Bushcraft Boat? Ref: Rivers TV Show

[Chinkapin]

Here in the U.S. most states divide their rivers between those that can be navigated and those that can't. Navigable being the key word. It is generally referred to as traditionally navigable, or navigable for commerce.

On any river that does not fit the definition of navigable and is therefore non-navigable the land owner, owns the banks of the river and the bed of the river as well. So, just like in the U.K. anyone going down one of these rivers is trespassing.

On navigable rivers the land owner does not own the bed of the river and you are therefore not trespassing.

But what if you want to go ashore and camp? Here, most states have worked out a very reasonable compromise: The canoeing public can camp anywhere between the water's edge, and the high water mark. This is usually quite a sufficient distance and includes plenty of camping space and firewood.

Not a bad compromise, really. I own property that is split by a navigable stream. My family has had for years a private picnic site near the waters edge, with a stone picnic table and a stone barbecue grill. A few times people have discovered it and abused it but for the most part it is left unmolested.

 

[Minotaur]

But what if you want to go ashore and camp? Here, most states have worked out a very reasonable compromise: The canoeing public can camp anywhere between the water's edge, and the high water mark. This is usually quite a sufficient distance and includes plenty of camping space and firewood.

In some places, in the UK, that could be one hell of a distance. The Severn, and Wye spring to mind.

 

[Elines]

From Two Sticks:

"I think most of the debate is about the ambiguity - although we don't have a 'right' to access waterways doesn't mean we can't, and just because we 'may' be trespassing doesn't mean we are!"

And other people make similar comments about "trespassing".

I am not a lawyer but on land I thought the position was that 'trespass' in itself was not illegal - to be a crime the land owner (or police?) would have to show damage. By analogy the landowner (or police?) would have to show that the canoeist/kayaker caused 'damage' by their 'trespass'.

Surely that would be an incredibly difficult thing to do if the canoeist/kayaker was just paddling through. This may be a case where the theoretical legal position has never been tested - anyone on this site a solicitor/barrister?

 

[TwoSticks]

I am not a lawyer but on land I thought the position was that 'trespass' in itself was not illegal - to be a crime the land owner (or police?) would have to show damage. By analogy the landowner (or police?) would have to show that the canoeist/kayaker caused 'damage' by their 'trespass'.

I'm not in the legal profession either, but my understanding is that if you wander onto someones property you may be committing trespass. In this case it is a civil offense and the landowner may sue for damages or seek an injunction against you. The Police shouldn't be involved as it's a civil matter, but could be if there had been a conspiracy to commit trespass (ie you planned your paddle!).
If you then go on to obstruct or disrupt a lawful activity you may be committing the criminal offense of Aggravated Trespass. This is when you may be breaking the law and the police may become involved.

Surely that would be an incredibly difficult thing to do if the canoeist/kayaker was just paddling through. This may be a case where the theoretical legal position has never been tested - anyone on this site a solicitor/barrister?

I don't think it's actually been tested in the courts yet - which is why I made the original point about the ambiguity.

 

[Minotaur]

I am not a lawyer but on land I thought the position was that 'trespass' in itself was not illegal - to be a crime the land owner (or police?) would have to show damage. By analogy the landowner (or police?) would have to show that the canoeist/kayaker caused 'damage' by their 'trespass'.

I am not sure how it works in the UK, but I think there has to be signs, some attempt to restrict access or mark the boundary. Which would be a nightmare on a river, I would have thought.

 

[Chinkapin]

minotaur: I misspoke, instead of "high water mark" i should have said "average high water mark." Obviously, this is quite a different distance.

Trespass in this country has evolved quite a bit in the last 40 or so years. In the early days if you were on my land, you were trespassing, period.

then for many years a person could enter onto your property and was not considered to be trespassing until you informed him that he was trespassing. At which point he had to get off your property in a "reasonable" time.

It sort of evolved that it was difficult to prosecute someone for trespass unless the land was "posted" Which meant that you had registered it and "posted" a public notice in your local newspaper.

Today, many states have the so-called "purple post" law. This means that if you paint the tops of your fence posts purple that you mean for there to be no trespassing and they are now warned. Anyone entering anyway can be hauled before the court, and do not need to be told, etc. Works quite well.

 

[silvergirl]

There has been a bit of discussion on Song of the paddle about this.

I don't know why people tell him an open canoe isn't suitable for grd 1-2 water, when if he hasn't paddled a kayak before he is obviously going to find that harder. I wouldn't paddle more than grd 1 in a kayak, but would happily do grd 3 in a canoe.

