Leaderboard

There appears to more and more people on the cut who are not that interested in boating and don't want to follow the simple rules. The cut is a lovely relaxed place with very few rules, and even those are a bit flexible, but when "boaters" push things too far it goes wrong, and is likely to go wrong for all of us. We now have thug looking baliffs strutting the towpath and helping to remove boats. CRT do not have the staff to enforce the rules against serious objectors and have already had a fatality, so if they decide to hand enforcement over to a private parking company, or even a security company, can we really blame them?. People like George and his supporters are going to make things worse for all of us.

As someone who has lived in the area for more than forty years, with some legal knowledge of the K&A Canal, I can assure you that the land currently occupied by George Ward at "Smelly Bridge" between the towpath and the boundary fence of Barton Farm Country Park is owned by C&RT. It is not private property, so please stop deliberately referring to "Private Property" in an attempt to throw doubt on the land's legal status.

I'll quote everything I reply to, that way it is clear what I am replying to. If you choose to go back and edit posts after I've replied, I won't be going back to read the edits - so its worth taking a breath and completing your posts in full, before pressing "Submit Reply".

This topic is about a geyser who has been "pushing the envelope" with regards to licensing, moving and keeping a boat on CRT controlled waterways. Getting into discussion about legal status of marinas and NAA is off topic. The problem of unlicensed reprobates is going to hit hard and it won't be long before this happens. Discussion needs to be had about what the system should do.

Err, these 2 posts seem to contradict each other. I agree that "morals aren't an easy cut thing", I would argue that if CRT chose to ignore George Ward and let him live on the canals without a license or BSS they would be failing in their moral duty to all the other boaters who do comply, and potentially to the wider society. So to make it really simple, what do you think CRT should have done in this case? (And just saying something about ethics, morals or even accusing CRT of having ignored/broken/circumvented the law in relation to something else is not an answer)

From one end to the udder...

Yes it’ll spoil the imaginative flow ..I want to hear of more slashing and burning, thuggery and wild guessing.

Over the years there have been lots of small companies as well as individuals who have built one, two or a few narrowboat shells, then quietly disappeared. And mostly nobody remembers them or knows which boats they built. And as boat change hands, move to different areas, are refitted, get renamed etc. any connection with their origins gets lost. As that canalplan listing shows its perfectly possible to licence a boat as built by 'unknown', and where boatbuilder information is given it can be wrong. Nobody worries about it. When you are looking at a boat that age, current condition, equipment and facilities is much more important than who built it. And as noted above 'boatbuilder' can refer to the original shell builder, a boat fitter who bought in a shell from elsewhere and fitted it out, or a boat seller that bought in the shell from one third party and contracted the fitting out to another third party then sold the boat in their own name.

Are you sure about that? My 1994 built boat has a 5 figure number and has always had the number since new

I can smell a MNC argument here but doubt this would apply in areas that are not river sections. People who aggressively take the piss of the system should not be tolerated because they put the existence of the waterway at risk. Get rid of these people. If the K&A fills up with entitled smartphone wielding semi-organised freemen on the land it will cause significant cost implications for the CRT and one can't help thinking someone might consider taking proper action to deal with the problem.

Yes it is - I posted a reply to your post. When I pressed the "Quote" button, it took the text and formatting of the post at the time - which was the original. If you subsequently edit a post after I've pressed the "Quote" button, but before I press the "Submit Reply" button, the forum software neither amends the quoted text to update it, nor advises the original post has been edited/updated. I don't go back and review the original post manually (which would need a second browser tab, so as not to lose my unsubmitted reply) so I'd be none the wiser to your edit. But the original post stands, and must stand, and is available to see with the quote function. The onus is on YOU to ensure when you post, you mean what you mean, and don't simply post without thinking things through properly. If your post is not detailed enough or you didn't mean to type what you did, or you want to change its meaning or emphasis, then that must be taken into account BEFORE you originally press the "Submit Reply" button. If you don't, then you are likely going to be ignored or the edit remain unread. Is it a distraction because your argument is weak? Or is it because you're emotive? Or are you yourself unsure of the points your trying to make?

Especially those who live in castles.

Or tie the shower room door knob to the extractor pull cord. Open the door and it turns off the fan!

The canals are in trouble, they are declining at an accelerating rate due to limited finance. We all need to make an increasing contribution in many ways, not just financially. Those who are not willing to contribute, or even worse make a negative contribution, will have to go. In the short term this will cost a lot of money in evictions and legal costs but that has to be done. If the latest figures on global warming are correct then this is all probably irrelevent.

