Leaderboard

This - and I'm a long-time cycle commuter. The petition calls the towpath a 'safe, fast route'; if anyone is riding fast down a towpath, they need chucking off it. Towpaths are too narrow for riding fast.

15mm, 22mm and some imperial sizes?

But as a timber Ash is very strong, and perhaps more importantly very flexible and shock resistant, which is why it is used for things like hammer, axe, spade, and chisel handles, it is also used for sports equipment like hockey sticks, baseball bats, rowing oars, archery bows, etc.

Seriously, you can find outliers for anything. Making a safe gas installation is a lot easier than a full electrical system. That fitter neglected to do one thing; test the gas system with pipes cold. This is much easier to do on a boat (if you use bubble testers) than in household installations. Manometers are really not great. I don't want to encourage anyone who has limited mechanical skill from working on a gas system (getting mechanical joints tight enough but not too tight requires some feeling for the use of spanners). However I'm tired of the demonization of gas. The same people who act terrified of gas are quite happy to get work done on their car by an apprentice who is paid £3.50 ph; then get in that car and drive at 70mph on the motorway. Car brakes, steering, etc are a lot more complicated than a boat gas system!

Nothing is the answer because CRT would just use the extra money to invest in building instead of their core business which is navigations. You clearly have never dealt with them my mate does as his Bar is rented from them they are useless, thieving, lying wasteful T*****s I when I converted my boat from diesel to electric had nearly 6 months of hassle before I got the license this is the norm for them! The phone for Tinsley flight has broken and has been for months its not been replaced why? because it means they dont have to fix or allow use of the flight! This stuff is constant they arnt all like my comments but a lot are, now I really have done I asked some boaters about your ideas and they are still rolling around on the floor laughing, my suggestion is buy a boat and then discover how expensive it is before having silly ideas

Mine is a Mastervolt, its so good I have never got round to putting it into power save mode

Mains equipment every time. Ensure u have a good quality inverter that uses very little power when switched on and sleeping. Some are terrible such as Stirling which use far too much power. Master volt are very good just for one. Mains equipment is humungously cheaper to buy and vastly more choice at the drop of a hat. Mains uses a very little more than 12 volt but that is far outweighed by other factors.

https://shop.canalrivertrust.org.uk/ Canal & River Trust Key £7 or https://www.midlandchandlers.co.uk/products/bwb-sanitary-keys-ag-023 £5.90 DO NOT buy from eBay, i bought one in the past and so far it has worked in one out of about ten locks tried, the key is just too thick for most of the CRT locks. I ended up buying two or three direct from CRT so i know they'll work and the cash has gone direct to where it matters* *board meeting biscuits and director's new car

Let me just check that I've understood the argument against CaRT increasing the annual license fee to pay for much-needed canal maintenance... -- CaRT doesn't spend enough on canal maintenance and hasn't for many years -- this is causing the system to deteriorate and we don't want this to continue (or get worse) -- we like paying a tiny amount to cruise/live on the canals just like we have for many years, it's a really cheap way to live innit -- we don't want to pay more 'cos it's not fair and some people couldn't afford it (and/or don't want to / can't ask welfare to pay) -- so somebody else (e.g. walkers, cyclists, Joe Public) should cough up, not us, even though we get by far the biggest benefit from the canals Is that right? Really? Boat license fees are currently in the region of £1000 which is £20 a week. To increase the overall CRT budget by 25% (£50M) -- probably what is needed make a big enough difference to fix the problem -- it would need to increase to about £2500 which is £50 a week. For what this gets you and compared to the other costs of buying/running a boat -- and certainly compared to the costs of living on land -- this is an increase from ludicrously cheap to very cheap... CaRT wouldn't be able to make such a big change overnight anyway because they don't have the maintenance staff or equipment to suddenly use up another £50M a year, this would have to be built up over maybe 5 years -- and it would be better value to do this in-house instead of subcontracting it, that way money isn't creamed off to service company shareholders and CaRT build up a skilled workforce who maybe even care about the canals a bit. So the fee might go up by about £300 a year for 5 years, by which time we could have a properly maintained canal system that works in the long term. This increase is gradual enough that it wouldn't immediately throw people out onto the street, and if it makes them change their lifestyle it gives enough time to do it. Could anybody who really loves the canals -- presumably, most people on this forum -- honestly object to this? ?