Access wise as Rousseau said -"the first man who enclosed a bit of land said 'This is mine', and found people stupid enough to believe him, was the true founder of civilized society".

Fortunatley (if that is the right word) in Scotland the land grab (of the commons away from the peasantry) didn't really get goin till the 1600s, whereas in England it was pretty much complete by 1360. So you have had people down there shouting "Gert orf my land" for longer than we have.

As far as I am aware no one has been prosecuted for canoeing down a river (well there was one case brought by a hire company (I think)) but that was about launching from their land. Even if you were challenged the only requirement is to leave the area by the fastest route, which is presumably the way you are going .

 

[Joonsy]

if canoeists want unrestricred acces to all rivers in England then it would be only fair to also allow the same rights to fishermen as well, unless you '''own''' a water you have to pay a considerable amount to fish and need a licence, if you decide to fish without a EA licence you run the risk of a heavy fine but if you decide to canoe where you please regardless of access it seems the worst that can happen is to be told to '''clear off''' by the landowner, canoeists contribute little to the upkeep of rivers but fishermen pay a considerable amount for the privilage to fish them (most fishermen don't ''own'' water but pay to fish), if free unlimited access was to be granted to canoeists it should also be extended to fishermen as well, in fact you can't even walk down a river unless there happens to be a footpath alongside it, maybe there should be a strip of land alongside all rivers allowing public access to all users (like a canal towpath). In reality the problem arises from too many people wanting different things from too little land, take canals for example, fishermem/boaters/walkers/cyclists all crowd onto the towpath each moaning at the other because they affect each others pleasure, because the thin strip of land called the towpath is legal access it becomes a crowded mass of different users that moan at each other, it's just what happens in an over-populated country, everyone wants priority for themselves and tolerance to each other becomes a dirty word.

 

[silvergirl]

if canoeists want unrestricred acces to all rivers in England then it would be only fair to also allow the same rights to fishermen as well, unless you '''own''' a water you have to pay a considerable amount to fish and need a licence, if you decide to fish without a EA licence you run the risk of a heavy fine but if you decide to canoe where you please regardless of access it seems the worst that can happen is to be told to '''clear off''' by the landowner, canoeists contribute little to the upkeep of rivers but fishermen pay a considerable amount for the privilage to fish them (most fishermen don't ''own'' water but pay to fish), if free unlimited access was to be granted to canoeists it should also be extended to fishermen as well, in fact you can't even walk down a river unless there happens to be a footpath alongside it, maybe there should be a strip of land alongside all rivers allowing public access to all users (like a canal towpath).

Long sentence

I really don't know about the situation down in England when it comes to fishing or anything else.
I do know however that there are many beats in Scotland that cost thousands of pounds a week to fish on. Here there is free responsible access to the water for all other water users.
The difference is that in canoeing you pass (usually quickly) over the surface of the water. You do not add or take anything from that water, it is merely a path down which you propel (my manual means not motors) your craft.
Fishing beats however, provide footpaths, cut back trees and overhanging vegitation, provided huts or benches. Hooks,line and sometimes bait are added to the water and fish are removed (even relesed fish have oxygen concentration and stress issues when they return).
Everyone pays for the upkeep of rivers through taxes, rod licences alone probably would not cover this (again I don't really know as there are no rod licences in Scotland).

And if you are in England you can buy a BCU licence for access to some waterways.

In reality the problem arises from too many people wanting different things from too little land, take canals for example, fishermem/boaters/walkers/cyclists all crowd onto the towpath each moaning at the other because they affect each others pleasure, because the thin strip of land called the towpath is legal access it becomes a crowded mass of different users that moan at each other, it's just what happens in an over-populated country, everyone wants priority for themselves and tolerance to each other becomes a dirty word.

And that is the real issue.
Everyone wants access, but why does it have to be 'exclusive' access. Are you seriously saying that kids can't go and play/ swim in a river because they don't have a licence? That people can't sit quietly and meditate at the side of a stretch of water because they do not own it? or that a right of navigation of our river which has existed for over 9,500 years (before bits of paper were invented) should be discared to preserve someone else peace and quiet. There used to be a law (which I'm not sure has been withdrawn) that required that rivers were maintained open for navigation to the width of a side ways floating pig

Like I say the situation in Scotland is different. There is responsible access allowed on almost all waterways and land through un motorised means. It doesn't mean you can fish for free though, cause as we are seeing, there aren't that many fish in the sea (or rivers) any more.

