Our rivers and lakes are part of our natural environment and are not for the pleasure of the selfish few. In particular the use of spurious health and safety arguments by local authorities to ban swimming in water that is community property, must cease forthwith. The Local Government Association, an unaccountable public funded quango, is strongly against open water swimming and actively uses its influence to have swim bans created and enforced. This also must stop.
If open water swimming is so dangerous, why has there not been a significant number of drownings involving swimmers in Scotland? The Land Access Act (Scotland) confers the right to swim in almost all Scottish rivers, lochs and reservoirs.
Using RoSPA's drowning statistics and the DfTs road casualty figures I'm over 1,000 times more likely to be killed travelling to my local river swimming spot than I am actually swimming.

Nice idea but England is extremely overcrowded. Our rivers are also home to a range of wildlife.

Danger that our rivers could end up as crowded as Blackpool so the impact on this ebvironment could be quite severe.

Go for a swim and enjoy it. If a jobsworth comes along with a clipboard, swim to the other side and wave to him. Remind him that his income is dependent on your tax contribution. If that doesn't work, tell him to stuff off!

Wake up please , in Holland,there are more densely populated than the UK but they manage to have clean safe swimming lakes all over the place and help take the strain from the so called blighted areas of tourism.

In France it's very common to see river swimming areas being maintained by local councils, it's that normal a thing to do everywhere it seems except in England and Wales. Come on, let us make our own decisions about whether we want to swim in a river or lake, I'm a grown-up and make bigger decisions every working day. As for wildlife in the waters, yes, there's plenty and we can co-swim perfectly happily all together :)

I agree with this proposal.

It's crazy that we are not encouraged to swim outdoors, let alone banned from doing so in many areas. My thoughts are it's the anglers that don't want us swimming in what they consider their space. We should have the equivalent of the Ramblers Association to lobby for our right to swim outdoors in rivers.

"Nice idea but England is extremely overcrowded. Our rivers are also home to a range of wildlife". Oh dear "susepp" very unhelpful and inaccurate comment. Read on ...

As these waterways become available (legally) for swimmers then the water quality will improve by enforcement action of the authorities and pressure on any polluters from the local people who bathe in them. The Environment Agency already publish water quality data for our rivers and this gives guidance to swimmers/fishermen as to the highest quality water - therefore the best quality swimming, most wildlife, best visibility etc.
Outdoor swimming, in conventional trunks in the summer and in wetsuits in the winter is an excellent past-time and sport. Clear non-chlorine saturated air makes the exercise much more pleasant than swimming up and down in an indoor pool.

If you do not know about outdoor swimming in your area then why not look up the Big Jump 2010 (11th July 2010) and look up the website of the Outdoor Swimming Society also on Facebook. As per Mahmoud "we should have the equivalent of the Ramblers Association to lobby for our right to swim outdoors in rivers" and I hope that this lobby is well received by politicians who can give us back the right to swim outdoors. Yours swimmingly, Bryn

Outdoor swimming is a healthy pastime which can improve respect for the natural environment.

It does not carry any environmental threats 'Susepp' and I speak as someone with a degree in marine biology! As I swim regularly in lakes, I can assure you that unlike land-based recreational activities, swimming does NOT cause disturbance or displacement of breeding birds, who do not seem to perceive swimmers as threats. However, when I cycle past them, this does have a disturbance impact, as I am sure does walking and angling along our waterways.

There is also little risk of pollution from outdoor swimming, as long as people take sensible precautions such as not littering and not putting sun creams or other lotions onto their skin before swimming.

The impact of all of us putting phosphates and other chemicals down our sewers every day via our washing machines, showers and toilets makes outdoor swimming an irrelevance in terms of environmental impact.

As Swansswimmer says above, encouraging humans into the water is unfortunately one of the only ways of actually getting our water environment properly cleaned up.

