Jerra
-
Posts
7,636 -
Joined
-
Days Won
96
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Jerra
-
-
13 hours ago, David Mack said:
If there's a public slipway then presumably you aren't the only person to be doing this. So I would just go ahead.
More generally for a river which has no obvious navigation authority there is probably no right of navigation, so in theory you will be trespassing (the river and bed beneath it belonging to the riparian landowner). But its pretty unlikely anybody will stop you on a river of any size.
That said, an unpowered (hunan powered) or electric boat would create less disturbance as well as being less likely to attract attention.
Having looked at the position of the slipway, near the mouth of the river beside the lifeboat station I suspect its main use is for small boats at sea and not the river.
-
2 hours ago, blackrose said:
I don't think cartel is putting it too strongly. Does Calor own the IP for that particular size of bottle or more importantly I suppose the valve threads for the pigtails?
From speaking to a couple of chandlers they say that Calor are a nightmare to deal with and won't let them buy bottled gas from anyone else. If it's not a cartel then it's certainly a monopoly - how do they get around the anti-competition laws?
I had a conversation at an Anglo-Welsh yard when looking for a particular size cylinder. fortunately, they had one but complained long and loud about the treatment they received fro m Calor despite the amount of gas the company bought.
2 hours ago, Ronaldo47 said:We still have our milk delivered in glass bottles, and the bottles have markings saying that they are the property of the dairy.
So do we but the markings say they are the property of dairies spread over a hundred miles radius and not the dairy that delivers.
-
Reading this I realise how lucky we are with our tip/recycling centre. No booking, no time slots, no proving who you are, no limit on what you can take, in fact basically no limits apart from if you have a sign written works vehicle or the two mentioned below..
Over the years the only problem I have had was when I turned up with a 6 wheel vehicle, 6 wheels not allowed. So I parked outside in view of the staff and transferred the load into the car going back and forwards many times.
Oh and double axle trailers aren't allowed without applying for a permit.
-
1 hour ago, IanD said:
And no amount of posters saying "I always give them *loads* or room, helmet or not" will change the fact that multiple studies in different countries have shown that drivers -- on average! -- give less clearance to cyclists wearing helmets, and that the accident rate is lower among non-helmet-wearers... 😞
I assume you managed to miss the fact I was confirming the research from this country for the benefit of those who tried to avoid inconvenient facts by decrying research because it was from another country.
-
42 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:
I have always left huge room, go onto the opposite side of the road if its clear. When driving instructing I always told pupils to expect cyclists to do the unexpected and to treat them all as though they had mental health problems. After all, would you play hop scotch on the motorway? being on a pedal cycle with our congested roads is madness
A teacher at school when were just getting to driving age said "Expect an idiot round every corner, you won't be disappointed".
The fact remains it isn't just research in other countries which suggests that for some reason some drivers make the decision that it is safe to drive closer to a cyclist if they are wearing a helmet.
-
On 11/08/2023 at 17:31, mrsmelly said:
Its always safer to wear safety equipment and any stats taken from another country are completely irrelevant as the way different countries and their people uses roads, means that the stats are beyond useless. I attended several Road Traffic accidents, people were allowed to have accidents rather than just collisions back in the day
where seat belts undoubtedly saved people from serious injury or death. I only ever went to one in which the seatbelt at the inquest was proven to be the major reason for the girls death, and even then it was due to the way she had worn it ( before inertia reel belts )
How about work from the university of Bath (I think that is still in this country):
"We then present a new analysis of the original dataset, measuring directly the extent to which drivers changed their behaviour in response to helmet wearing. This analysis confirms that drivers did, overall, get closer when the rider wore a helmet."
Having said that personally I never notice whether they are wearing a helmet or not. I give them all as wifde a berth as possible.
-
3 hours ago, LadyG said:
I don't believe that going off topic is a violation of rules, the exception being Politics.
I thought going off topic eventually was mandatory.
-
4 minutes ago, Bromleyxphil said:
Going to look at some boats this weekend. I see on some advertisements that the boat is being sold as the owner has reached an age where boating has become too much. A child of the 60s I am no spring chicken, it’s going to be for leisure not liveaboard so……how young is too old to start 😀
I am past my mid 70s and still cope well with boating. I did however start decades ago.
