Dave_P
Moderator
-
Posts
4,260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Dave_P
-
-
It was only down about 3" at HP this morning, about 2" down now. I'd hope its back to normal by tomorrow morning.
-
I've just measured it by my mooring and it's around 6-7 inches down. I'm off on my summer cruise on saturday (supposedly), hope it comes up a bit.
-
7 hours ago, magictime said:
But surely what CRT are trying to spell out there is just that repeat journeys along the same stretch don't add anything to the total 'range' covered - not that if you cruise 110 miles round the Four Counties Ring, say, your cruising range is only the 50 miles or so between Middlewich and Autherley Junction (as the crow flies)?
Yes, you've highlighted the lack of clarity in both CRTs and the IWAs guidance. It has already been touched on in this thread by Captain Pegg and myself. In any other circumstance, range would be 'as the crow flies'. And I tend to think that using this measure is the only way to be sure when continuously cruising. However, it is possible to envisage a range which follows the twisting course of the canals. So a cc'er who covers all the BCN but never leaves it would be covering a 100 mile range, but a much smaller area, 'as the crow flies'. Would this imaginary cc'er satisfy the IWA? I suspect not, because, as I initially said on this thread, the proposal of 100 miles / 300 miles has been arrived at to make it virtually impossible to cc and have a fixed job. I may well be wrong, but I'm yet to hear another valid rationale from the IWA.
When CRT talk about range, this is what I envisage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_(biology)
Perhaps because my first degree was in Ecology.
-
8 hours ago, Graham Davis said:
Then, as I said, you and I have a different opinion on the meaning of "range".
From Alan's post #111:
"C&RTs definition of 'range' given by Enforcement Manager Simon Cadek :
“When we are looking at boat movements we are looking for characteristics of bona fide navigation, these fall roughly into four categories:
· Range: by range we mean the furthest points a boat has travelled on the network, not merely the total distance travelled. While the BW act does not stipulate what that distance is the Trust has previously said that anyone travelling a range of less than say 20 miles (32km) would struggle to satisfy the Trust that they are engaged in bona fide navigation and that normally we would expect a greater range." -
14 minutes ago, Teasel said:
I think so yes - the law doesn't say the boat has to be navigating throughout the period of the licence but that it has to be used for navigation throughout that period - there is a difference. I think my interpretation's along the same lines as magictime's above (although my cooking pot analogy may not have been very useful). As long as the boat's being used for navigation all year round (without stopping continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period is reasonable in the circumstances), there's no need for it to be continuously navigating. It seems like your interpretation is that the boat has to be navigating throughout - rather than it has to be used for navigation throughout..
I get what you’re saying, but, given that you have to move every 14 days or less, the distinction is moot.
-
Just now, Captain Pegg said:
I could have sworn I read a post where you said you had drawn a circle of 100 miles radius from Oldbury. Must be going mad.
JP
If I did, I didn’t mean to. 50 mile radius, 100 mile diameter.
Of course, you could measure range in a linear way, along the canal. In Birmingham this would shrink the overall area down. In London and Bristol, not so much.
-
31 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:
You are absolutely correct - BUT - the law does say that your will bona fide navigate for the duration of your licence (1 year ?) with stops of no more than 14 days and will then move to a new 'place'.
From the 1995 Act :
"..the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances".
As has been said by a Judge (in a CC court case) - (from memory), words to the effect - "Moving from Bath to Bristol simply to justify not having a mooring is not bona-fide navigating"
C&RTs definition of 'range'
“When we are looking at boat movements we are looking for characteristics of bona fide navigation, these fall roughly into four categories:
· Range: by range we mean the furthest points a boat has travelled on the network, not merely the total distance travelled. While the BW act does not stipulate what that distance is the Trust has previously said that anyone travelling a range of less than say 20 miles (32km) would struggle to satisfy the Trust that they are engaged in bona fide navigation and that normally we would expect a greater range.