 Posted by mahmoud July 05, 2010 at 01:55PM: 'We should have the equivalent of the Ramblers Association to lobby for our right to swim outdoors in rivers.'
The River and Lake Swimming Association (RALSA) has been doing just that since 2003. RALSA was born out of the campaign to maintain public access to Hatchmere lake in Cheshire. Hatchmere has been a very popular swimming lake for generations and this did not stop it being designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest. However, in 2000 there was an attempt to turn it into an exclusive fishing lake. The excuse: swimming interferes with the wildlife. We have heard it all before. www.river-swimming.co.uk / www.hatchmere.com

I am in favour of any such liberty, although I would be unlikely to make use of this particular freedom myself!

People should be trusted to make their own assessment of personal risk and balance this against any enjoyment they are likely to experience to decide what to do.

I agree with much of what has been said before. As I understand it, it was the Lords who blocked the initial proposal in the Countryside Rights of Way Act to allow access to water. Given that (part of) this administration see the Lords as undemocratic, perhaps they will remedy this lack of freedom. Two underlying principles for me are - to avoid exclusivity; and freedom to use, unless you abuse.

Definitely need to encourage as much river and lake swimming as possible because it will make us all happier and healthier people and by immersing ourselves in our environment we may be inclined to look after it better. I.e keep our rivers and lakes clean. Nice one

I totally support this suggestion. Many far more populous regions of the world have no problem with this. We should have the freedom to decide for ourselves.

With the amount of anti-social behaviour inside the inner city not allowing unfettered access to our rivers and countryside is only creating a bigger monster. As a youth leader I have found that if you challenge the young they will respond in ways that you would least expect from 'youths'. Being able to freely take young people to experience the great outdoors, as I can in Scotland, is something that this Government needs to address. I fully support any Act of Parliment that would allow our children to experience fully the benefits of all outdoor activities, be it swimming in our lakes, camping on our moorlands,sailing or canoeing down our rivers. Give our children the chance to experience other things than soap operas and computer games.

What a great comment Leswhatling and a viewpoint I hadn't thought about at all. Brilliantly put!

Nothing against opening up some areas but be careful not to have a damaging effect on sensitive areas and wildlife. Should be up to the local authorities (such as open access plans for walkers) with some areas reserved for nature.

Nothing against opening up some areas but be careful not to have a damaging effect on sensitive areas and wildlife. Should be up to the local authorities (such as open access plans for walkers) with some areas reserved for nature.

I agree with RO that care must be taken to protect sensitive wildlife.

I also agree that care must be taken to let swimmers protect themselves. This is very different from protecting swimmers against their wishes, though! Here's what I mean:

In order for people to be able to make an informed judgement about the safety of a given body of water, there are two things they must have information about:

1. Physical hazards existing in the body of water;
2. The quality of the body of water (i.e. is it biologically or chemically contaminated).

Point 1 should, I think, be handled as follows. If the hazards are obvious (e.g. white water), then nothing needs to be done, since no-one ought to brave those hazards unless they've got the skill and training to do so. If the hazards aren't obvious (e.g. submerged drains, weirs (which are more dangerous than they look because of the back-currents and aeration they produce), or suchlike) then signposts should be placed nearby warning of the hazard(s). Fortunately, this is already done by landowners or local councils in most places.

Point 2 is trickier, but surmountable. It would be very useful if there were a website one could visit that would be updated weekly with reports of the water quality in popular swimming spots. Visitors to the website should be able to add swimming spots to the list of spots to be checked (much as they add ideas on this website), with all spots receiving at least a certain number of requests automatically being added to the list of spots for the checking agency to consider.

The agency/agencies responsible for checking the water quality at the swimming spots ought to ensure that no time-wasting redundant measurements are made (e.g. multiple measurements close together on the same body of water). Once that's done, it's just a case of sending off a bloke in a van (or better still, on a bicycle) to collect samples once a week and bring them back to a lab. The lab would then assess the water quality and post the results on the website.

Those who don't mind swimming in algal blooms, etc, would still be free to do so; the rest of us, if the website reported the presence of that sort of contamination, could make an informed choice to wait for the contamination to clear before returning to that swimming spot!

A side benefit of the system I've proposed is that it would motivate people to consider the quality of their environment. After all, if you learn that your local swimming spot is chemically or biologically contaminated, that's a good incentive to pressure your council to investigate the local farms, industries or sewage works that might be causing the contamination. This would increase the transparency, of local politics and of the water!