Last Monday. Wells Next The Sea.

It isn't as simple as that. Whether C&RT charge or not is irrelevant, they cannot permit anyone to moor residentially on the section between Bradford Wharf and Avoncliffe because previous applications for residential moorings on that stretch of Canal have been refused by the Planning Authority, it is a somewhat contentious issue amongst local residents.

My latest video on Westfield Lock

I dunno, when both my ecofans are going it's practically a helicopter!

If you are talking about this August you might find this site with price reductions for late bookings interesting. https://www.latelink.com/

She's definitely coming along at pace. Surprised that you've managed to get anything done over the last few weeks with the lousy weather we're having.

If you approach buying a boat in a logical fashion, sooner or later you will arrive at the most sensible conclusion: don't buy a boat. Thousands of people have "been there and done that" and gone ahead and bought a boat anyway. Its fun - its a lot of money, but its boating.

So you agree with their actions with regard to George Ward. Life is complicated, sometimes people you don't like do things you agree with, and sometimes people you like and think are good people do things you disagree with, if you can't accept that, and simply classify people and organisations as either good or bad life must be very hard. Your inability to engage in reasoned discussion on this forum is meaning you are alienating people who might otherwise agree with you.

Because the owner of the private property gave them authorisation.

He is right. We were looking for a boat no bigger then 57ft with windows. If it had portholes then it had to have windows in the front bulkhead. So our boat is 62ft with portholes and no window in the front bulkhead.

Will do next time I’m down that way in a few years. Thanks

This is the normal process. Moat people do it. Then when they start actually looking at boats they find they don't actually 'like' the boats that look good on paper. Then by chance you, I mean they, will go aboard a totally unsuitable boat for a look at <something or other>, and the boat will make you fall in love with it and you'll buy it, and all your spreadsheets will have been for nothing. Hope that helps...

Or this Time Delay Relay Module, Delay Relay Module 5v 12v 24v Timer Switch 50ma 0.01s-9999min, Delay Off Cycle Timer Module Timer Relay with Lcd Display (1) https://amzn.eu/d/j4m1QYc 555 timers might be old tech but do the job Google "555 timer kit" for more results

The United States Coast Guard maintains a meticulous set of regulations regarding boat fire extinguisher requirements. The requirement for fire extinguishers on a boat is contingent on the vessel's size. As a general rule, larger boats mandate a higher number of fire suppression systems compared to smaller boats. Therefore, a 30-foot yacht will necessitate more fire extinguishers than a 20-foot boat.

Pre covid, so 2018 or 2019, we were stuck for two days at Rumps lock waiting for water levels to be increased in the pounds up to Wheelock. We were visited regularly by C&RT staff who assured us they were doing all they could to feed water down from Bosley locks. Apparently the main feed for that stretch of the T&M is Todbrooke Reservoir and Coombes Reservoir. If that is true, there is no wonder water is low at present and will remain low until 2025. Rog

This conversion is nothing to do with me. I observed it in progess and asked, not quite in these terms "Do you know what your are doing sability wise?" and they, not quite in these terms said "No". They had the grace to look somewhat alarmed and said they would look it up on the internet. I might put a note through the door to get in touch with Paul Fisher. The were pleasent, hardworking chaps and I would hate their dreams to be shattered at the stage of completion and getting the boat licensed to do whatever they intend to do. Nick They are very pretty boats in a variety of styles. Worth a look just to admire. N

If they acted much more quickly to deal with overstayers, then their costs would be substantially lower because it would discourage, rather than encourage others with a similar mindset.

So according to the article the canals support 80000 jobs and contribute £1.5B/year to the economy. Meanwhile the government is crowing about the JLR battery factory generating 4000 jobs "and thousands more in the supply chain" -- so lets add the same again to get 8000 total -- and is said to be subsidising this development to the tune of £500M, and how this is good value for money and great news for the UK. So on the same basis, didn't they ought to be willing to kick in £5B to support the canals with 10x the job count? Without eating into the capital, if this yielded even 3% a year that's £150M a year -- which funnily enough is the existing grant plus an extra £100M/yr to solve the maintenance backlog. I'm sure some people will say this is ridiculous -- but why is it? For starters the canals are likely to last a damn sight longer than a battery factory, assuming they don't wither away die to lack of maintenance...