-
3 hours ago, IanD said:
Checking every fortnight is not enough to confirm that boats meet the rules, they could have been in one place for up to a month.
CRT clearly thinks fortnightly checks are enough. However, lets up the number of checkers to 30. You say it would be too expensive so go on how much do you think it would cost an individual licence holder?
3 hours ago, IanD said:If the existing checking/enforcement system worked we wouldn't be having this discussion... 😉
Having real people walking round the canals writing down boat numbers is the kind of solution that almost every other sector has abandoned, because there are much cheaper and easier solutions which work better available nowadays -- and yes, they involve technologies like smartphones. Welcome to the 21st century... 😉
Which is why I have been dwelling mainly on technology. In fact, it was my post that introduced technology into the discussion. Do keep up with the thread when making comments.
3 hours ago, IanD said:Yes I know there are people who would rather it all went away. For example, instead of discussing this on an online forum we could all hand-write letters and put them in the post... 😉
Nobody other than you has suggested it should all go away! However, I have said to work properly it has to be trouble free for the boater i.e. require them to do nothing otherwise a good proportion wont do it and at least one other poster has confirmed he isn't prepared to do anything to help CRT track him.
3 hours ago, IanD said:Funny how nobody seems to object to the fact that you need a computer or a smartphone to access CWDF, but suddenly it's *terrible* if you need the same for CART to know that you're following the CC rules... 😞
Needing a device to access CWDF is purely voluntary your suggestions would make it compulsary. A totally different thing incase you haven't noticed. Easy to suggest when you aren't strapped for cash, not so easy to do when you are.
4 hours ago, IanD said:But hardware on the boat really *can* track where you go every minute of every day, which many would see as invasion of privacy, especially if wearing a tinfoil hat.
Nobody other than you has suggested it should be tracked every minute of every day. Please when replying to me stick to what I have said not what you think I might have said.
4 hours ago, IanD said:A photo every few days is exactly the same for tracking purposes as a checker walking past, which nobody is objecting to.
But that requires people to;
a) have the equipment which for some will mean expense
b) require them to take action which many won't do.
4 hours ago, GUMPY said:You lot do make it complicated!
All it needs is for the licence "disc" to be a GPS tracker, permanently affixed to the boat it sends back details to the central hub. GPS trackers are cheap >£20 retail I'm sure cart could get a deal the thousands they would need.
No tracker then the boat gets crushed.
No personal information, no personal tracking, just boat tracking which is what's required.
This is more or less what I suggested back up the thread, but in a different way.
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, IanD said:
The last line is the problem -- you'd prefer that CART have enough checkers around the system to do the job properly, which means a lot more than now -- and who pays for them?
You know this how?
I have twice asked how many checkers CRT has and nobody seems to know, so how do you know it needs more? You are assuming it would. CRT claims to check all the system every fortnight so there should be no problem.
Who would pay for any upgraded system be it technological or otherwise? You know full well, the boater either through your subsidised smartphones and a pay plan or licence fee.
-
Just now, IanD said:
For some reason you keep missing the fact that the boat has to be identifiable in the photo... 😉
Talking of missing how did you miss the bit where I said it must of course show the reg number? Somehow you seem to have missed that.
Just now, IanD said:If boaters don't have a smartphone they could get one -- or maybe CART could sell them a cheap one
ready-configured for the job.
Why should any boater have to pay for CRT's convenience e.g payment plan even if the phone was given free. I suspect many of the "CMers" are on low incomes and would be reticent to spend on a phone which they probably resent tracking them anyway.
Just now, IanD said:If boaters are so reluctant to step off the boat every few days and take a photo showing where it is, what alternative method do they suggest? The "tracking" is no different to a CART checker walking past, so what's the objection?
I haven't objected to a checkers walking past. In fact, if you have been following the thread that was my opening suggestion, even giving an idea of how many I thought necessary. The point you need to remember is that unlike you and I there will be many who for whatever reason don't like being tracked. As a result, any technological solution needs to be :
a) tamperproof
b) require as little, preferably no in put from the boater i.e. fit and forget
c) not cost them a penny
Just now, IanD said:If they don't want tracking, your suggestion of hardware on the boat is *far* more of a problem for tin-hat wearers since it knows where you are *all* time and can report back.