What we need is some common sense initiative which makes sure that the non-swimmers (or the ones who come along and fancy a dip and inevitably get into difficulty) are deterred and prevented, meanwhile allowing the really good swimmers to do their training, etc.

There are numerous websites that support research done on chlorine in swimming pools which suggests that the by-products given off when chlorine mixes with sweat, etc can be harmful for our lungs over a long period of time. I for one don't like swimming indoors as I always become really congested afterwards. So it would be good to have a choice and maybe even get to enjoy Britain's natural beauty outside.

Perhaps if there was some kind of accepted reward good swimmers could achieve in order to access outside lakes and (possibly even reservoirs where their underwater machinery and dams are cordoned off by netting). Certification of this nature could potentially then give the Authorities the confidence to enable some swimming to take place. It would be like a permit only a certified one obtained via a set of performance tests.

I completely agree. If the lake/river is not on private property then Councils should not treat people like children and ban them from swimming.
We are all capable of making decisions on whether our activities are safe or not. We dont need some unelected clip-board carrier telling us what we can and cannot do.

Obviously a good idea. If this really is going to be the "most liberal Parliament in a generation" (Nick Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister, Friday 9th July) it will give people back the right to take their own (minimal) risks in pursuit of their own happiness. Swimming in inland lakes and rivers is surely among the most benignly enjoyable activities available to us, and should be encouraged, not needlessly impeded.

there is nothing more enjoyable than swimming in rivers and lakes. I was lucky to be introduced to it last year and I haven't look back since. I totally agree with gahana and the comment above.
We should be allowed to swim and make our own decisions and it's about time that health and safety got on it's bike and left us in peace.
I am a member of the Outdoor Swimming Society and when events are arranged it is always at each persons risk if they swim. My 3yr old took part in the Big Jump on the 11th and he loved it. We did no damage to the enviroment and had fun.After all isn't that what life is for????
so come on and lets swim

Yes lets all swim freely. I live near the sea and love to swim in it , but shush dont tell anyone in case this gets regulated.

This is a very good idea, especially when society struggles with obesity and mental ill health caused by lack of exercise and increasing alienation from outdoor activities. Outdoor or 'wild swimming' is one of the most popular activities in water today, yet it is banned in most places. All this when our river and lakes are maintained at vast expense / subsidy to the tax payer. The UK should follow policy on the continent and reopen the beautiful river and lake beaches that exist all across the UK. See www.wildswimming.co.uk to explore some of them.

Yes, absolutely agree there should be a default right for people to swim on bodies of water in the UK, just as there is a right to roam. Swimming outdoors is very different to swimming on a pool. It's terrible freedom to hnave been restricted.

I agree.

I agree that the rights of access to natural rivers and lakes should be returned to the public.

It is a crucial life skill to be able to assess risk and to be able to weigh up risk against one's talents and abilities. This proposal returns responsibility where it ultimately has to lie on any issue - with the individual. Wild swimming is liberating, healthy and great fun. Rivers and the sea deserve respect and appropriate signage or other information should assist people to make informed choices. This proposal is excellent - it isn't 'lowest common denominator' thinking that seems to drive so much controlling and unnecessary laws and regulations.

When I was a child there was a changing facility on the river Thames between Weybridge and Walton on Thames. When a swimming pool was built in Walton on Thames this facility was closed down and now there is actually a notice in this very safe and suitable location saying that river bathing is dangerous and should not be done. The sign is quite useful for hanging one's towel on to dry after having a swim.

All such silly notices and prohibitions should go, suggested public bathing spots on rivers and lakes are a good idea and would promote safety as more people would use them.

I understand that it is actually illegal to swim in most canals in this country, this certainly needs changing ans for those like myself living in Basingstoke where the nearest waterways are canals there really is no alternative.

I swim in rivers and lakes on a regular basis and would love to see a legal right to do so. It would be really good if it included the water company reservoirs where sailing is allowed at the moment, so obviously it is considered safe for people to enter those waters. It could be a big help to tourism too.