 

[Joonsy]

And that is the real issue.
Everyone wants access, but why does it have to be 'exclusive' access. Are you seriously saying that kids can't go and play/ swim in a river because they don't have a licence? That people can't sit quietly and meditate at the side of a stretch of water because they do not own it? or that a right of navigation of our river which has existed for over 9,500 years (before bits of paper were invented) should be discared to preserve someone else peace and quiet.

Hi silvergirl, no i am not saying that at all, actually the reverse, i was trying to say that rivers (in england) should have free access to ALL users, i was trying to make the point that access issues arise because in a crowded land people get selfish and try to grab land/waterways for themselves and then keep it exclusive for their own use only, i probably didn't make my point very clear. I am both a canoeist and fisherman so have seen both sides, as a canoeist i was abused by fisherman when i canoed a small river (i always try to keep on the far bank when passing fisherman but on small rivers that's not possible and abuse was hurled at me even though i passed through very quickly to get out of their way) and also as a fisherman i have been abused by canoeists who ignorantly decided to play in the the very spot i was fishing (i paid good money to fish but had to pack up because they refused to go away saying they had access and could do whatever they liked, they said they were practicing and ''why couldn't i go elsewhere'' even though i was there first, i let them play directly in front of me for an hour before i politely asked how long they were going to be as they were ruining my fishing, they were ignorant and abusive and it was me that had to pack up even though being there first). I believe that rivers should be accessible to ALL users but was trying to make the point that where large numbers of people want the same land for different use there will always be conflict due to a minority of selfish people. People often seem to know what their rights are but not the responsibilty that goes with them. In Scotland there may be places wild and remote and you may have the river to yourself whatever your chosen pursuit is but in England it is a little more crowded sadly. Rivers should have free access to ALL people but a responsibilty to respect it and others goes with it too which is not always observed.

 

[silvergirl]

OK

I miss read you I thought you were saying 'Everyone should pay'.

However I guess the arguement is that fishermen pay the land owner for permission 'to fish', rather than just to use the river for its own sake.

We could get into discussions about catch and release and the right/responsibilty to take a modest 'natural' harvest, but lets not

 

[Minotaur]

minotaur: I misspoke, instead of "high water mark" i should have said "average high water mark." Obviously, this is quite a different distance.

Most of the rivers I have been on in the UK, this would not work here. Unless the river floods in most cases there would be no difference.

if canoeists want unrestricred acces to all rivers in England then it would be only fair to also allow the same rights to fishermen as well

Yes, I agree. Only problem is they cannot fish. Fishing falls under sporting rights, which might not even be owned by the same person. It is not the same thing. Fishing is not an access issue, it requires a license, and land owners permission because of sporting rights on land.

I don't know why people tell him an open canoe isn't suitable for grd 1-2 water, when if he hasn't paddled a kayak before he is obviously going to find that harder. I wouldn't paddle more than grd 1 in a kayak, but would happily do grd 3 in a canoe.

Think a kayak requires more skill, but a Canoe is better over distance.

Fortunatley (if that is the right word) in Scotland the land grab (of the commons away from the peasantry) didn't really get goin till the 1600s, whereas in England it was pretty much complete by 1360. So you have had people down there shouting "Gert orf my land" for longer than we have.

Not true, the last main screw of the peasants was the Agricultural Revolution, which was the 17th to the 19th century. I blame Robin Hood, all the Kings Deer business drives people in the wrong direction. The major difference, between England, and Scotland was they removed the land users in Scotland. In England they were still there, but most had been screwed, and would lose their land over time.

 

[John Fenna]

Think a kayak requires more skill, but a Canoe is better over distance.

I have to disagree here!
Having coached both Kayak and Opens the only thing I find easier in a Kayak is falling over!
Unless you want to play in realy big white water then canoes are by far the batter vessel (IMHO) as they are less likely to turn over unexpectedly on a novice, are less likely to entrap a novice, are easier to paddle in a straight line for a novice, are easier to pack a weeks unsuported expeds kit into, convert into a shelter easier and are a darn sight dryer!
There is a lot of truth in the old saw " Kayaks are for getting wet in, Canoes are for getting places in!"
For a novice this translates as " you are less likely to fall in the water before the end of the day if you use a canoe" and to the experienced paddler as " if you want to play in high end white water, covering comparatively short sections of a river, without having to empty your boat too often, look good in a skirt, helmet and nose-clip then a kayak is your boat - if you want to go on long, unsuported expeds then a canoe is the boat of choice"!

