Mike Todd

Charitable organisations generally ofer two conflicting elements of experience: 1. People have only limited amounst of time available and organisations have to work around that making it difficult to use volunteers in critical service delivery 2. People are most committed when they are involved in something with a sense of belonging. Well before the arrival of CaRT I have been advocating the development of a schme for adopting a length of canal with either an individual or a club/group taking on the lengthsman duties (generally those of tidying up and wee removal etc as well as keeping an eye out to report back to the engineering team). It would take several years to build up momentum but my guess is that this would eventually lead to quite strong senses of ownership in the way that a lot of good work is done on the Shrippie for example. What is not likely to gain commitment is asking for volunteers for non-specific work which has no lasting sense of belonging. Even volunteer lock keepers are likely to be better if they have their 'own' locks to look after.

You have plenty of time to collect the advice as it is likely to be several months before you can get the next booking! In January we did not get our first choice of dates for next week.

Melling according to Nicholsons and my variable memory from a week ago (but I was not looking specifically)

Try going through Southall where there seems to be a limited ability to read . . . see my rant on http://takefiveboat.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/paddington.html

Are you suggesting, as an extension of your case against BW, that any boat or boatmen can gain access through Thames Lock and that no licence or insurance is needed or that the boatman needs to be sober and in control of the boat? That is, CRT cannot prevent access under any circumstances?

We have had a winter (6 months) mooring there for the past two winters - but we are non residential (the mooring is because we actually live in Cornwall) We have found that it met what we wanted although we missed the close relationship with technically competent people at our previous mooring. HyLine do have a base there but it is rather limited. The BWML Marina Supervisor (Maeve Hilton) has always been very helpful and accommodating - although I have to say that our needs have not been very demanding. There was one incident last winter when another BWML person sent out a rather officious letter regarding residential use (I think that his interpretation was nonsense!) but that's all. Other users, especially residents have all been very friendly on the occasions in the winter when we have stayed on board for a few days. No idea about cats but several residents do have dogs The quality of the boats moored there is very varied but it is not a super-posh place of the sort one might find on the Thames itself. Mobile coverage seems as good as anywhere and I understand that 4G is available - at least the adjacent PC World were demonstrating it last New Year. Each mooring has the usual electricity (card) and water tap service. Elsan/toilet/shower/laundry facilities are available on site but shared with passing boaters. There is a pump out on the canal side. It is about 20 minutes walk to station and the towpath can get quite muddy but it does feel safe. Buses are nearer - five minutes to the nearby main road where there are also a few shops, including newsagent and general store. Frequent service to Uxbridge. Prices are available on BWML web site, I think You would not be the first person to moor there, or thereabouts, in order to do a daily commute. In the past it would seem that BWML have not been too picky about residential use on a leisure mooring but I understand that Local Planning Authorities are getting a bit more so so I would advise that you check out that angle quite carefully before making any long term commitment. That said, whilst it is not the most exciting place, it does what it says on the tine, is as friendly as would be expected, is very safe and in a good location for most transport. I am happy to recommend it on that basis. (If you do speak to Maeve, do mention us - boat is Take Five)

The key is whether or not qualified advice has been given regarding safety to travel - usually on the side of **not** traveling. If you are warned that it is not safe (red or yellow/stream increasing) then insurance will generally be invalid. On the othjer hand, no-one giving advice (it's OK to go) can take away the responsibility of the skipper to take his/her own decisions and be responsible. Even if the local lock keeper says go and there are obvious indications that it is unsafe, you are still likely to be uninsured. (As I understand it!) A Yellow board/stream decreasing indicates "We advise users of all unpowered boats not to navigate and users of powered boats to navigate with caution."

There is (was) diesel just a few minutes upstream from Tesco Reading mooring on the left side going down, that last time we were there was a reasonable price (for the Thames) and any split.

I'd almost never copnsider backing into a winding hole - you never know what's there and, also, you lose control over the steering of the boat. Boats turn quickest when in open water so, with the bow against the bank, it can be a bit slow, especially if the wind is wrong. However, it can be useful sometimes to back out just a bit, turn in fwd until back on the bank. repeat until most of the turn is completed. Sorry, grandmothers out there (with eggs) . . .

That's 'more accurate' not 'precise' - pedant!

I suspect that might have been the same person we followed up said locks earlier this year! Left top gates open as well.