Wales lifts restrictions : What are the rules about going out on my boat? You are now able to travel outside your local area on your boat, and there are no longer limits on where you can dock. It is also permitted for you and members of your household or extended household to stay overnight on your boat. Activities should only be undertaken with crews of people from the same household or extended household. We advise boaters to be mindful of the potential impact that you could have on other water users and to not place unnecessary pressure on the RNLI, coastguard and emergency services. Getting baby-sitter arranged for the horses, stock up all the feed bins, get all the tools packed up, masks, sanders etc, hopefully the weather will be fit to get the painting finished, then we have a couple of weeks before we need to be back for the hay-making, then we can get back and (hopefully) have a couple of months coast-hopping.

They're close enough together that you're forgiven.

Well if you fancy popping up to Glasson Dock sometime next month I'll buy you a beer.

£375 each at the moment but they do have a BMS to stop all the ups and downs in life, I am just trying to buy a BMS for my small electric car its 15s 400amps at 60 volts so lets see what I get quoted. If I just wanted a balance while charging and passive BMS rated at 60 amps I could get one for 70 squids, and that might be the way I go if the price is way to expensive

July 2009, just slightly upstream of Dav and Pen’s Marne photos - at Dizy, where the Lateral Canal goes off towards Reims among other places, and the Marne continues upstream at the top of the second photo to Épernay. The CEVNI rules which govern navigation on continental waterways allow for an uphill travelling vessel to cross starboard-to-starboard with one travelling downstream under certain circumstances, and it displays a blue board and/or flashing white light if it does so. The lock mechanism here for the lock up onto the canal is on your port side when going upstream, which means you have to cross over to operate it, putting you notionally on the ‘wrong’ side of the river. However the CEVNI rules have a further exception which says a vessel travelling upstream and turning into a side arm of any kind has priority over any craft coming downstream. Despite these two rules within the CEVNI code I have three times had a cruiser coming down the river from Épernay trying to pass port-to-port here even though I have also made my intentions clear by announcing what I was doing on VHF, and each of these sadly was flying a red ensign. Tam

Left Kidlington Green Lock this morning. We’ll look out for you. Boat name? PM if you prefer.

Neither will a means tested increase No one here has shot down any sensible suggestion Yawn!

Have you thought about starting with the half-way house of a boat share for a few years? It would fit in very well with your plan to have 2/3 holidays a year although the long weekends wouldn't work so well. You would save a lot of money and have some time to really find out what you liked and didn't like about boat layouts.

It depends on what inverter you have and what fridge you buy, if its cheapest fridge and cheapest inverter you will lose out, but if the fridge is A++ and the right inverter you may win but the margen will be small. Also how do you plan to use the boat, if its on shoreline for 11 months a year then 240 is the winner, if its never on shoreline then its marginal, If you have loads of solar or you cruise for say 4 hours a day then again probably 24 volt wins.

I and others have already made that point. Tell it to Dora. I’m of the view that there are many forms of tunnel - and tunnelling techniques - and that there isn’t an absolute single definition between what constitutes a culvert, bridge, tunnel or viaduct. As a result I have concluded that what it’s custodian calls it is good enough for me, and I have pointed out why it matters to them. JP

I assume you mean cost of verification not enforcement? (enforcement is exactly the same as now i.e. have you got a license?) From your POV there's no point ever having any progressive tax system because it will always be fiddled, so the only solution is to charge everyone the same so the poor can't afford it and the rich laugh it off. I can't believe that you think that's a better solution... ? Verification of income/tax/expenditure is already done by banks, mortgage lenders, HMRC and others -- HMRC is the obvious channel since they already deal with income. It depends on how the numbers are crunched and whose particular pot the money goes in and out of; one option would be to charge everyone the highest fee (money goes direct to CaRT) and then poorer people apply for a rebate through some other channel that's already set up to do this (HMRC?) who then cross-charge this in bulk so CaRT doesn't know who pays what. The other option would be to tell CaRT how much to charge in the first place, but there could be data protection issues with this since they'd have to know about people's financial circumstances -- HMRC already knows about this. None of this is difficult, it's exactly what is already done with other tax reliefs and repayments, and the system is already set up to deal with it. It just needs the will to make it happen -- and the general agreement from boaters that a progressive license system (the rich pay more to keep the system going) is acceptable, not mass protests by people who don't see why they should pay more than they're been used to doing, even though they can afford it and it's necessary. I have a suspicion that "could pay but don't want to" protests from the selfish might derail this... ?

