Jerra
-
Posts
7,636 -
Joined
-
Days Won
96
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Jerra
-
-
As somebody who has done quite a bit of hiring in the past a couple of thoughts occur to me.
1. I see no reason why a hire boat should be treated any differently from any other boat i.e. have reserved moorings.
2. If I were on a hire boat unless it had been explained when I took the boat that a. Trade boats meant hire boats and b. I was expected to use them rather than any other moorings I would just ignore them and moor where I felt best.
-
I've never really understaood the need to change something that was working perfectly well into a new format that then requires everyone to adapt to. It just seems like change for change's sake to me.
As I understand the situation the old software was "no longer supported" so problems etc which might arise due to incompatibility of newer software and equipment couldn't be sorted out. (Or words to that effect). I seriously doubt admin would have voluntarily have given themselves the "hassel" of the change and potential complaints if they didn't feel it was b]necessary.
-
read the boaters handbook before you even go away. I am sure its available online.
Available at http://www.waterscape.com/media/documents/1784.pdf
-
But not allowable under new BSS requirements - it must be welded or brazed.
Does anyone know the logic of this? Surely any gas tight solution should solve the problem and be safe?
N.B I am not saying the information is incorrect I am trying to get my head round the logic of the regulation.
-
Ventilation goes to the exterior of the boat
An hole is a gap to where you don't want the gas leaking
Yes I could see that when it was mentioned that the hole was in the bottom!
-
It's in the gas locker, I have a hole about the size of a ten pence piece and have been told that I must be a "proper" welded repair
Out of curiosity what is the difference between a hole and ventilation?
-
With regard to using Ash that has been infected by dieback the advice is:
The timber in infected trees might still be usable for some purposes, although staining by the fungus might limit the range of end uses. However, it is not currently possible to move ash material out of confirmed infected woodlands or other sites which have been served with a Statutory Plant Health Notice.
-
With regard to reducing staff number surely CRT needs to have been running long enough to compare its record with BW
I know somebody will tell me the "top" people haven't changed but the status of the organisation has and this must have an effect on how it operates - for better or worse.
-
Could there be an issue about damaging some types of rope with the enzymes in biological washing powder or liquid?
Post #4 says use non-bio!
-
That right already exists under the existing arrangements which begs the question why they have introduced something else that they now seem reluctant to carry through where people don't pay up.
I don't want to start an argument but Carlt categorically states they have no powers to withhold a license. Personally (not having read the laws/rules/regulations very closely) I can't see why the owner of something can't say "Sod off you haven't stuck to my rules I am not having you on my property any more".
-
2) If you know of no such example, can you please explain why that might be?
I don't have a wide enough experience/knowledge of the canal system to attempt to answer 1. However I would have thought the answer was clearly BW didn't bother to try to enforce any time restrictions. CRT haven't yet been in existence for 12 months (OK can't remember the exact date so it may be 12 months). Perhaps they are giving a little time to see if the restrictions have the desired effect before deciding that enforcement would be necessary.
Incidentally is there any reason why the charge can't just be demanded before the next license is issued as surely a record of the boats details has been kept. Yes I know there could/would be a problem with boats not showing their names numbers etc but that is another argument.
(Also please remember I did say above I am in Devil's advocate mode as it helps me to see the other side of the discussion).
-
You are mooring a boat, not parking a car and you are entitled to moor your boat for up to 14 days in one spot for no charge beyond a proportion of your licence fee so the charge leaps from, effectively, zero pounds per fortnight to £25 per day.
Quite a leap.
So if you are entitled to moor on provided VM for 14 days why (historically) has anybody bothered to:
1. Put up notices trying to make the mooring anything other than 14 days.
2. Why has anybody taken any notice of these signs which appear to have had no meaning all along.
-
My pet Budgie used to pee on me when I was a kid! Either that or we had a leak upstairs. :-)
The you must have had a leak upstairs. Urine is passed by animals to remove urea (a white substance) among other things. If you look at some of the goose poo on the canal bank you will see it is two coloured. (Wonderful breakfast time subject this) The white is the urea and the poo contains more liquid than many animals.
Coming back to budgies (my Dad bred them when I was young) I think you will remember the black and white colour of the droppings, the same principle as I mention above.