. For the avoidance of doubt, a small number of long journeys over a short period of time, followed or preceded by cruising in a small are of the network would not generally satisfy the Trust that you are engaged in bona fide navigation.· Overstaying: we look to see how often boats overstay, either the 14 day limit on the main length of the canal, or shorter periods where local signage dictates, for example short stay visitor moorings.
While we are flexible with the occasional overstay from most boaters due to breakdown, illness or other emergencies, we will look at the overall pattern balanced with range and movement pattern in order to form a view.
Overstay reminders are issued when a boat is seen in the same area for more than 14 days. While we are unable to say how far you need to travel each time you move, we would advise that you normally travel further than a few km each time.
This will prevent you from getting reminders and depending on the length of other trips you make and how many times you turn back on yourself, should increase your overall range over the course of your licence.
· Movement: Continuous Cruiser Licences are intended for bona fide (genuine) navigation around the network, rather than for a boat to remain in one mooring spot, place neighbourhood or area.
We would expect boats on these licences to move around the network such that they don’t gravitate back to favoured areas too often i.e. in a way that it’s clear to us that they’re living in a small area of the waterway.
The basic principle of this is that these licences are not intended for living in an area and if it looks like a boat is habitually returning to a particular part of the waterway then this would not generally satisfy the Trust.
Within an acceptable range we’d expect a genuine movement, so for example it would not satisfy the Trust if a boat went on a 60 mile trip during the course of say two weeks, then returned to cruise in an area of say 5 miles the remainder of the time (figures are examples only).
Generally speaking, the smaller the range the less we’d expect to see boats back at the same locations. Of course people need to turn around and they’re perfectly free to re-visit places they have been to before, it’s living in a small area on this kind of licence that would cause a problem.Thanks. That saved me from typing all that on my phone. It seems many are still confused about the distinction between journey and range, and are also confused about what ‘bona fide’ means.
-
45 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:
I think you could define it in one of two ways, one of which is your method. However you have inadvertently created a range of minimum 200 miles since that is the linear distance between two opposite points on your circle. Of course if you navigated down a canal between those opposite points the distance would be a lot more than 200 miles. Also you wouldn't have to visit all the points on the edge to have achieved the range.
So you could draw a 50 mile radius around Oldbury to give a 100 mile range or perhaps simply add up the linear length of all the different individual sections cruised in a year and ensure that it adds up to at least 100 miles. In which case cruising the entire BCN once a year would qualify since there is 100 miles of it.
I suspect there are other reasonable definitions of what constitutes a cruising range. And reasonableness is all the law requires (not that the law says anything about cruising range before anyone thinks I am endorsing such a proposal).
JP
I’d considered both possibilities but the guidance is not clear. However, my ‘circle’ is approx 100 miles in diameter (50 mile radius), not 200 as you suggest.
31 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:Then it suggests that we have a different opinion of what constitutes "range".
For me, if my cat ranged for one mile around the house it would mean that it went on a journey of 1 mile, possibly in a circle, not 1 mile directly away from the house.Sorry but that’s not a range. Also 0.5 of a mile, not 1 mile. The cat could walk the other way.
-
28 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:
But that isn't "range" is it? Your response is somewhat simplistic, but not unexpected. Perhaps you need to read the "proposal" again.
I would suggest that you could easily take a journey of 100 miles around Oldbury and still remain within a road journey time of 2 hours from Birmingham.If that isn't a range, then what do you think a range is?
If I were to suggest that my cat roamed over a 1 mile range during the night, then a circle with 1 mile diameter would be exactly what I had in mind. I most definitely wouldn't be suggesting that my cat was taking a 1 mile journey during the night.
-
9 hours ago, Iain_S said:
Wealth created, or wealth gathered??