I use RS a lot. They do have some trade counters where you can collect from, depends where you are.

I thought you just said they were "on your moorings" -- doesn't that make them liveaboards? If not -- they're leisure boaters who live on the land and use the boat for holidays -- then they can afford a bigger license fee, since they can afford a boat *and* a house they can hardly cry poverty, and the added cost is small compared to owning a holiday boat anyway. You seem to be clutching at any straw to make out that poor people will be disadvantaged one way or another. What I'm really proposing is that the license fee should be graduated just like income tax (in theory, ignoring tax havens), so the poor pay less towards the cost of the canals (maybe even less than now?) and the rich pay more than they do now. What exactly is your objection to this -- is it that you'll pay more? I certainly will every time I hire a boat or if I retire soon and buy one, I'd be happy to do that knowing that I was helping to renew the canal system. How about you?

Restoring canals (e.g Wendover arm, Monty etc) are major projects and are being done mainly using volunteers. Maintenence of an existing canal probably isn't much harder.

Yes U570 when it was captured and became HMS GRAPH. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Graph Also a couple surrendered in the Thames https://www.britishpathe.com/video/VLVA55TW3CHXVGGJE6UJI059JG0H5-U-BOAT-SURRENDERS-IN-THE-THAMES/query/U+776 WW I as well: https://historyhouse.co.uk/articles/uboats_in_british_ports.html U570 - HMS Graph. Gunther Prien also entered Scapa Flow and sank The Royal Oak.

Often people don't need a financial incentive. Just the desire to help keep our canals going or to learn new skills and get some fresh air may be enough. I'm sure many live aboards wouid be happy to act like lengthsmen in return for being allowed to moor in the same place. All year round CC'ers are in a good position to report issues and do basic repairs. I wouln't want anything financial in return.

Last time I got a quote for a proper back to clean metal repaint, from a reputable painter, I was quoted just under £8k. How are you determining a £500 paint job? How about the OP post some links to cheap and expensive boats and we'll tell him why they are priced as they are?

I think you have melted his brain. A terrible thing is cognitive dissonance. I read the words you posted and followed it quite well. I'd rather the fees didn't get too steep, but they would have to go up quite a lot before I stopped paying them. If nothing else, the prices of secondhand boats would probably come down quite a bit, attracting more people onto the water who would accept the higher ongoing costs.

Great advice so far.... sounds like you are still at the stage you need to hire to check out the different layouts and if you can spend time in a narrow environment. Is there any hurry to proceed with buying or is this just the looking stage - have you sold your house etc!!?? Well done for not buying a caravan by the way!

As Biscuits says the wanderers licence covers non-club waters. I fish your area when out on the boat and I have a E.A license and CaRT wanderers license, many boaters believe if they fish off their boat they don’t need a license, I fish off the boat or next to it, but I make sure I don’t fish where it states a club permit is required, you have just got to be sensible and if near a match venue and can be seen don’t fish. There’s lots of hidden spots near you for good fishing.

Regardless of whether they are guilty or not, we use to do the same with hangings but managed to grow out of that

The manual shows that there should be one (it is also an anode, and erodes away), so maybe whoever replaced the anodes forgot / didn't know about that one. Whilst you are 'out' get on put on, it helps to protect the leg.

We name and shame them on here and they lose their jobs on magazines........... TD'

Err, good question! From your comment and then pausing to think what the BSS actually covers, it doesn't need to be out of the water does it! d'oh So... I'll check the tank when it's out for blacking in a year or two.

it was 93 when the price of diesel rose above petrol.( no tax) But in 2006 the duty on diesel was 6.5p litre higher than petrol

