Ricco1

Stillwater fisheries up and down the country are blighted by cormorants. Rivers too. So much so that many waters that were once teeming with small/ medium sized fish, roach for example, now hold only a few bigger fish. But here in the north west, I've only ever once seen a cormorant on a canal. Maybe they stick to the quieter stretches?

Thanks, that's certainly put my mind at ease! The old survey did mention limited pitting but only to a depth of maximum 0.5mm, the implication was that this wasn't important.

Maybe a bit daft thinking about this in the middle of summer but as I'm about to buy a boat to live aboard, lots of questions are going through my mind. Water, stored in a tank in the bow, no heating there, does it not freeze solid during a cold spell? Could this cause damage? What can you do to avoid it/ deal with it? Cheers

Thanks so much for all the replies! I've had a quick skim through for now. I'm going to read each one more thoroughly, and the suggested links. Hopefully then I'll just describe myself as a fool rather than an idiot! Seriously though many thanks, your replies are really appreciated. If I could ask one specific question. I thought I knew the answer to this but now I'm not too sure: Scenario: I want to run various 12v and 230v appliances with an inverter switch on. I'm aware that my batteries are getting low. I know that I can run the boat engine thereby charging the batteries with the alternator. But: as an alternative, can I use a generator to charge the batteries, or is a generator just to provide a live feed (for want of a better term) to the 230v circuit?

Consensus seems to favour the Springer. To be honest I'm sure it would be a nicer boat to live on in many ways. There's more light inside because of bigger windows and there's a really nice side hatch, the roof slides open there too. There are other pluses too. There are some downsides to it though. The Hallmark has a grill and 2 hobs, the Springer just 2 hobs. I like my toast in the morning! The Hallmark's seating can be used as an occasional guest bed wheras the Springer has a sofa, which can't. I've viewed a hull survey on the Springer from 4 years ago. The hull was sound and it's been blacked since then. However the bottom plate was as thin as 4.6mm in places. 4 years on, a little thinner maybe? I'm tending to lean towards the Springer despite the negatives I've mentioned. I can buy a 1000w invertor and power a toaster I think?. And if I have guests they can use my bed, I'll kit myself on the floor for a night. The one thing that's holding me back is the age, and the previous thickness of the hull. Will I be looking at overplating a few years from now?

That's the one! I posted for opinions on it before I started physically viewing boats.

Here we go... http://narrowboats.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=319115 http://narrowboats.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=255145

Thanks for the replies. To be perfectly honest I'd be happy to live on either of the boats. But do I want the brighter inside of the cared for one, or the newer hull and bit of work needed with the other? The less cared for one has apparently been blacked most years, so I think it's very likely the hull has more years left in it. As for looking at more boats: If I visit more than 2 shops to buy a pair of jeans my mind becomes a whirl. I confuse myself, forget attributes etc and eventually end up going home in a bad mood having bought nothing. It will be the same with boats. I've seen others that weren't for me for various reasons. Now I just want to make a straight choice between these 2, to make an offer on. OK if I viewed a hundred all around the country I might find the perfect boat at the perfect price. But bearing mind earlier in this paragraph, I might not. I'm going to post links in a minute...

Thanks for that. The boats are fairly close to each other. I went to see them both today. That's the problem you see, I've stood on both, looked all around them, spent 2 hours chatting to the owners and other boaters nearby, but I just can't decide! Should I go for the sparkly clean immaculately fitted out one that might need hull work in 5-10 years, or the slightly neglected one that more than likely has a sounder hull?

I've looked at a few boats recently. Some people on here say you know straight away when you see 'the one' but I like 2, and can't decide between them! One is a Hallmark made in 1998. Everything I need is on there but it's a bit tired in appearance, and has certainly been neglected. Then there's a 1989 Springer that's clearly been loved, it's close to immaculate inside and out. The older boat is advertised at £3,000 more than the Hallmark. I'd have full surveys done on each if I agreed a purchase. I know you haven't seen the boats but on the evidence of what I've told you, which way would you be leaning?

I don't always describe myself as an idiot but when it comes to electricity, I am. I've spent hours reading through posts on here but still struggle to grasp the basics. What do I know: that boat batteries are 12 volt and are charged either through an alternator or via a generator and charger. That an invertor can convert 12 volt to 230 volt. Boats often have 12 volt and 230 volt circuits. What don't I know: Just about everything else. I hear of amps and amp hours, watts. The more I read the more confused I get. Could anyone take the trouble to explain the basics to me, or perhaps point me in the direction of some reading that will clear this in my mind? Thanks.

That's quite surprising, especially when you consider the many new benefits that were created by the previous government, most of which were aimed at the group that holds the key to election victory: families with children. And then the massive increase in the public sector during their tenure. How was this possible without significant additional taxes? Ah yes: 1/ an economy that mostly grew during the tenure 2/ borrowing; lots of; as we know only too well today.