Both disciplines take training and skill to get good at.
It is interesting that GRJ (of very little skill) uses an Open for the trip and that using a kayak he fell in the 'oggin within a very short time!

 

[Minotaur]

I have to disagree here!
Having coached both Kayak and Opens the only thing I find easier in a Kayak is falling over!
Unless you want to play in realy big white water then canoes are by far the batter vessel (IMHO) as they are less likely to turn over unexpectedly on a novice, are less likely to entrap a novice, are easier to paddle in a straight line for a novice, are easier to pack a weeks unsuported expeds kit into, convert into a shelter easier and are a darn sight dryer!
There is a lot of truth in the old saw " Kayaks are for getting wet in, Canoes are for getting places in!"
For a novice this translates as " you are less likely to fall in the water before the end of the day if you use a canoe" and to the experienced paddler as " if you want to play in high end white water, covering comparatively short sections of a river, without having to empty your boat too often, look good in a skirt, helmet and nose-clip then a kayak is your boat - if you want to go on long, unsuported expeds then a canoe is the boat of choice"!

Both disciplines take training and skill to get good at.
It is interesting that GRJ (of very little skill) uses an Open for the trip and that using a kayak he fell in the 'oggin within a very short time!

Not sure what you are disagreeing with but completely agree with everything you said. If I was going to add something it would be that Kayaks bring stuff to the table at higher skill levels, but you have to want to do those things. Most Kayaks stuff that interests me these days involves some of those sea trips around some of the Scottish islands

Wonder still if you could have a Canoe, with a larger covered area, for locking/storing away kit?

 

[John Fenna]

I am saying that both require skill, neither nedds more skill than the other...just different skills as basically - they are intended for different things!

Traditionally designed Canoes are the better boat for long journies as this is what they were designed for in the first place.

I do not like the idea of a fixed lockable decked in stowage as it would play havoc with trimming the vessel and would likely cause drainage problems in the event of a capsize and rescue.

Lockable boxes that can be chained to immovable objects ashore but which are free to be moved around the canoe to retrim and allow free drainage would be my choice.

I often take my canoe on the sea and Wales has been circumnavigated (sea and rivers) before now (Mr Goodwin and Mr Eglestaff) so even for serious sea work the Canoe is a viable option - if you know what you are doing!

Sea Kayaks are designed for sea work (!) and a guy I worked with (Pete) took one acrosss the Atlantic - not something I would try in an open canoe

 

[Minotaur]

I am saying that both require skill, neither nedds more skill than the other...just different skills as basically - they are intended for different things!

Traditionally designed Canoes are the better boat for long journies as this is what they were designed for in the first place.

I think the Canoes win out as the best Bushcraft boats, but they lose out for me to modern world requirements.

I do not like the idea of a fixed lockable decked in stowage as it would play havoc with trimming the vessel and would likely cause drainage problems in the event of a capsize and rescue.

Lockable boxes that can be chained to immovable objects ashore but which are free to be moved around the canoe to retrim and allow free drainage would be my choice.

I wonder if there would be ways to solve those problems?

I often take my canoe on the sea and Wales has been circumnavigated (sea and rivers) before now (Mr Goodwin and Mr Eglestaff) so even for serious sea work the Canoe is a viable option - if you know what you are doing!

Sea Kayaks are designed for sea work (!) and a guy I worked with (Pete) took one acrosss the Atlantic - not something I would try in an open canoe

I wonder why, especially with the sailing canoe people, a Catamaran, or trimaran style canoe has not appeared. That would solve all the sea issues, you would have thought.

In fact I wonder if you took a Canoe style hull but only pointed at the front, and made it a pontoon style catamaran. I wonder if you would get the best of all worlds? Also I wonder how it would handle white water? They do use big inflatable version in the states, but I am not thinking of something that big.

 

[Bravo4]

I wonder why, especially with the sailing canoe people, a Catamaran, or trimaran style canoe has not appeared. That would solve all the sea issues, you would have thought.