It could but I would suggest it would only report movement so personal tracking, unlike phones wouldn't be possible apart from when the boat was actually navigating.
Just now, IanD said:A phone app wakes up and takes a picture (and sends it back to CART) only when yo tell it to, then shuts down.
See above about reticence and costs.
-
6 minutes ago, Goliath said:
yes I’m quite happy for CRT to record where I am.
but I’m not going to do there job for them or take on any extra time or expense to do it.
My point exactly the system should require no input or expense for the boater, greatly reducing the number of objections there could be.
-
11 minutes ago, IanD said:
No it's my own phone, but they will also provide company phones. The phone has to be verified before it can be used to access anything, and there are additional restrictions like it has to be locked when not in use and PIN/firgerprint/password protected.
How would this be ensured assuming a boater was prepared to use their personal phone for CRT business?
11 minutes ago, IanD said:If boaters don't want to have a phone to prove that they're meeting the rules, they don't get the "discount", or have to prove where they've been by some other means which means a lot more time and effort -- and presumably CART could charge extra for this.
That might work.
11 minutes ago, IanD said:But you'd presumably be happy for a CART employee to walk past your boat daily (or every few days) and record where you are? Because that's what would happen now if the checking system was working properly...
That is why I suggested the 20 checkers and 10 miles a day. Boats only need checked to see if they have over stayed the 14 days. OK 24 hour etc ones are more difficult but I am sure if all 2000 miles are being checked those who have been there for days would soon become apparent. I would suggest checkers shouldn't have a routine i.i. not visit the same places on the same day each time.
Does anybody know how many checkers CRT has?
11 minutes ago, IanD said:How is this any different to you having to take a photo of the boat daily (or every few days) so an app can record where you are?
I haven't suggested a system where boaters have to put any effort in. I would prefer something with no boater input. Checkers fit the bill for that.
-
10 minutes ago, IanD said:
You don't need to geotag/photo every hour, one every few days would prove you were meeting the rules.
That is when cheating becomes easy. Cycle down the towpath take your photo and cycle back. Every hour shows movement at the right speed every few days doesn't.
10 minutes ago, IanD said:If the boat has to be shown (and identifiable) in the photo, that stops the cheat you proposed... 😉
How do you get round :
a) boaters who don't have a smartphone or say they don't have a smartphone?
b) the reticence of some boaters to being required to do this?
What I propose is automatic and goes on in the background with no need for the boater to remember, bother to get off the boat, and take the shot, which would of course need to show the reg number to prove it is the right boat.
-
2 minutes ago, IanD said:
Faking geotagged photos isn't impossible but whether enough people would be technically capable to do it is debateable, especially given the technophobia of a lot of boaters... 😉
I hadn't noticed any mention of photos. I assumed when phones were mentioned it would be a tracking device which recorded the geotag say hourly. Also if it was as suggested for a start voluntary those volunteering would be less likely to cheat.
2 minutes ago, IanD said:If CART wanted to make this work more securely it wouldn't be difficult, they could even provide an app where any picture you took as a "here-I-am" proof was automatically uploaded to a server along with phone and location data -- where the phone (number/IMEI) is registered to the boater. It's hardly rocket science, apps do much more difficult things than this every day. It's the kind of thing my employer does every time I log in to their secure system, verification data is sent to my phone and the system knows where I am and what device I'm using to do the authentication.
As I said I hadn't thought of photos I am not sure if whoever posted the idea was thinking terms of photos. I was thinking more in terms of recording places to show the movemnt.
The say every hour geotagging would make faking things a bit of a drag as you would have to walk at a bout three miles an hour to the place you wanted to pretend you had gone to. Then hide the device for the time you were "moored" there. Then repeat going further away.
2 minutes ago, M_JG said:Forcing people to use a smartphone is not going to be accepted by a lot of boaters.
There are a good number of people who don't have smart phones. I visualise CRT providing the "device" expensive at first but then only needed for boats new to the system.
2 minutes ago, M_JG said:Suggesting it can be done is 'pie in the sky' thinking.
True of smart phone solutions.
I wonder if IanD's employer provides the phones. Otherwise you can't force people to have one.
-
Just now, Arthur Marshall said:
Bet they wouldn't stay there long...