Fair enough, but those users don't need the canals to be navigable. Having taken a walk along the abandoned Buckingham and Wendover arms of the GU recently, I'm not sure that these are significantly worse places for walking and cycling being that they haven't been navigable in years. I would hazard that the largest costs are in maintaining locks and keeping them deep enough to navigate? Sure it is harsh, but we're dealing with a harsh reality here. Is it harsher to let the canals disappear entirely or to have the people who use them pay for their upkeep? I think those who have paid for a boat would rather that the canals stay open than for their investment to become completely useless! To me it's far harsher to suggest that people who DON'T navigate the canals be forced to pay for the upkeep. It doesn't have to be sudden. My understanding of the problem from this thread is not that we need to find 200 million right now or the canals will disappear. Rather, there is a growing backlog of maintenance that needs doing - and presumably this could be done over the next several years. I suggested 300 GBP extra per year per boat over the next 20 years to raise 200M. For me that would represent a one-time 30% increase. It might be better to increase the license by 10% YoY until we get to that number. Starting with the 21M number then a 10% increase per year would mean that we'd raise 200M extra in 11 years. Also I don't know that 200M is the number we need - I'm just trying to make the leap from "oh no it's too much money the canals are doomed" to practically how can we make the canals sustainable? I don't blame those people, if anything I blame the govmt for subsidising the waterways for so long so as to have created a false expectation that the canals are cheap to run. But I also don't see the argument that just because something has been historically cheap that we should continue to socialise the cost. I too find that a really weird argument. I think a gradual increase to a point that navigation pays for itself is good for the network, it's good for the public, and it's ultimately good for future generations of boaters who will still have have canals to enjoy. It's not fair to use public funds to support leisure navigation, and if someone wants to argue that it's to support cheap housing, then let's redirect those funds to support actually cheap housing. It's a lot more fair than having those who don't drive pay for the roads. And I'd argue this is much more true of boating, since even though I don't drive, I benefit from trucks being able to deliver goods on the road, and emergency services being able to access, etc. Those who aren't boating don't derive any value from keeping the canals navigable, so it's very unfair to expect non-boaters to pay for the canals. That's essentially my point. Why should non-navigators pay for navigators to enjoy the canals? "because they always have" is hardly a fair answer. I don't think anyone is arguing that we need 200M per year are they? Is this really true? How are they going to be able to achieve this - charging points? How could you run a boat in the winter without diesel/petrol? Agreed - as a newbie I was absolutely staggered at how cheap this is. My license fee is worth it just for the refuse, water and elsan alone. I can't even fathom the cost of replacing locks, maintaining the banks, dredging and keeping the canals full of water. It's mindblowing to me that the license fees are so cheap. But someone still has to pay. If not the wealthy, then the poor. Why is it fair for the poor to pay for something they don't use?

What do you base this on? If boaters license fees are not paying for the product (i.e. well maintained, navigable canals) then clearly boaters aren't paying enough? Why should anglers, volunteers and general taxpayers be subsidising our navigation? If there was a massive locust swarm that came and ate half the wheat in the world and the bread price doubled, people say "oh, but we're paying too much for bread". But surely the price of the production of the bread needs to be reflected in the cost of the bread, otherwise why would anyone sell bread? As it stands it seems that we're benefiting from the investment made by the freight industry over 100 years ago, and that this has a time limit unless further investment is made - and the people who benefit from this are boaters. Anglers don't need deep water, people walking along the towpath don't need to have boats there (if anything they're competing for the space). I think it's fair to ask what would it cost for boaters to pay their way - and if it's genuinely too much for us to afford then to ask whether boaters navigating is enough of a public good that the taxpayer should cover it. Alan said "100's of millions needs spending". So can we say 200 million over the next 20 years? That's 10 million per year. According to CaRT website there are about 34 000 canal boats in the UK. 300 GBP extra per boat per year would raise that number. Why shouldn't boaters pay it? And if that's too much then perhaps CaRT does need to consider closing some of the canals so that we can afford to maintain the remainder. Let's be practical about this - not idealistic. Perhaps the truth of the matter is somewhere between "I won't pay more nor have any hand in helping - the canals will be closed in our lifetime" and "boaters can pay 1000s more and volunteer hard and the waterways will stay 100% open". I for one hope there is enough of a core following of boating that at least some of the major waterways (e.g. Grand Union) will survive pretty much forever.

It all seems a bit illogical. Pubs etc have to have social distancing measures which reduce their footfall and income, whilst they need to have increased staff for table service. And yet it doesn’t seem to make any difference. When someone comes in with CV, others get it and the pub has to be closed. What is the point of the social distancing measures? Is it just the government pandering to the public to make them feel secure even though they aren’t? A motivation that they need to be seen to be doing something?