Bit of both
-
16 hours ago, magictime said:
Not being funny Dave, but is it not overstating things a bit to suggest the IWA proposal would 'rule out' commuting? It'd only be an annual requirement after all - you could stay within an hour of work 50 weeks of the year and still hit the target by doing a holiday cruise or two a bit further afield. This is pretty much what we've done in the past - 90% of the time the boat's stayed in West/North Yorkshire, but once or twice a year we've headed off to do the Four Counties or something.
I would hope you're right, but I don't think that's what IWA mean by minimum cruising range. If it were, then the current CRT range of 20-25 miles could be acheived by shuffling around a 5 mile stretch and then popping off on a long weekend a couple of times a year. CRT are pretty clear that they don't find that acceptable.
14 hours ago, Graham Davis said:I'm trying, and failing, to understand why you think those named places would be required to be visited to fall in line with the 100 mile figure. It certainly isn't the way I read their suggestion.
It was acheived by putting a dot in a map over Oldbury and drawing a circle round it with a 100 mile diameter. Hey presto - a 100 mile cruising range is shown. What do you think they mean?
-
1 hour ago, nicknorman said:
It's got groove, it's got meaning.
-
11 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:
So what is so special about London? Something in the air? Are Londoners special commercial supermen? Or is it that London is subsidised by care and control of just about every marketable and cultural asset the nation possesses?
What's special about London is that it is a major global finance and commercial hub. Without it the UK would be poorer overall. I'd agree that the wealth created by London should be equitably distributed around the country though.
-
1 hour ago, nicknorman said:
No. In the 60 and 70s you rarely saw other boats and even more rarely saw people living on them. The KandA didn’t exist as a navigable waterway. Didn’t do much boating in the 80s but by the time we went back to it in about 1990 the whole feel of the place was much more crowded, far more liveaboards and of course in places near the SE of England there has since then been a massive increase in live aboards. It is no coincidence that this coincides with areas of expensive housing. You don’t get wall to wall liveaboards on the Rochdale, for example!
Housing costs are a supply and demand issue. Council houses sold off cheap, new council housing not built, half of London in foreign ownership and not actually lived in. Uncontrolled growth of cities isn’t really sustainable, as housing and transport fundamentally can’t cope (unless we go back to huge tower blocks). We as a country have made so many mistakes and now we are reaping the “reward”!
Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word 'plenty'. But the liveaboards that were about were not required to move to the extent that they are now. Or in any case, they weren't being enforced against in the same way. I know someone who lived on the Regents Canal in the 80s, right by the zoo and, as far as I know, didn't move for years.
I found there was a surprising number of liveaboards on the Rochdale, especially the eastern end.
27 minutes ago, welly said:?
London’s thriving economy generates a £26.5bn surplus that is recycled by the government to provide financial help to Britain’s less well-off regions, according to an official breakdown of the public finances.
The first attempt by the Office for National Statistics to break down the UK’s budget deficit by region has demonstrated the importance of the capital and highlighted how taxes and public spending are used to narrow the north-south divide.
Experimental data from the ONS showed that only three regions of the UK – London, the south-east and the east of England – ran a budget surplus in the 2015-16 financial year, the latest year for which figures are available.
Every Londoner provided £3,070 more in tax revenues than they received in public spending, while people living in the south-east ran a surplus of £1,670 per head. The east of England turned a small deficit in 2014-15 into a surplus of £242 per head in 2015-16.Thanks for this. I was trying to make the same point earlier - but badly.
-
46 minutes ago, WotEver said:
Not before time. My missus cried when we drove past the demolished Pebble Mill. We spent very many hours there in the 70’s and 80’s. The Mailbox was always destined to fail, and post houses in Bristol are also suffering now. I edited hundreds of hours of stuff for the beeb before it effectively stopped making programming in The Midlands. Even Spielberg recognised the talent pool when he shot Ready Player One in Brum last year.
I did enjoy seeing Livery Street in it!
-
3 minutes ago, WotEver said:
Yes indeed but the contagion is spreading. C4 is now looking to relocate and Cov, Brum and other Midlands cities have put in bids.