I've used to point this out to fishermen as well. If they object to boats passing them then they should remember that it takes only a few years after closure before they canal is unfishable through choking weeds. It has happened before. Thankfully, it is now a while since any canals were lost so memories fade . . . However, canals are only fishable if boats use them.

But cycling in the vicinity of locks is already banned, is it not? As with so many of similar matters, enforcement, or the threat of enforcement, is missing and so leads to abuse. Also, some of us can remember what towpaths were like but a few decades ago. The immense improvement (many were impassable for long stretches) is down to walkers and cyclists - the funding has come from LAs for thier use not from boaters specifically. Ban walkers and cyclists (or make it sufficiently unpleasant for them and we will soon be back where we were before,

Not sure how you justify that remark: this is an interim report, issued in order to highlight as quickly as possible any recommendations to other people in order to avoid a repetition. The same thing happened recently near here in Cornwall regarding a fatal accident in which a kill cord was not being used. The aim of the report was to ensure that all boat users are reminded of the dangers of failing to comply. In this case, anyone using a rigged up generator in an enclosed space really ought to have it checked out by a properly qualified person as soon as possible, preferably before further use. Issuing such a report, even if the exact details of the case that gives rise to it, is very good practice in order to prevent further fatalities. I cannot see why you should criticise MAIB for doing that.

see http://takefiveboat.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/audlem.html - answer: no

Passed him just north of Market Drayton early afternoon. Unfortunately it was not in a place where we could stop and chat! (Some parts of today were very wet - occasional thunder in the distance and at least one nasty hail storm!)

Is it not reserved space for a hire base turnaround operation?

I realise that - but I would not say necessaryily 'with ease'. In that sitiuation you have limited control compared with the normal method of coming in against the flow. At least that's the theory I have always been told and this was the only occasion when it proved wrong! It's OK if you know you can do it but you do need to know that you have enough reserve to mnake the turn in at the right moment!

As someone said, the lockies are not infallible. But at the same time remember that the tide estimates are not easy to make as they depend on the balance of fresh coming down and tide coming in. We discovered this the hard way last summer after being held at Stockwith Lock because conditions were judged unsuitable for transit, we were released following a conversation between both lock keepers. Our journey down was smooth and uneventful until just before the railway bridge. At this stage the tide was turning very rapidly - sooner than had been estimated - and were were carried along faster than comfortable, narrowly avoiding being forced onto the pillars of the bridge. As normal, we went just beyond the lock entrance and made a turn to come up against the flow before slipping into the lock entrace (the gates were open and waiting for us) However, by then the flow was really strong and we barely made headway even on maximum power. For perhaps 15-20 minutes we inched our way forward and breathed a very big sigh of relief when we made it into the calm of the lock. What also made it trickier was the direction of flow at that point which was tending to push our narrowboat towards the wall and the moored barges just downstream of the entrance. It was perhaps less dangerous than it all felt but it was scary enough for us - we still have nightmares! More so after reading yesterday the MIAS report into the capsizing of a tug in the Thames last year. Makes you realise just how quickly things can go wrong when on the water and a useful reminder never to take it for granted.

It is a good legal phrase that has stood the test of time. It prevents someone just saying 'no' without giving their reasons. Those reasons then have to stand a 'reasonableness' test in court. Generally, courts are pretty good at making such judgements such that it generally deters unreasonable behaviour in contract situations. In this case I guess they would have to have pretty strong reasons for not giving permission but the clause does mean that CRT's right to determine who may moor and where (essential in the long term to effective control and the prevention of anarchy) is sustained. For example, they might well refuse permission for a wide beam boat on a mooring only fit for a narrow beam.

yes - many of us are in that category for part of the year at least. Mooring never implies that anyone is on board and the CC restrictions apply to the length of time moored 'in one place,'

The biggest probloem we find is that most of the towpath is impermeable to mooring pins and no piling to use clips or chains. At some stage the towpath was leased out to cable and telecomms companies - I hate to think what conversations are going on beside the canal . . .

We stayed a total three nights at Hackney Marsh last March - quite OK see http://takefiveboat.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/olympic-park.html

The number of residential spaces in a marina is also subject to planning regulations. Some marina operators would like to offer more but are not permitted to do so, even if they have many empty spaces. Planning is generally a good idea but it can have repercussions.

There is no single 'best' answer - you need to have several techniques ready to deploy in appropriate circumstances depending in particular on wind and water flow. Unless you can read both of these, together with a readiness to deal with underwater obstructions and lack of depth, sooner or later you will have a problem. (And we all have at some time or another, don't believe anyone who says otherwise!)