Arthur Marshall

Was he pedalling? Anyway, he's safely being ignored now, so that's all right.

"Until 31 August 2026, boaters without home moorings won't be required to move every 14 days. This is part of a range of measures to conserve water during the current drought. If you have a home mooring but are cruising elsewhere on the network, this temporary suspension also applies to you."

No, certainly not. Sneering at morons who seem to thing we're at war. I do wish you'd learn to read, it's obviously too late for you to learn to think. Dunno why I haven't got you on ignore, t think because you usually only drivel in the politics ghetto. I have now, so don't bother with any more personal tripe.

When I used to interview teaching candidates on the School Direct scheme, I automatically rejected any applications with spelling or grammatical errors. I rather think the question ought to be why the school haven't taught their pupils to spell. Sticking a red line threw the rong werd doesn't teach anybody anything, unless at the same time it explains what the right spelling was, which doesn't usually happen. So the kid learns nothing except they're wrong, but not how to get it right, so they just shrug and give up. They aren't going to go look it up in a dictionary, because if you can't spell, you can't... Grammatical errors are a minefield, as the rules of grammar change every few years, as they aren't really rules anyway, just conventions (so, of course are those of spelling, unless you want to go argue with Chaucer and Shakespeare, the latter of which didn't even spell his own name consistently because, unlike Koukouvagia, he knew it didn't matter) . Being pedantic about them is daft.

It's a valid approach, though of course you need a balance between the two. You can always learn to spell, and the weird grammar rules, but only if you want to because you enjoy reading and writing. That's why a lot of kids can't write or spell, the nonsense way they're taught knocks all the pleasure out if it. It's the same in music, learning to play an instrument. The crucial bit is tone and feeling, playing notes is just mechanical technique. Too much concentration on technique stops you wanting to learn, which is why I can play fifteen different instruments but am rubbish on the piano, which got hammered into me via technical exams for ten years as a kid and is the only one I've got a certificate for.

Heavens. I didn't realise we were currently under attack. Probably reading the wrong newspaper again.

Legally, the 14 day requirement doesn't apply to home moorers. We are allowed it as a concession out of kindness, I suppose.* *Spot the song...

I wish I wa's, too.

Perhaps it's time that boats have to be registered by the builder at the time of (and before completion of) first sale after construction, and any previous either brought into the regime compulsorily or destroyed. The panic buying of licences should fund the removal of the rest. Enforcement would include the display of name, number and licence as already defined in law but largely ignored.

That would certainly knock the price down a bit.

Mid-range? Really? For a narrow boat? I must be getting old! 👴 Maybe when I sell it, I'll get more than the seven grand I paid for mine after all...

But most people don't live on their boats. Most people are leisure boaters, so you have to compare the annual cost of the boat with what it would cost you to hire one for the same period that you spend on it. The advantage of owning is that it's easier to choose when you go, the great advantage of hiring is that you get more choice of where you go. I use a guideline of a grand a week to hire, which means for my small boat I only need to go out for about four weeks a year to make it worthwhile financially. Most working people don't even get that, and judging by the number of boats on my mooring that never move at all, and the one or two that occasionally nip out for a day, it's already uneconomic to own a boat for most people. It's only laziness that stops them getting rid. Whack the cost even higher and fine, liveaboards have no option but to pay, but the rest of us do. I've largely written this year off for boating for health reasons, but if next year is like this... And it's worth taking a thumping great loss on the boat selling price to be rid of the annual albatross of rising costs and falling enjoyment. There are better things to do in the summer than watch your boat sit on the mud and read closure notices.

More flying pigs. If the cost of boating goes as high as the flying pigs, and it continues (as it will) to be virtually impossible to do a sunny holiday cruise in the warmest months, there won't be any leisure boaters left to pay the fees. Absolutely no point in owning a boat to only be able to go on, and expect to finish, a planned holiday cruise when you're going to be cold, wet and possibly snowed on. It really isn't what most owners want. Especially when it's a lot cheaper to go and fly somewhere warm for a couple of weeks. The costs simply can't go up much more than inflation. There are only two possible solutions: cut the system to an affordable size, or national support via taxation, and only one of them, I'm afraid, is likely.

Quite like that. Gives a good overall view of the stoppages. Seems to work on the old shareware principle of being free but you can sign up for more and to aid development.

I was really thinking of the main boat conurbations, like London, rather than the linear private moorings. I agree they're a pain, the Shroppie seem a prime culprit. I think most of us have decided that when confronted with those, tickover is a nonsense and 2mph is acceptable, and if anyone thinks it isn't, they ought to learn about springs and either moor up property or move to a marina!

It's back to supply and demand economics, always with the proviso that if it's too simplistic a calculation, it's going to be nonsense. But CRT have got to look at what the canal system is for in 2026, not what it was for in 1900. Which, largely, as far as the navigation goes, is for two or three week holidays in what CRT regards as the cruising season, which is April to October, and for currently mostly illegal residential boaters who don't want to move in a few big towns. The latter don't really make much odds to the former, and vice versa. Sadly, what are almost completely irrelevant are the few genuine enthusiasts who like permanently cruising the system, and who keep on the move. There aren't enough of them to matter. The logical decision would to keep the few viable and popular rings open, dump the rest, and set up paid moorings for the residentials. Cutting maintenance as unaffordable on the other canals would soon make them unviable unless local demand (and local money) kept them open. The two immutable rules are "Use it or lose it" and "You get what you pay for".

Green, I think. Eco friendly, and also the colour of the canal when the algae blooms. Except in Stoke, obviously, when the signs will be orange. And the signs saying "Life is better with water" will now include the word "out".

They do that. Most of the answers to the original question were given fairly early, then someone says something a bit off topic and it veers. Best thing to do is when you get nearer the time you want an answer to a specific question, start a new thread, read the first answers and stop bothering with it after the second page, or treat whatever happens after that as a general conversation.

I don't think moorhens do, either. I presume waterfowl are waterproof, and pigeons aren't.

All that really doesn't matter. Nobody believes these figures, or wants to challenge them. They're irrelevant. No business ever reports genuine numbers, they just fiddle them to support their argument for what they want, bit like doing your tax returns. As long as they are vaguely believable, and they serve everybody's purposes, they'll be accepted. You pay accountants or consultants to massage them into credibility. There's usually another book somewhere with more genuine figures that the managers can use for planning, but it'll be locked away very securely and it certainly will never appear in a public announcement.

Dunno, I haven't got Artificial Intelligence, only the real stuff, and probably not as much of that as I used to have.

The last three or four years, leisure boating has been 50% enjoyable and 50% interesting.

That's just silly. It was a good thing that the volunteers restored them, a shame that they then abandoned them. Either way, how we got to where we are isn't the point. As I've said, canals don't need to be closed, just not maintained. The HNC is virtually unnavigable already by most boaters - what percentage of boat owners would ever miss it? Plenty of others are, I'm afraid, the same. Of course the solution is more resources. Trouble is, there aren't any. And it's no good moaning about planning permission. About the only clout the system has is as part of the heritage industry. Scrap that and you can wave goodbye to about the only good argument there is for keeping it open. As a playground for rich people on hundred grand boats, or as a dosshouse for those with nowhere else to go, it's not got much of a future.