A lifeless canal

[jenlyn]

The SEVM's in my mind are being pushed through with no thought or structure. Before implementing such change, there should be plans laid to ensure such a change works. Dredging along lengths before and after the VM's, with bankside being ensured for suitability of mooring as well.

Enforcement through consistent and regular patrols have clearly made a difference over the past 12 months, and have clearly in my mind, more or less shot in the foot, the need for the SEVM changes. This is becoming abundantly clear.

I am really at a loss trying to figure out why on earth they are so keen to bring this change in.

I have my thoughts on where this is all going, along with several others. I guess it wont bother too many until it hits a place near you.

 

We came down to Marsworth from the midlands twice last year admittedly the summer was very wet but noticed less boats moving and we were able to get on visitor moorings without too much trouble. Seemed to be a fair few boats moored on the towpath through Milton Keynes and wide beams getting more popular compared with 3 years ago.

Widebeams are getting popular. Even I am concerned at the number being craned in at Watford.

[magnetman]

.

 

Widebeams are getting popular. Even I am concerned at the number being craned in at Watford.

 

so am I and i've got two wide beam canal bargets - they take too much space, no more please!

Edited May 7, 2013 by magnetman

[Tuscan]

The SEVM's in my mind are being pushed through with no thought or structure. Before implementing such change, there should be plans laid to ensure such a change works. Dredging along lengths before and after the VM's, with bankside being ensured for suitability of mooring as well.

Enforcement through consistent and regular patrols have clearly made a difference over the past 12 months, and have clearly in my mind, more or less shot in the foot, the need for the SEVM changes. This is becoming abundantly clear.

I am really at a loss trying to figure out why on earth they are so keen to bring this change in.

 

 

Initially I thought it was a result of pressure from the IWA but now I am leaning to a more worrying view that it is the beginning of pattern to manage stay times throughout the system by using daily overstay chages and no return rules as deterrent which will impact on all users potentially.

[jenlyn]

 

The SEVM's in my mind are being pushed through with no thought or structure. Before implementing such change, there should be plans laid to ensure such a change works. Dredging along lengths before and after the VM's, with bankside being ensured for suitability of mooring as well.

Enforcement through consistent and regular patrols have clearly made a difference over the past 12 months, and have clearly in my mind, more or less shot in the foot, the need for the SEVM changes. This is becoming abundantly clear.

I am really at a loss trying to figure out why on earth they are so keen to bring this change in.

Initially I thought it was a result of pressure from the IWA but now I am leaning to a more worrying view that it is the beginning of pattern to manage stay times throughout the system by using daily overstay chages and no return rules as deterrent which will impact on all users potentially.

This is exactly their plan. Eventually, others will wake up and notice whats afoot. Trouble is, it will probably be too late.

[RichardN]

Now in my case I pay nothing move very 14 days and can use Visitor Moorings

 

And that is quite right, it is important that there are people who can and do cruise round the network.

[magnetman]

 

And that is quite right, it is important that there are people who can and do cruise round the network.

why?

[cotswoldsman]

 

And that is quite right, it is important that there are people who can and do cruise round the network.

That seems like the answer from someone that completely missed my point. Never mind you just carry on.

[BlueStringPudding]

Initially I thought it was a result of pressure from the IWA but now I am leaning to a more worrying view that it is the beginning of pattern to manage stay times throughout the system by using daily overstay chages and no return rules as deterrent which will impact on all users potentially.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I don't believe CaRT are making the changes for any sort of deterrent. That's why it doesn't make sense when anyone tries to apply that logic to it, and as time progresses further holes in their case will become apparent until its just laughable.

 

It's being done for revenue generation. They're a charity. They need money. They will apply this ruling across the country.

[madcat]

I have started to think what I will do instead of boating. I have no desire to be harassed from one place to another with threats of overstay charges hanging over my head. I started the thread on 48hr mooring proliferation because I could only see a bad outcome. Cheshire Rose pointed out. How it will affect the operation of historic boats and leisure boaters who like to visit favourite places regularly.

Me I like to mooch about and stay a few days in some places, I want a holiday, I need to relax. CaRTs barmy rules will put a stop to this simple easy going approach to boating

 

I think it's time to wake up and smell the crap coming our way.

[RichardN]

That seems like the answer from someone that completely missed my point. Never mind you just carry on.

