Bristolfashion

There are 2 day CRT visitor moorings before the Glory Hole (and Brayford Pool) when coming from Torksey. Today, there was loads of space there - but that's not always the case. The moorings just after the Glory Hole were pretty full yesterday, but lots of space further on before the lock.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/gLyX6sFNbQVhmzWA7 A short video of us going through Ferry bridge https://photos.app.goo.gl/YBdwr2Yjvek1tZeA8 And the head of the navigation at Cobblers Lock. Having wandered up and measured it - that's a bit optimistic on their part - we measured it at 1.75m

We got through! We walked up from South Kyme and measured the clearance at 175cm. Our air draft is 168cm with everything off the roof. We also walked into Sleaford and, fortunately, met a couple of guys from the restoration team. On the day, we reckon we had 3 or 4cm of clearance, so maybe the water has risen a cm or so. Video / pix to follow.

Hello all, Having arrived at South Kyme on the Sleaford Navigation, SOMEONE forgot to look at the height mark for the Ferry / Halfpenny Hatch Bridge beyond South Kyme on the last lock, so we don't know if we'll fit. Does anyone either know the actual height - or have an account of a successful or unsuccessful attempt - and the boat air draft involved. Otherwise, has anyone moored in the vicinity of the new winding hole beyond South Kyme - a shorter trip on foot to check it out. Otherwise, we'll trudge up there tomorrow carrying highly sophisticated surveying equipment - boathook, tape measure & rope! As ever, thanks for any info.

In the depths of winter, on a cold frosty day, when no other boat is moving, there's something quite pleasant in sitting on the boat in a full, narrow lock for a cuppa (always on deck and ready to move should a boat hove into view - although that's never happened) I was just going to add that here on the River Witham, the locks accommodate 15'8", so a single gate gives you 7'10" - so never any need to open both gates for a narrowboat. Other bits of the system are probably similar.

Sure, but many people draw pilotage plans as not to scale charts as well as notes.

Whilst one should always refer to published, accurate charts when navigating, it is standard practice to produce a pilotage plan which draws together tide times, places to moor, relevant VHF channels etc for the trip in question . Many people include a a not to scale "chart" to highlight navigation marks & characteristics, hazards, prominent landmarks etc. I suspect that's what the OP meant.

As far as I can determine, we're a bit narrow - 6'81/2" maybe, so in "normal" conditions, we'd only open one gate. If there's any chance of a problem - wind, turbulence, gate not quite opening fully etc we'll open the other one a bit.

Network access fee, From the CRT .... "The annual fee payable to us is calculated by multiplying your mooring rate (the rate charged to customers mooring in your marina) by an agreed gross mooring capacity (GMC) and then taking 9% of the resultant figure. Read our code of practice for determining GMC." I can understand CRT focussing on the absolute essentials in these cash strapped times - the usage of CRT facilities by those not paying for them has been increasing, damage (and the consequent repair costs) is also up. On the other side, most boaters have toilet & shower facilities on board. We've probably all seen the figure of (up to) £6000 for a severe sanitary blockage caused by improper use. I watched a van dweller pull up, dump two big bags of rubbish & fill up with water the other day, something CRT can't really afford.

No. Wood can only be burned in a Defra approved stove (in a smoke control zone). Authorised fuels or smokeless fuels (as defined) can, of course, also be burned in a Defra approved appliance. Here's the full description from the government. What you can burn in smoke control areas In a smoke control area you can only burn fuel on the list of authorised fuels, or any of the following ‘smokeless’ fuels, unless you’re using a Defra approved appliance: anthracite semi-anthracite gas low volatile steam coal Exempt appliances that can burn unauthorised fuels Unauthorised fuels, such as wood, can only be burned in exempt appliances such as some boilers, cookers and stoves. You must only use the types of fuel that the manufacturer says can be used in the appliance. Outdoor ovens, burners and barbecues You can use outdoor barbecues, chimineas, fireplaces or pizza ovens in smoke control areas. If your appliance uses a chimney on the roof of a building (for example, a summerhouse), you can only burn authorised fuel unless it’s an exempt appliance. Garden bonfires You’re allowed garden bonfires in smoke control areas but you need to follow the rules on bonfires.