The proposed Channel 4 is only to reverse the significant loss of media jobs in the Midlands over the last 15 years or so. Pebble Mill used to be a major programming centre. It was hugely downsized into The Mailbox, but was at least still reasonably busy when I worked there. Now its like a ghost town. My job was relocated to Bristol so I left the world of TV and retrained to do something else.
-
3 minutes ago, WotEver said:
Not really... you missed off the last place
I have family in Crawley. You have my sympathies.
-
14 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
The problem is that when the recent ( 94 ) legislation was implemented there were not many genuine liveaboard boaters and those of us that were then living aboard had always understood we had to move around or have a mooring and we WANTED to live on boats it was a lifestyle choice. Unfortunately today the newby boaters ( not all ) seem to think they have a right to live how and where they want and expect the ccing rules to soften because they have moved on a boat and have no genuine intention to cruise. Last week on the K and A reinforced this view with me as basicaly its a linear dumping ground. You are very correct in that all this nonsense about living in London is simply that ( nonsense ) jobs are available in areas that would enable most of these people a better lifestyle with more expendable income even when paying rent as its much more affordable in many places. Shock horror people actualy go to work in places other than London. The great problem for people like myself who have always either CONTINUOUSLY cruised or paid for a mooring for now near on thirty years is something will eventualy change and it will be buggered up for everybody by the pee takers who wont give a damn.
From what people have told me, back in the 60s, 70s and 80s there were plenty of liveaboards with no official home mooring who just set up 'camp' on a particular spot and never moved at all. Have I been misinformed? If I haven't then the movements patterns of the newbys involves far more cruising.
-
32 minutes ago, WotEver said:
There would be if that’s where the people were. Simple supply & demand. Look at Media City in Manchester. The biggest centre for creative arts in the country. And who are the players, some little regional outfits? No, BBC, ITV etc who finally shrugged off part of their London-centric view of the world and looked to the far north... yes, past Watford.
Media City still only accounts for a tiny proportion of media jobs, compared to London.
-
2 minutes ago, WotEver said:
Just noticed this edit...
Born in Wimbledon and lived there till early teens, then Kingston, then down to Crawley.
Worked mostly around the West End. Did a spot of dispatch riding and also sold HiFi in Tottenham Court Road.
Best thing I ever did though was move out.
Ooh! Get you, Mr Posh!
-
2 minutes ago, WotEver said:
It would benefit the country hugely. There is an absurd and unjustifiable bias towards London at present. It’s unsustainable.
What rubbish. They’d live happier and more productive lives if they got out from there and opened their eyes to the wider country.
The individuals would indeed be happier. The bigger picture is a little different.
-
I have a home mooring but I am seriously considering going back to continuous cruising in the near future. The change that a reworded Waterways Act could allow IWAs suggestion to come to fruition is one thing which really puts me off the idea.
3 minutes ago, WotEver said:I can’t afford to live in London. So I don’t. I used to, I was born and bred there, but I got out.
And if everyone who doesn't earn 6 figures followed suit? How would that benefit you?
We should all be grateful to those people who struggle on existing inside the M25. We need them!
Incidentally - I was born and bred in Woolwich, how about you?
-
Just now, welly said:
But I can afford a boat. And I can comply with the CRT's guidance. So a home mooring is pretty much irrelevant, being as I only have to comply with the CRT and not anyone else.
Until the goal-posts are moved.
-
Just now, WotEver said:
Yes indeed. And cries of “But I can’t afford a mooring in London” are pretty much irrelevant. I can’t afford a Ferrari, so I don’t drive one.
How about "I can't afford to live in London"? You can make a comparison with that and not owning a Ferrari, but, as far as I'm aware, no breakdown of social and community cohesion ever occurred due to a lack of Ferraris.
Have My Trojans Recovered? Too Late!!
in Boat Equipment
Posted
Will be interesting to see if you get better answers on here or on facebook ;-)