The problem we face in England and Wales is that the public are denied access to and along 98% of rivers. The legal situation is different in most other countries in the world, where canoeists are generally able to paddle large and small non-tidal rivers without seeking permission, as the beds of these rivers are not privately owned. Under these different and more open regimes there is very little, if any, conflict between land ownership, angling and navigation interests - each having rights to the use of the water.In England and Wales it is currently assumed that the law dictates that whoever owns the land along the river bank (the riparian owner) also owns the property rights to the river bed. If a river doesn’t have a public right of navigation and you haven’t got consent from the riparian owner, you’re committing trespass by paddling, swimming or even wading
The Magna Carta gave free Passage of all rivers for ships and boats. This public right of navigation has been effectively ‘stolen’ by a succession of legal authors. Prior to 1830 there was a generally acted public right of navigation on all rivers which were physically navigable. Riparian rights are created by statute and there has never been a law giving landowners control over navigation. However, since 1830 successive legal authors have assumed, more positively over time, that the control of navigation is a riparian right.
However, with regard to the River Avon, many argue that there remains a Public Right of Navigation on the River Avon from Salisbury to the Sea by virtue of the Statute of 1664 (see 'History')
2 comments:
I'm interested in the riparian rights argument in which the owner of the land of the banks assumes legal rights over the river bed also. Now, unless there's something very wrong with your technique your craft should not touch the bottom but traverse the fluid above the bottom in much the same way as an aircraft traverses the fluid (air) above my property. Do I therefore have the right to prevent aircraft doing this?
However, The navigation was a toll!(not a public right of way) and the River made navigable (costly) the toll monies were intended to repay the debt. A large flood destroyed the workings and they were unable to raise sufficient funds to reinstate the works. How does that affect the arguement?
Post a Comment