Posts posted by magnetman
is it because the moorings are no longer leased to the CRT so anyone on a CRT mooring licence would have to vacate.
Presumably as it is now Somerset council owned and someone is spending a lot of money they may take the view that the moorings were too cheap.
As it will take time to rebuild the moorings and a boat on the B&T canal can not legally fulfil the requirements to continuously cruise they have to move away.
When the moorings are rebuilt it seems likely they would be allowed to return but as the moorings will presumably be more expensive it probably won't be economically viable.
Outcome is probably new moorings with very few boats.
I suppose as per the other thread one approach would be to be abusive to the CRT then they might take several years to S8/13 the boat and take it away by which time new moorings will be available.
Perhaps it could form a precendent in a future legal case.
It is assumption and all that jazz.
1 minute ago, Goliath said:
Read up a bit on it and it seems the basin is getting a “£5 million face lift”.
Work to be completed in early 2025
So couldn’t CRT just leave the boaters to float about until they can return to the basin?
Maybe it is a housing project and the developer has decided, rightly or wrongly, that residential boats don't fit the scene.
Does seem odd but of course everyone knows living on a boat is an insecure lifestyle. This especially applies to somewhere you can't get away from, unless you own it.
The news article in the OP is not all that clear as it says this
"The boats are set to be moved to Bridgwater Marina. The action comes after the boaters received notices from the Canal and River Trust. "
I think what they meant was removed from not moved to but I am not sure.
According to the man in the video the CRT are not a public body. They have some public functions such as being a navigation authority.
I don't think in reality the CRT have any duty regarding housing and I believe, although would welcome clarification, that they opt IN to the Equality Act rather than being bound by it.
This is as I understand it.
Also perhaps the fact the CRT are not a public body removes the requirement for reasonableness.
8 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:
There is an obligation on public bodies to act in a reasonable manner.
Interestingly Mr Symonds of the CRT did mention on the K&A video posted a while ago that the CRT 'are not a public body'.
16m15s --5 minutes ago, MtB said:
They will probably take them to that place in Chester, which always seems perverse and just plain spiteful to me.
On the other hand, the boaters have know for two years this was going to happen, and there has been nothing stopping them in the interim arranging their own craning-out and transport to another part of the system, then selling up or whatever.
Except there might not be anywhere they can crane them out. I'm just wondering if the marina which has been closed is where the lifting in took place and that private individuals may not be allowed to arrange craneage there.
Could be a tricky situation.
13 hours ago, matty40s said:
So, our charitable Lords, have finally decided that although they were charitable, andbtried their best to be charitable, even though they knew that this wasnt going to work, now decide to enforce and be uncharitable, because they can.
Problem is, they will probably dump these boats as far away from their owners as possible, until cranking fees and other fees are paid, or just auction the boats one by one to recover costs.
What are cranking fees?
Ah. Got it. Craneage fees.
I was thinking it was something to do with starting the engines !
One idly wonders where the lifting and mainenance facilities are located for these landlocked boats.
They must have got in somehow.
Canal licences are obviously much too cheap and enforcement of movement requirements too lax if boats are appreciating.
Food waste is another red herring.
In this country the food production and importation amounts to significantly more than we need. This will result in waste. Everyone knows that massive amounts of food is dumped. This is not news.
One of the great things with food products is they are of biological origin in that if you reject the product it will degrade quite quickly.
Wrapping things in plastic might seem clever but what do you do with the plastic? The plastic can make the product last longer but if there is already a surplus why do you want it to last longer? All you are doing is providing profits and creating food waste and packaging waste.
Obviously starving people would rather have the food but the economics of transporting it to them is not viable.
Wrapping foods up in plastic is the wrong plan in a state where food is plentiful.
14 minutes ago, blackrose said:
The environmental benefits of plastics in terms of lightweight materials and reduction of food waste are seldom mentioned and the alternatives like paper generally have a greater carbon footprint and environmental impact.
I obviously bow to your superior knowledge on this but I am struggling to work out why single use plastics have come in for so much criticism if they are actually a wonder product.
Could it be that in fact they are not a wonder product but the vested interests involved in the production are heavily influencing the story and attempting to promote the line that they are wonder products.
Why does a cucumber have to be wrapped in plastic in order for it to be presented for sale in a supermarket?
There is something wrong with this.
Maybe it would be best if people who discharge overboard only did so when there was extra water about after decent rainfall.
The Ann Summers woman died the other day aged 62. Breast cancer.
10 minutes ago, blackrose said:
Anyway, most litter is littered by members of the public who then like to blame the plastics industry, food manufacturers, the council or CRT.
There is an argument for everyone to just drop all of the packaging litter in order that a bigger conversation can be had about things like single use plastics.
Its all very well binning them and making some people incredibly rich but is this really how things should be done?
It is very convenient for those who make enormous amounts of money from these things to blame litter louts when there is actually a far bigger problem.
I wonder how the canal boat owner "slammed" people. It sounds like something quite physical like shutting a door violently.
I'm not sure that one can use text to slam anyone at all. I think it is a fraud.
The correct words would be "canal boat owner moans about..."
If I did a light rant about cyclists on towpaths would I be "slamming cyclists"? No I wouldn't. I would simply be moaning about a predictable negative associated with living on a boat.
moaning not slamming.
Where did the BMW 635Csi go in the water?
I used to watch EE yars ago. They might have used the old EA Sunbury yard on the Thames for some bits as well.
Oh yes that was Pavo I think. Nice boat that.
Quite a few tall buildings recently in Alperton. This increases the wind speed due to the wind sheer effect.
Small animals can easily get blown in the cut as well as rubbish which may not have been thrown there.
Alperton is a 3rd world slum area anyway.
Nothing new under the sun.
It seems odd that someone would choose to moor in such a horrible dump then moan about it being a horrible dump.
Great thing with a boat is you can go away if you don't like it.
A lot of the supermarket people put bananas in the fruit section.
Mr Stiftung who runs Lidl does this and I'm sure there is a good reason for it.
Ah. Interesting !
Isn't it 2027 when the funding stops?
I don't know anything about it but the address change on here is interesting.
Published 30 May 2022.
Change of registered address
First Floor, North Station House
500 Elder Gate
National Waterways Museum
South Pier Road
Flexible hoses do seem a possibility.
Not sure they would come round in such a tight radius so if the space is very limited it might not work.
Is cauliflower a fruit?
Several boats set to be removed from Bridgwater & Taunton Canal
in General Boating
Posted · Edited by magnetman
From this it looks like the CRT may have been turning a blind eye to failure to adhere to movement requirements.
If there actually are no boats there then presumably they are on the towpath.
Also it seems that very soon the technical ownership of the docks changes.
"Bridgwater Docks are owned by Sedgemoor District Council (due to be incorporated into Somerset Council from April 2023) and the docks were leased to Canal & River Trust. That lease terminated in June 2021 and the docks have been closed, and empty of boats, since then and likely to stay that way, possibly into 2024 or longer.
From this it looks like the CRT may have been turning a blind eye to failure to adhere to movement requirements. "
edit for double post