The actual legislation is quite interesting - and probably better than the rather poorly worded summaries/reporting floating around. There is no specified "lighting up"period and the defences are useful. It does appear that, whilst the original legislation says "buildings" elsewhere it is indicated that boats can be included. As others have said, it's "authorised fuels" (indicated on the packaging) in any stove, wood only in a Defra approved stove. Handy to know if a jobsworth or Karen comes a-knocking! (1)Dark smoke shall not be emitted from a chimney of any building, and if, on any day, dark smoke is so emitted, the occupier of the building shall be guilty of an offence. (2)Dark smoke shall not be emitted from a chimney (not being a chimney of a building) which serves the furnace of any fixed boiler or industrial plant, and if, on any day, dark smoke is so emitted, the person having possession of the boiler or plant shall be guilty of an offence. (3)This section does not apply to emissions of smoke from any chimney, in such classes of case and subject to such limitations as may be prescribed in regulations made by the Secretary of State, lasting for not longer than such periods as may be so prescribed. (4)In any proceedings for an offence under this section, it shall be a defence to prove— (a)that the alleged emission was solely due to the lighting up of a furnace which was cold and that all practicable steps had been taken to prevent or minimise the emission of dark smoke; (b)that the alleged emission was solely due to some failure of a furnace, or of apparatus used in connection with a furnace, and that— (i)the failure could not reasonably have been foreseen, or, if foreseen, could not reasonably have been provided against; and (ii)the alleged emission could not reasonably have been prevented by action taken after the failure occurred; or (c)that the alleged emission was solely due to the use of unsuitable fuel and that— (i)suitable fuel was unobtainable and the least unsuitable fuel which was available was used; and (ii)all practicable steps had been taken to prevent or minimise the emission of dark smoke as the result of the use of that fuel; or that the alleged emission was due to the combination of two or more of the causes specified in paragraphs (a) to (c) and that the other conditions specified in those paragraphs are satisfied in relation to those causes respectively.

Er, yes!

Thanks Tony - the advice for Trent (for general leisure boating) says to use "large fenders" but with no specific advice for narrowboats. I wondered what that meant and if anyone had found fenders other than standard narrowboat ones useful.

Hi all, Planning our cruise as we approach the Trent. Which fenders do narrowboats need on the tidal Trent - conventional, slim narrowboat (rope/rubber) style, tyres or yacht type spherical or tubular inflatable types? Thanks, as ever, for any advice.

Yep - I'm just pointing out that all these arguements about fairness (a.k.a the other bloke should pay more) are a bit risible.

On thinking about this, it's a bit weird that the CRT environmental approach (25% discount for an electric boat) rather goes against the "charge the rich more" approach as electric boats tend to be newer and rather more expensive and so, presumably, the purchases of the wealthier boater. Why should I, as a slimmer type, pay for all that material in the XXXXXL department‽ 😀

Trousers! All the sizes in one make/style are the same cost. Why? 'Cos the variable cost (the difference in materials & transport costs) is insignificant when compared to the fixed cost.

Although, interestingly, there is a strong correlation between shoe size and wealth!

Having a "step" in pricing between "narrow" and "wide" does make some sense 'cos of the way the canals were designed. Still, I've long given up expecting any strictly logical pricing regime for anything as there are so many variables, opinions & ambitions lobbed in. In general, those that benefit from the vagaries tend to think that the pricing model is splendid, those that don't, don't

Yep, the Half Moon at Wilstone is a great pub and serves the fine Tring brewery beers. The walk over to Tring is a bit longer, but worthwhile and can take in the nearby farm shop. Try Nona's for lunch. Statue of Ronnie Barker in Aylesbury basin, the legendary Friars music venue and a tribute to David Bowie nearby. The medieval Kings Head pub near the basin serves the excellent Chiltern Ales. The Aylesbury arm is definitely worth it.

Um, those are different prices for different products. It's not really an economic theory, it's a pricing model - I've been involved in a lot of these - at a very basic level, theoretical factory gate prices are the cost of production + an allowance for profit. The question I'm asking is whether the cost of running the canal system varies significantly enough with different boat lengths, widths & broad categories of usage to justify the administration associated with differential pricing. What you are doing is drawing in other reasons for differential pricing - wealth, with a rather poor proxy measure of boat size for example. I could just as well say that "being in London" is a proxy for wealth as, statistically, Londoners are wealthier than other parts of the country. There really is no reason to believe that the owner of a relatively new, rather nice 45' narrowboat is poorer than the owner of a 60', 1978 model in mediocre condition. The CRT also pull in environment with their electric boat discounts. Now, there's nothing wrong with using pricing to achieve social or environmental goals etc, but is it cost effective or appropriate for the CRT? I don't know the answer, I'm just asking the question. In some ways, basing the pricing on the shoe size of the skipper makes as much sense!

So should we all pay a different price for a litre of milk or loaf of bread? Should the 60 foot Braidbar with swanky fitout pay more than a basic scratch & dent 60 footer? Should the rich owner of a 30' springer pay more than a poor owner of the same model? Keep it simple. Flat price, lower bureaucracy, complete clarity. BTW, I was only considering the powered boat licence - fair enough that canoeists etc have some other licence fee. Although a reintroduction of the cycling licence..... I used to buy one 😀

Let's just charge everyone exactly the same - dump length & width calculations, surcharges and network access charges. Dividing the current CRT income from licences by the number of boats on the system minus those unlicensed gives a figure of around £1500 each. Simple - no under declaring length, arguing about charges for CC vs Home moorer etc. It'd cost me around another £250, but it'd be worth it for the peace and quiet! 😀 In reality, it's hard to see that boat size really makes that much difference to the cost on the system. The only drawback is that a few people only seem to keep breathing in order to have an endless, futile argument. 😁

Thanks Tonka - having sold our little, 45 year old yacht, we were missing engine problems, blocked heads, frightening weather, inscrutable electrics and mysterious leaks. 😀 As to whether we're yet boat owners, watch this space!