silver lining to the cloud, if you will.
The loosers here seem to be is the people of Llangollen and the slalom paddlers.
Without wishing to belittle the importance of the events in question, the loss of these slalom races is (fortunately for the locals) unlikely to have a devastating effect on the local economy. Besides, as has been said before, if a substandard access agreement is seen to be accepted by the governing body we have ALL already lost.
But then, you'd be alright, wouldn't you Jack?
-
Seedy Paddler
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 2:00 pm
More devisive debate, after the event and it would seem without the key players.
We should really drop the them and us tag we are all paddlers. I empathise with Mrs H as setting up a slalom of this standard is a lot of hard work and for once it was taking paddlers away from the concrete ditches into a real river environment.
From Mrs H comments it would seem that access negotiations on the Dee have not included the event organisers or the BCU Slalom Exec. If negotiations stopped in February why did the WCA not just advise the BCU that all negotiations were off, the agreement was in tatters and it was up to the slalom organisers to negotiate their own access for the weekend or relocate to an alternative site? It would seem that we entered into a game of brinkmanship but forgot to have a player at the table.
If the strategy had been worked properly we should have had information out to all parties and the inclusion of Llangollen Canoe Club, JJs, BCU Slalom Exec and all paddlers to highlight what the situation was and the potential losses to Llangollen as a whole if organised paddlers move out. Whilst not organising bandit runs their operation following cancellation of the agreement in February could have been used to highlight the potential alternative to reasonable access for all paddlers.
The internal bickering and name-calling serves no purpose either here or on the TWP and riverguide sites. For Gareth he should note the statements on the home page of the site and the fairly clear "unofficial" tag above. If he holds by his view are we to perceive that TWP is a commercial operation that is merely an outlet for Nookie and publication of their views and policies ? I think not, recognise useful and related links and/or advertising for what they are and let us concentrate on moving the issue forward.
At the end of the day we should not be slating each other on the bulletin boards, if I was down south I would be writing to my MP on a regular basis asking for a precise and detailed explanation why Westminister belives that the citizens of England and Wales cannot be trusted with the same rights and responsibilities as the citizens of Scotland. I could get my MP included but with the West Lothian Question the whole issue will be diverted into petty nationalistic debate.
What we really need is an update from the WCA on where we are and what we should be doing to progress the matter before we have to confirm calender and events for 2005. Otherwise the prospects of a return to Llangollen must look fairly bleak.
-
Pingu
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 12:42 am
- Location: I'm everywhere and nowhere (baby)
- Contact:
GarethGuest wrote:
p.s as far as im concerned as long as this site has bcu, icf, and slalom logos on the front page. then it is affiliated to the slalom executive/commitee.
The logo's that you see on the Slalom UK site are in the section headed "Links".
The site is not an "official" site but (as Nick says) it has become the most convenient place to find out news about slalom.
For this reason it is the place where, for example, Clubs send their results if they want to get them published. It is also one of the methods used by the Slalom Executive Committee to publicise information for paddlers. The Exec might request that such info is published. It is up to the webmaster as to whether or not it is indeed posted.
It is therefore truly independent of the BCU and the Slalom Committee.
Out of Darkness cometh Light