 

No I ignored the bits where you missed my point. Packet Boat was something that I could easily look up as I was looking at T&Cs on their site for other reasons so it gave a sighting shot. Of course I don't expect to see a roving licence at £200/m but £40/m inside the M25 is cheap. I note that none of you guys who have been coy about what is actually being negotiated are disputing that figure.

 

In answer to Magnetman's why? I think that canals are made to be moved on so don't penalise people who do move on the canals.

[cotswoldsman]

 

No I ignored the bits where you missed my point. Packet Boat was something that I could easily look up as I was looking at T&Cs on their site for other reasons so it gave a sighting shot. Of course I don't expect to see a roving licence at £200/m but £40/m inside the M25 is cheap. I note that none of you guys who have been coy about what is actually being negotiated are disputing that figure.

 

In answer to Magnetman's why? I think that canals are made to be moved on so don't penalise people who do move on the canals.

You still don't get the point a Roving Licence is commonly called a Continuous Licence that costs the same as any other cruising licence. A Roving Permit is additional cost over the cost of a licence and allows you to stay in a defined area

[jenlyn]

You still don't get the point a Roving Licence is commonly called a Continuous Licence that costs the same as any other cruising licence. A Roving Permit is additional cost over the cost of a licence and allows you to stay in a defined area

Your not getting it john, some just simply want something or someone to moan about. Let them get on with it, will be a flippin laugh when the crap hits the fan.

[alan_fincher]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I don't believe CaRT are making the changes for any sort of deterrent. That's why it doesn't make sense when anyone tries to apply that logic to it, and as time progresses further holes in their case will become apparent until its just laughable.

 

It's being done for revenue generation. They're a charity. They need money. They will apply this ruling across the country.

I simply don't agree, from what I have heard.

 

To me it is far more about a "sledgehammer" solution that they think will be able to be used to crack the "nut" of boaters who choose to stay in areas they would prefer they did not, and who they seem to think they don't currently have suitable means of guaranteeing enforcement without these changes.

 

Of course only time will tell which of us proves correct, (assuming either of us is right, of course!), but I do not think they expect to be collecting a lot of £25 overstay charges, and I believe they will be very reticent to test the legality of them in court, as soon as anyone simply refuses to pay.

 

Now of course, on the other hand, if you are honest and law abiding, I am sure they will bank your payment and give you a receipt, but I honestly don't think that will happen very often, or even that CRT expect it to.

[Lesd]

The SEVM's in my mind are being pushed through with no thought or structure. Before implementing such change, there should be plans laid to ensure such a change works. Dredging along lengths before and after the VM's, with bankside being ensured for suitability of mooring as well.

Enforcement through consistent and regular patrols have clearly made a difference over the past 12 months, and have clearly in my mind, more or less shot in the foot, the need for the SEVM changes. This is becoming abundantly clear.

I am really at a loss trying to figure out why on earth they are so keen to bring this change in.

 

Agree 100% with this, the enforcement has worked, no need at all for the SEVM changes. The dredging point is key, at the CC meeting in Rugby Vince Moran acknowledged that allocated dredging funds could be used to dredge the sides in shallow sections either side of popular VMs, not sure how this will be actioned but he agreed to the logic of it.

 

 

Berko is already seeing some anti-social antics; several garden sheds and canal side houses being burgled recently, also two thefts off of boats, less boats on those stretches will mean these scrotes have more opportunity, the boaters are often the eyes and ears of these towns.

We poodled down from Lady Caples down to Stockers over the weekend, most boats we saw moving were weekenders from Harefield marina who had headed north, in total about a dozen boats see on Saturday. The near boatless pounds in Berko look very similar to the long pound through Cassiobury park, maybe 8/9 boats moored throughout that whole stretch, normally many more than that, yet the SEVM calls for one 14 day section to be reduced to 24 hrs !

[alan_fincher]

I have started to think what I will do instead of boating. I have no desire to be harassed from one place to another with threats of overstay charges hanging over my head. I started the thread on 48hr mooring proliferation because I could only see a bad outcome. Cheshire Rose pointed out. How it will affect the operation of historic boats and leisure boaters who like to visit favourite places regularly.

Me I like to mooch about and stay a few days in some places, I want a holiday, I need to relax. CaRTs barmy rules will put a stop to this simple easy going approach to boating

 

I think it's time to wake up and smell the crap coming our way.