-
The difference is though surely that NT don't have thousands of people who are effectively 'forced' to use their property by virtue of committing thousands of pounds to boat ownership or even committing their entire homes to their waterways and then somebody suddenly comes along and moves the goalposts for no actual good reason.
I can opt. not to visit and NT property if I wish - but what do I realistically do if I want to opt. not to boat on CRT waterways....a different waterway authority is not a practical option for me.
I can see that as a reason for opposing the charges but that doesn't make it illegal. People keep stating categorically it is illegal and I haven't worked out why as it isn't a PCN it is a charge for a service just like a car park.
Somebody mentions reasonable round here you will pay £5 or 6 for a few hours car parking so £25 for 24 hours could be argued as reasonable (please note devil's advocate mode).
-
Trusting that you meant those high-flying aluminium birds that is. :-)
I took him to mean that sort of "bird" as feathered birds don't pee.
-
I know I am being thick and I will get a certain amount of flack for this but can somebody explain this to me.
The National Trust owns property they make rules e.g. where you can park for how long and any charges that apply.
Why is the CRT any different? Don't they have the right to decide who can park (moor) where for how long and at what charge?
Yes I agree when they want to deo things which seem detrimental to a majority try to change their minds but, why is it considered illegal for them to decide who should be charged for what services.
-
I find the cassette v pumpout amusing. One point I find really amusing is the number of pro cassette people who say oh no we don't want a large tank of that stuff on board, and follow that up by saying if you have multiple cassettes you don't need to go to the disposal point so often.
-
2
-
-
Likewise with the canals in the mid seventies, my memory isn't of them being much different from today.
I have only done the Llangollen twice, first time in the early 60s second time 5 years ago. Before we set of for the second trip I spent time telling the others about my watching the fish swimming ahead of the boat, imagine my surprise to find the water totally opaque.
Incidentally the boat on the first trip pumped the contents of the toilet over the side (well technically I suppose through the side). Something had certainly changed.
-
I would suspect you are unlikely to get much water weed in canals which are popular and have much in the way of boat traffic.
Firstly the prop is going to keep breaking the plants up. Secondly the water tends in my experience to get stirred up and cloudy so this will prevent light penetrating making the plants struggle.
Clear water in an unused canal will allow good photosynthesis and so good plant growth.
-
Most towpaths are classed as permissive paths not public rights of way.
Some are definitive rights of way but only a minority.
The sudden closure of towpaths at times would appear to confirm this. As I understand rights of way to close one you need to
1. Apply for a closure order
2. Where ever possible provide an alternative.
So if they were rights of way the path could not be closed suddenly as warning could be given while the closure was being applied for.
N.B. I am not suggesting your statement is wrong just providing what I feel is a logical reason for people to believe your point.
-
when there are creatures like the rat, that at any time they reckon you are no more than 3 foot away from one,
I am afraid this is urban myth a recent study of rats in cities showed the distance (on average as obviously sometimes you are close and other not) to be nearer 100 metres.
-
Its not. The issues all relate to faecal matter.
You know that and I know that but there are a number including some on this forum who do think it is acceptable.
-
I've seen plenty of cattle weeing and pooing in the canals and especially in the Thames. What's the difference? Why aren't they stopped?
I would suspect because there is some ancient access to water for the farm when the canal was built. It is like a few other idiosyncrasies in modern life. For example if alcohol were new and there was a decision to be made about whether to allow it or not I am fairly sure it wouldn't be allowed.
However if you were to take look at it that way why don't we still allow human waste into the canal? Surely it is best to keep out as much of any possible problem as we can. Dog waste like human waste is something we can easily keep out of the canal cows however may not be so easy if the farmer has a right to water the animals.
-
So what happened in the "old days" before pump outs or cassettes? I seem to remember that when I used to go on the Norfolk Broads it just went into the river and I can't remember what happened when we hired a canal boat in the seventies - can't remember pumping out?
Certainly when I was on a narrowboat in the 70s it went straight into the canal.
I am puzzled as to why anyone should think it is acceptable to flick dog crap into the canal if dumping our waste in isn't!
Returning to the topic list
in Technical & Account Support
Posted
Personally I don't use the back button preferring to see what new has come in since I left "New Content". However having just used the back button it takes me to where I was on the list.