Leaderboard

The man clearly needs support but that should be by health and/or social services which his 'supporters' should be finding for him rather than using him in their fight against CRT. Deeply cynical and frankly repugnant.

Interesting reading all the speculation, Unfortunately the article in the Bridgwater and Taunton Mercury is very misleading and the "unnamed man" is a disgruntled boat owner who has caused nothing but trouble for himself through his own behaviour, Also not an original bw docks boat owner... Thought he could buy a boat on the B&T and freeload from the situation, 1. The reality of the situation is. CRT gave up 28 marina's the same year as the bw docks, Somerset County Council were the only council to insist on all the boats having to leave (not crt's choice) 2. CRT worked with the boaters as yes some lived there had job's and families so lifting out and causing upheaval leaving there home was something crt recognised and helped by allowing the boats to move out onto the 14 miles of waterway, 3. As some on here have stated you can't meet Cc requirements moving over 20 miles a year as it obviously isn't that long a waterway, there were also no suitable identified mooring locations for the particular size of boats in question. 4. the docks future at that point was uncertain, potential leveling up funds for refurbishment but no timescale or guarantee so crt gave the boaters an agreement to bide by and it was reviewed every 6 months. 5. The time came where the town’s fund was secured and a date set for refurbishment was place to be the summer of 2025. 6. Once crt had this information they (last year) spoke with the boaters and indicated if the boats didn't have home moorings by January of this year they would have to be removed from the b&t. 7. Three locations were identified for moorings (pretty much where the boats had found homes over the past two years and local businesses approached with offers to lease and manage the locations, 8 (here's your new paper misinformation) all the original boat owners who left the docks have identified locations there is some finalising to be done with 4 but heading in the right direction. One original boat sadly the owner passed away and the family are removing the boat to be sold. Two of the original boats but not original owners are being removed, And a third that just showed up on the system thinking they could be clever and play the system these 3 boats received eviction notices, Two of the three have done nothing but try to play the system claiming squatting rights cause fights and upsetting the local areas,ect, the 3rd was recently sold and the new owner is lifting it for a refit. So 10 people loosing there homes/boats? Not true. There has been nothing but support for the boaters from crt and the local bridgwater town council, yes some difficult pills to swallow at times loosing the facilities at the docks for example (the county council again insisting they had to be closed) and life adjustments to make but everyone is still local to there families and job's. The Bridgwater mercury didn't fact check before publication.

All I can say is that the editor and myself spent a year looking for someone to take over from me. I had deliberately kept the "trade" at arms length to avoid accusations of partiality, and I really don't think the way modern magazines are edited gave the editor any more contacts. I suggested a couple of possibilities and asked one or two of the more technical members here who also showed a degree of writing ability, but in all cases they said no. I think that in the end, RCR took up the offer. I think those with the experience, practical ability and knowledge in both mechanical and electrical systems were too busy earning money and were scared off by the thought of putting it down on paper. Actually the number of questions that came via the magazine were only one or two a month, the vast majority came direct to me via TB-Training, and they were getting less and less as those who had attended my courses got sufficient experience. In the end I was re-answering questions from over 10 years previously. I was not happy doing that, but the editor needed a selection to choose from. If anyone is interested in why I stopped, it was for several reasons. perhaps the major one is that I was of an age that relatives, friends and acquaintances were increasingly dying or getting rushed into hospital. I did not think it would be fair on the magazine if I suddenly could not produce the 4000 to 5000 words a month. As I indicated above, it was getting increasingly difficult to meet that target. Then there was the fact that my knowledge was/is getting less and less relevant for modern systems and practice, lithium battery systems being a case in point. Finally, I recognised my brain work was, and is, becoming less sharp than it was, as illustrated by the cock-ups I have made here over recent years. The message is use it or lose it, send your questions to the magazine.

I think the reason why the editor couldn’t find someone to replace you was that you would be a very hard act to follow. Your combination of decades of practical experience across a wide range of boats, theoretical knowledge, and experience of passing that on to others via training courses, was unique. A lot of people think they are irreplaceable, but in your case you were.