A shame more didn't wake up and smell the crap, and send in detailed objections to the South East proposals.

 

We are told the balance was about 50% in favour, and 50% against, although I admit that since they have published all the redacted responses, I have not spent hours testing the accuracy of that statement. (It almost seems unimportant now, as it was obvious they were never going to take "no" as the answer, despite a 700 signature petition against the proposals, and both NABO and RBOA ultimately saying they should be shelved without proper evidence of the need.

 

Sadly I think a lot of people who may have been duped into thinking none of this really affects them will only realise too late what is slowly being eroded away.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

A shame more didn't wake up and smell the crap, and send in detailed objections to the South East proposals.

 

We are told the balance was about 50% in favour, and 50% against, although I admit that since they have published all the redacted responses, I have not spent hours testing the accuracy of that statement. (It almost seems unimportant now, as it was obvious they were never going to take "no" as the answer, despite a 700 signature petition against the proposals, and both NABO and RBOA ultimately saying they should be shelved without proper evidence of the need.

 

Sadly I think a lot of people who may have been duped into thinking none of this really affects them will only realise too late what is slowly being eroded away.

Well said!

 

​I made a foia request with regard to responses (as suggested by CWDF members) and have found that that two random samples indicate that the majority are against any change.

 

In both cases, a random sample of about 10% of responses found that 20 out of 36 were opposed to CaRT's proposals.

 

My foi request asked CaRT how many members NABO/RBOA had in an attempt to determine the weight that CaRT should apply to responses from those organisations.

 

CaRT said they don't know!

 

I also asked the number who responded collectively saying 'Stop in the whole, the south east vm proposals (i.e. Jenlins' petition).. CaRT's response pretends that they are completely unaware of the petition.

 

 

Edited May 7, 2013 by Allan(nb Albert)

[luctor et emergo]

First they cleansed the South East, but I said nothing, becuase I don't boat there.

Then they cleansed the K&A, but I said nothing, because they deserved it. Then they cleansed the Oxford, but I did nothing, because it's shallow.

 

And when they came for me, there was nobody else left to do something

[Athy]

Then they cleansed the Oxford, but I did nothing, because it's shallow.

 

 

We moor on the Oxford and travel on it quite frequently. We have noticed no CART activity at all this spring, apart from a "work" boat which has been occupying a visitor mooring just above the main road bridge. What cleansing are you referring to?

Edited May 8, 2013 by Athy

[nicknorman]

We moor on the Oxford and travel on it quite frequently. We have noticed no CART activity at all this spring, apart from a "work" boat which has been occupying a visitor mooring just above the main road bridge. What cleansing are you referring to?

The one he foresees in his tea leaves.

[magnetman]

[luctor et emergo]

The one he foresees in his tea leaves.

Crunched up cones actually. More accurate than tea leaves.

[jenlyn]

Well said!

​I made a foia request with regard to responses (as suggested by CWDF members) and have found that that two random samples indicate that the majority are against any change.

In both cases, a random sample of about 10% of responses found that 20 out of 36 were opposed to CaRT's proposals.

 

My foi request asked CaRT how many members NABO/RBOA had in an attempt to determine the weight that CaRT should apply to responses from those organisations.

CaRT said they don't know!

 

I also asked the number who responded collectively saying 'Stop in the whole, the south east vm proposals (i.e. Jenlins' petition).. CaRT's response pretends that they are completely unaware of the petition.

 

I find it odd regarding the statement on my petition. It has been mentioned publicly by CRT and was also used by Jeff Whyatt in his recent south east user group meeting slides.

I have re sent it today, using a more up to date edition which has almost 1000 signatures.

[jenlyn]

Seems the visitor moorings at Upton upon Severn are being lost as well now. Being given over to Avon Belle boat trips.

[madcat]

Alan,I took a while for the full implications of all this to sink in so I didn't contribute to the SE consultation which I regret. I'm wondering how to register my concerns,have HNBC had any input to this do you know?

Jenlyn I expect you mentioned your petition on here,is it an online one? How do I sign? I don't always spot things on here due to having a furry mind.

[Tuscan]

CRT are just about to put their final report on the consultations on their web site I believe. I am not sure about the HNBC i didn't hear but both NABO and RBOA have been making their feelings known. I imagine there will be a lot of subsequent activity.