Our previous British government had a tax and spend philosophy. They were voted out of course. Unfortunately we still have the European Union, a tax and spend outfit if there ever was one. Does the union really believe that the way to maintain/ increases people's standard of living is to apply more taxes? Maybe this could be a good thing in a 'closed' country, it could enable the poor and disadvantaged to have better lives. But when the developed world is under serious economic attack from the developing world, countries whose citizens pay very low taxes and exist with zero welfare, how can increasing taxes/ costs possibly be the way forward?

The original poster has the right to send such a letter, if he is concerned about the safety of people. If I received that letter though, I wouldn't take much notice of it, because I don't like its tone. The word melodramatic has already been mentioned. We could add confrontational, and probably disrespectful, assuming the letter is to someone in a senior role. I'm afraid it would probably go on some 'pending' pile on my desk and then after a suitable number of days/ weeks, straight into the bin.

I stated my intentions earlier in this thread. So, moving every 14 days. I have no intention of staying in one place longer than that. If a CRT chap suggests that my 'pattern' of movements concerns him, then I'll change that. Simple.

I asked the question because that's, broadly speaking, my plan, when I buy a boat. I'd like to be in my home area if possible but if a nice CRT chap tells me to move or else I'll move, not a problem. It's nice to know that a warning/ warnings are issued, rather than a fixed penalty notice, or similar.

So are we saying that, strictly speaking, the 'intent' in my suggested scenario means I would be breaking the law. But... because swathes of boaters declaring that they continuously cruise when they do nothing of the sort means that I'd probably be free to do this, because CRT don't have the resources to enforce action on everyone? Is that close?

I can see your point. And you're right, I'm new, wasn't aware that the 'abuse' of the system was so blatant. How about: CCer spends 6 months moving around 25 miles. 14 days in each 'place'. CCer then turns the boat around and retraces his/ her steps. Anyone have a problem with that?

I can understand why CRT want to enforce their CC rules. If they don't, over time, the rules will cease to exist. And I can understand how a fellow boater might feel aggrieved if a popular area he/ she wants to moor up in for a few days is awash with CCers who stay there all year round. What I can't understand is a fellow boater who has a problem with a CCer who plays the rules a bit, maybe doesn't move as much as the rules or 'spirit' suggest they should, if that person is in a quiet area. What difference does it make to anyone if there are one or two boats moored in a mile long stretch of canal? Boaters who have a problem with this are perhaps either jealous or bitter. Otherwise, by nature, perhaps they are the type that told teacher at school when a fellow student stole a test tube from the chemistry class. Or perhaps, the type of person who goes around proudly proclaiming that they have never broken any rules in their life.

This is the third of three boats that I plan to view initially, with a view to buying a liveaboard for one person. I've already posted similar threads about the other two on which I received some great feedback. I'd now welcome any thoughts about this boat, be it price, apparent condition, how it's equipped, or anything else. http://narrowboats.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=255145 Many thanks for any replies!

I'm so tempted to do just that. I love the lines of this boat, I can see it in my chosen colour scheme, it would be perfect in that way. I could park my bike on the tug deck safely, sit out and fish off there too. But it appears to lack light, I'm not good without natural daylight. There doesn't appear to be a shower and the living area seems to lack any furniture. There is a double bed further back in the boat so the 'pull out' bed under the tug deck would be wasted. Still, I'm tempted!

I'll be cc ing but within a limited area (within the law of course) I'll just move a short distance every 2 weeks, as required. I can do at least 6 months without having to use any locks. Might a silly offer on 23K be under 20K do you think?

Cheers. I've already decided to have a pushbike as well, for fitness purposes, which I'll keep on the roof! I'd also like a kayak, but that's another thread I guess!

I really appreciate your replies, and others that have been made. I have a limited amount of money and the need for transport other than my boat. If it's positively dangerous to keep a bike on a cruiser deck I'll have to reconsider things. However: moving the bike from side to side as the towpath changes from side to side is an inconvenience, that's all. If covering the bike (I'd already decided to do that to stop it rusting away) mitigates much of the risk that's really useful to know. Different people have different feelings about different levels of risk. Some are ultra-cautious, others are not. I recently rode a motorbike for a year when I worked in Jakarta. That was pretty risky. Because of that I spent time observing driving/ riding habits there, before getting a bike. And I was extremely alert at all times when I was riding. But I knew, despite these precautions, that I could be involved in an accident that would leave me seriously injured. Or worse. I guess I accepted that risk. When I buy houses I don't have surveys done on them. I suppose you could say I'm a risk taker, but not a reckless one. If having a bike on a cruiser deck is positively dangerous I won't do it. If it means I'm inconvenienced and need to take special care because there's a risk involved, I have a decision to make. Thanks again.