The humble stick, wooden stick that is, not that old stick as in a person. This stick can be a savior in many applications. Take boats for example. If your boat won't pass under certain bridges due to a lofty wheelhouse or somesuch structure a long stick is attached to the bows sticking upright. As the stick hits the bridge it snaps connecting a contact switch and battery to fire a small charge of dynamite in the too tall wheelhouse to collapse it before it strikes the bridge. A stick poking down at the stern a few inches below the rudder when reversing up close to a bank will snap off when it strikes bottom the snapping sound to warn you that it's trying to save your rudder from getting busted. Carry a few spare sticks for replacments. Now comes the big one, could make my fortune and become a multi billionaire. It's to do with aeroplanes. Aeroplanes coming in to land can be the most hazardous part of flying aeroplanes. My invention again envolves the humble wooden stick. This invention doesn't envolve any power or unreliable electromics for it to function. Landing planes no matter what size, civillian or military can use the humble stick to assist landing in dense fog or a cloud burst when the pilots cannot see to touch down. This stick of variable length depending on the size and length of the aircraft envolved is fixed under the front of the planes belly by a simple hinge. At the tail of the stick is attached a caster wheel.''A supermarket trolly caster wheel is Ideal as they have good bearings which will withstand the speed to which it will become accustomed to. A length of string also attached to the tail end leading up through a hole in the aircraft. The front of the stick is connected to the elevator, ailerons and engine speed control levers. Now imagine the plane commin in to land blind in dense fog. The stick is lowered fully by the string and as the sticks caster wheel hits the runway the stick moves upwards operating the afore said controls automatically to cause a pleasing and safe flare out and landing with no chance of pilot error. Think how much safer you'd feel if your holiday plane was so equiped. I'm approachin Airbus in Toulose first about this invention as I prefer them than Boeing.

I was extremely fortunate recently to come across a cabin stool in a local vintage store, especially as it was painted by Frank Nurser of Braunston. It’s a most welcome addition to my collection of historic ware. As many will know, Nurser enjoyed a fine reputation and his work is very collectible.

I'm more familiar than many with this because it's "on my patch", I have known the B&T since pre-restoration and explored extensively, including recently canoeing into the docks from a few miles up the canal. Bridgwater Docks have got a somewhat sorry history post-restoration of the canal. For some reason they ended up with British Rail when the rest of the canal ended up with British Waterways. Going further back they were (and still are) under a separate harbour authority to the port of Bridgwater. When the docks were restored in the mid-eighties the barge lock into the Parrett was restored as well, that's why there are rotting gates with hydraulic paddle gear on them. This lasted about six weeks. The gates were supposed to be sealed against tides higher than the dock, but they obviously weren't as saline intrusion occurred and got into the town drinking water supply. Boats had passed through the lock, and the closure left some very cheesed off boat owners who had taken a mooring here specifically to go out into the river, one or two had even arrived that way and now found themselves stuck. However, the moorings attracted quite a few boats that were suited to the canal, and some even ventured out along it. There was a feeling though that the boats were regarding somewhere between a revenue stream and a bit of a nuisance. The dock regeneration wasn't exactly dynamic - it's all residential, a bit windswept and a bit "out of sight" feel to it - security issues and anti-social behaviour meant the moorings weren't as attractive as they might be, and the canal silted up meaning that only the determined headed off down it. BUT the only other moorings on the B&T are a couple of groups of linear moorings at Maunsel and Creech - Bridgwater Docks probably had more than half the available moorings on the whole canal. So basically the canal was restored, the docks regenerated, both amidst a fanfare, and then they were ignored.... Then a couple of years ago the lease to CRT (originally to BW) was up and it wasn't renewed - there was certainly an option to renew it which is probably why CRT gave a concession to allow boats to moor on the canal, but nevertheless the canal lost more than half it's moorings and those on the closed moorings were not offered an alternative because there wasn't one. The only real alternative is to move your boat to another waterway, and you'll need a truck to do it - this isn't a "choice", as a boat owner who has complied with every regulation going you are now being told to pay a couple of grand and take your boat somewhere else "or else". Whether that is reasonable is not for me to say, but it smacks of bad management that just didn't think it through, not least from the PR point of view, it will be a lot more difficult to sell the next lot of moorings with this fiasco fresh in the mind. The basic problem is the number of agencies looking at this with envious eyes on Paddington Basin, or Bristol Floating Harbour, who see only the magic numbers and not the context. Unless they learn, they'll repeat the mistakes.

They weren't parties, they were work events. 😀

A nice sentiment and undoubtly correct. However I would like to see more curtailment of domestic sewerage and farm offrun as a priority. I suspect this is much bigger problem. Country File last Sunday evening featuring the River Wye as an example was a shocker.