Once upon a time I owned one of these:
http://www.windrider.com/16.shtml

Great sailing boat, not so great to paddle. Her 12 foot beam gives plenty of stability but would be a nightmare to manuever on any sort of white water. I think it would be the same with a canoe-cat; unless possibly you used oars instead of paddles. Might seem similar but two canoes rigged together is a much different beast from a "cataraft".
http://www.nrsweb.com/shop/product.asp?pfid=1116&deptid=1132

There are quite a few aftermarket sail rigs and outriggers available for canoes and kayaks:
http://www.solwaydory.fsnet.co.uk/sailing_canoes/sailing_canoes.html
http://www.baloghsaildesigns.com/pro.html

As a sailing vessel, the 2 canoe catamaran concept is sound.
There was a sailor by the name of Francis Brenton who took 2 dugout canoe hulls, decked them over, rigged them up as a sailing cat, and sailed from South America to the States and eventually on to the Azores I believe it was. His book, which is near impossible to find, is called, "The Voyage of the Sierra Sagrada; across the Atlantic in a canoe". Incredible story.

Minotaur, I think I understand what you mean by "modern world requirements". How to secure your equipment when you come ashore and need to leave the boat? Where to sleep when the shore is private property? You can't just pull up on any old beach and pitch your tent.

This guy has had some interesting adventures; (Almost) to Cuba by Outrigger Sailing Canoe:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~tim/pix/cuba.html

As for big trips in a simple, open canoe, have you ever heard of Don Starkell and his sons voyage from Canada to South America, "Paddle to the Amazon"?
http://www.amazon.com/Paddle-Amazon-Ultimate-000-Mile-Adventure/dp/0771082568

How about Verlen Kruger? That guy got around.
Kruger canoes are something in between a canoe and a sea-kayak, have catamaran options, and are often sailed with one of the BSD rigs or similar.
http://www.krugercanoes.com/
They don't come cheap. If money were no object,,,,but I can't think of when money is no object for the small boat skipper who wishes to undertake an extended voyage.

So, I think the best boat for your purpose, is the smallest, simplest one you can get by with. Or the one you already have. Or the one someone will let you borrow. Or maybe the Kon-Tiki, but definately not the Titanic. Think hard about where exactly you plan to use the boat; the best of both worlds so often contains the worst of both worlds.

 

[helixpteron]

Excellent post Bravo4!

 

[Minotaur]

Minotaur, I think I understand what you mean by "modern world requirements". How to secure your equipment when you come ashore and need to leave the boat? Where to sleep when the shore is private property? You can't just pull up on any old beach and pitch your tent.

First off brillant post.

Yes, my thoughts are running along those lines. Anyone who saw the last episode will have seen him leave his canoe with kit in a town. Also saw him doing portage, funny.

One of the things that has happened in the world, is once we come up with an idea we head in that direction and only that direction.

I was thinking more about a Pontoon boat or hydroairy ship. Think the raft everyone makes, which is basically a style of catamaran. With a little more thought, I wonder how a slightly wider canoe/skift style boat, with pontoons would work. Provided you want to step away from the traditional hand build, it would be interesting to see what could be done alone these lines.

So, I think the best boat for your purpose, is the smallest, simplest one you can get by with. Or the one you already have. Or the one someone will let you borrow. Or maybe the Kon-Tiki, but definately not the Titanic. Think hard about where exactly you plan to use the boat; the best of both worlds so often contains the worst of both worlds.

As I answered John's post, I think the best boat is one of the canoes. They win in everything but me wanting certain thing from them.

I do not want the best of all worlds, just a boat to travel the rivers, and lakes in the UK. Not sure if I want to be able to sail, but it is an interesting option, that needs adding early. I even wonder if an electric boat might not be the way to go, and cycle instead of paddle. Used to spend a lot of time paddling a sailing dinghy when I was younger. It was a racing style that was complete unforgiving to the begineer, even people who could sail struggled in it. I also wonder how useful being able to sleep in the boat would be.

 

[al21]

Have you considered a small sailing dinghy? Something like a GP14 for instance, GP for General Purpose 14 foot. Designed to be rowed, sailed and propelled by outboard motor. Will sleep two onboard, size dependant, and are capable boats which can be sailed solo or carry four, though I've seen more. Or a Wayfarer or Wanderer which are regarded as quality cruising dinghies, that said you could probably go to any sailing club in the land and pick up an old unloved Mirror for next to nowt. A surprisingly capable boat the Mirror and is car topable like a canoe.

I suggest you take a look at www.dca.uk.com for a few more details about dinghy cruising and camping.

I say this as someone who has paddled canoes for many years and would have readily agreed that a canoe is the perfect bushcraft boat, but it isn't really suited to open water and the sea. It can be improved with the addition of an outrigger in the manner of Proa's etc to make a very seaworthy vessel, but the modification might put many off. I'm now thinking that a dinghy is the way forward. They address many of the issues you raise with many having lockable waterproof chambers and sleeping onboard under a boom tent.

Food for thought, I hope.