As I said earlier sealed and no evidence of a sealed in place tracker no licence as you can't "satisfy the board".
I am also fairly sure it would be possible to develop a cover which was permanently sealed and fixed to the boat.
-
1 hour ago, M_JG said:
It is 'an' answer but there would be a huge backlash I suspect and if hundreds of boaters objected and refused to have such a device fitted what to CRT do? And how would they monitor if devices had been tampered with?
They dont appear to be able to successfully enforce the rules now, I think they would fail miserably trying to successfully 'tag' every boat.
As the device would be tracked 24/7 in its memory waiting to be uploaded unless they broke the seal I mentioned and took it somewhere by towpath it would show easily. Boats don't normally move by road a lot.
Being a little more controversial I am sure some sort of agreement could be worked into access agreements about boats showing an untampered device. They could be fixed to the outside of the boat.
The problem with the voluntary system mentioned for phones is it would be too easy to fake the results but as it would be voluntary cheating would be less likely. Perhaps a discount of a good amount would encourage uptake.
-
Surely in this day and age the answer to the problem is technology.
Some form of tracking device permanently sealed and fixed in place, any sign of tampering refusal to renew the licence ......ever!
BOna fide navigation. A tracking device would show which days the boat was static. Surely to be bona fide navigating you are moving more than you are moored and such tracking would prove things one way or another. I know this will be a complete no-no for many but if the problem is going to be solved (and it needs to be) how else does anyone suggest a comparatively simple cheapish method?
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, IanD said:
Though of course Peel have a much smaller length of canal to deal with, with a lot fewer moorings, and much more freedom about what they do to enforce it than toothless/cash-strapped/red-tape-entangled CART... 😉
I would suggest CRT could manage with 20 checkers.
My thinking goes like this.
10 towpath miles a day on a bike isn't too onerous (OK some days it will be less but some days more). That means in a fortnight a checker could cover 100 miles.
How many checkers do they currently have? Does anybody know?
-
1 hour ago, jonathanA said:
so rather than increase the frequency of emptying or provide larger bins, you think taking them away is the answer...
I am merely telling you what I have observed happening in The Lake District over the last 70+ years
1 hour ago, jonathanA said:I think the problem is a bit wider, certainly here in Lancashire LCC have increasingly made it harder to use the local 'tip' sorry household recycling centres either by closing them or with endless petty rules and restrictions, need to book trailers etc and not surprisingly they are now wringing their hands in horror and complaining about the massive increase in fly tipping but refuse to acknowledge that the two things might be related...
I am referring of course to the litter mentioned by those enjoying the canal not on water and they could take it home and put it either in general household waste or their roadside collection of recycling whichever was more appropriate.
1 hour ago, jonathanA said:I think there is also a society issue with folks who think its ok to toss their maccy d wrappers/left overs out the window of their car rather than take it home and put it in a bin....
True but it does seem to have reduced greatly up here.
1 hour ago, jonathanA said:in our village their are a group of volunteers who litter pick along the main road through it every week, suspect the 'clean laybys' may be receiving the same sort of local attention.
Many of them are miles away from the nearest village. Yes locally to villages you do get volunteers but not at lay=bys 8 or 10 miles away.
-
Most lay-bys up here have no litter bins and are much cleaner. When a bin was full people would just leave stuff in bags or not. Crows tore open bags and scattered what was in looking for food scraps.
-
On 27/06/2023 at 17:15, IanD said:
If it gets damaged/vandalised by fat boats (who else would do it?), make them pay for the repair -- or put the fee up... 😉
Or just close that part of the canal to wide beams permanently. Surely also in this day and age hidden cameras could catch the culprits.
-
51 minutes ago, cuthound said:
Thanks Rich,
Your work is much appreciated.
^^^^^^^^ This!
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Peanut said:
I was surprised that a Stanly knife, others are available, is regarded as a lock knife, as it has a locking blade. You may take it to and from work, but don't carry it anywhere else.
I think it is because a certain element of society carry them as a sharp instrument capable of doing a lot of slashing damage to others.
-
2
-
Boating on ‘un-navigable’ rivers.
in General Boating
Posted
From my experience of canoeing Salmon rivers (admittedly several decades ago) they don't take kindly to canoeists, so what they would think of motor power I don't know but sus[ect i could guess.