Not specious. Climate change doesn’t necessarily mean hotter and colder. Climate change, as the name suggests, creates a change in the climate such that the frequency of severe weather events increases. Those directly affecting the canals would be long periods of drought and violent rain storms causing flooding that overtops sections of canal and causes serious damage, eg the 3 locks on the C&H. More storm force winds causing trees to get blown over and structural damage to buildings.

Sold our lovely boat Compass Rose in 2019, due to family circumstances that looked like not much cruising ahead. Bought a motorhome with the proceeds, on the basis it's more flexible. Had a fantastic time, still going strong, spending months down in Cornwall and loving it. But, so regretted selling the boat. We'd made it our own unique space. I hope the new owners are getting as much fun as we had out of the idiosyncrasies of the toilet. Never failed to amuse us. We've just bought our next boat and I'm delighted. Just sorting out the kit now, and then we'll be off to cruise the whole way round again. Vaguely hoping to pass our old boat and wave but no idea where she's gone. This will be the last time round for us so going to appreciate it all the more.

One day, all boats will have an electric shower, being the natural evolution of going gasless once the traction is done by battery electric. The "house" side will be but a small proportion of the total energy stored and consumed. Electric cooking will be the norm, electric shower surely will be a logical progression?

No. It is a cost caused by people signing up to the “no home mooring” option and then feeling no compunction to abide by the associated laws.

I told you - stop apologising! An unpaid volunteer (which may not have been you) missed a renewal - unless you are up at 00:05 every night (local time, which may not be UK) thinking "I wonder if it's still working", these things happen. And a DNS renewal also takes time to percolate through the system, that's how it works. Now, thanks for keeping the site up 99.98 percent of the time.

I'd have expected Tixall to be wide ...

The article says the boats are due to move to the marina but does not explain this. I have heard a rumour that the boats can return to the marina when the works are complete, so if this is true then it looks to be unreasonable of CRT to evict them as the problem will resolve itself in due course, and CRT do take some of the blame for this situatin by giving up their lease on the Marina. I believe their might be a court case pending.

Just purely decorative. I bought a short length tiller from an Auntie Wainright auction and made the piece. I tend to keep the rebate on the tiller greased. The main aim was to make a decorative tiller with pin as a gift to Mike Humphris for an anniversary to remind him of his boating days and I had a length left over.

I've written this a few times before, but most of the original Canal Enabling Acts contained Clauses to the effect that owners of the land through which the canal was dug were given various compensatory Rights, including the Right to "Construct Places for Boats to Moor and Lie". BW tried to have all these Acts repealed in their 1994 Bill, and me and Di argued against this in the Lords Committee. Happily the committee agreed with our case. BW withdrew that part of their Bill and these Enabling Acts remain in force. BWB introduced the NAA to try to circumvent this decision, and people wishing to dig a new marina mostly found it simpler to agree an NAA than to get involved in the time and cost of legal arguments. However several existing marinas at the time found such a Clause in the Act for the canal where they were based, and refused to sign any NAA. So it is not the case that they have any special agreement - they simply rely upon their pre-existing Rights and do not require one. Tam

For goodness sake, please stop the pipe dreams and be more realistic. I hate to say this, by the very nature of your questions so far it is patently obvious that with all due respect your journey to see the barge would be an utter waste of your time because of your lack of knowledge and experience. If you are really wanting to get involved with boats, start more modestly and don't waste your money on a pipedream. Good luck with whatever you decide but please think very long and hard and look at other more realistic ways of getting into boating before you make what could be an expensive and time wasting mistake. Howard

Yes, built to withstand the droughts, storms and heavy rain of 200 years ago, as these events were understood at the time, and using the technology of the day. And ever since then there have been periodic failures of infrastructure and regular repairs, maintenance and upgrading as the risks, costs and consequences of failure have become more apparent. Why should it be any different now? Because of that history CRT is responsible for more older reservoirs than any other body, many of them situated where the consequences of failure would be significant (e.g. Todbrook). A combination of age, decay, original design and construction not being to today's standards, increased rainfall intensity (a consequence of climate change) and arguably, some short-sighted cuts in inspection, monitoring and maintenance, have meant that the risks which CRT has to manage today are far more significant than the canal companies of 200 years ago had to deal with.

You put your todger in a pocket?

Unfortunately they need to do that in order to get the continued funding (or more) from the government. In other words convince the government that their canals and rivers are for the benefit of the general public and not just a group of boaters. I'd rather that than see my licence increase 5 fold to make up the shortfall.