Steilsteven

That's because they aren't entitled to charge when red boards are displayed and neither is anyone else. Keith

Have you actually seen Bristol Harbour? Keith

Yes I remember that, a few others had similar notices too. Reading Borough Council has had signs at various locations for many years that demanded a charge for mooring. They even employed someone to collect the payments for a while but he didn't have much success which is what led to RBC using DE. As riparian owners, RBC have the right to charge for ''landing'' and/or for use of facilities ( my own interpretation ) such as landing stages, wharves, mooring rings or bollards. BUT, what is unclear is do they have a right to charge for the first 24 hours and can they forbid mooring at certain locations? The stretch upstream of Caversham Bridge used to have no restrictions but now mooring is forbidden for about a mile. The PRN includes anchoring or mooring for ''a reasonable time'' without charge, The Thames Conservancy Act interprets this as 24 hours but if circumstances ( such as strong stream, or breakdown etc ) require longer then the master of a vessel should be within his rights not to pay. Let me say that I have no legal experience, this is just my opinion from what I've read. Keith

Update on 19/08/2021: Further to the notice below, we are pleased to advise that works at Lock 104, Southcote Lock have now been successfully completed. We are aware there are many boats waiting patiently to navigate through the lock so we have asked that our Volunteer Lock Keepers attend site tomorrow from 9am to assist with the safe passage through Southcote Lock. Thank you for your continued patience.

https://whatsupwithamsterdam.com/houseboats/

Is that how you'd refer to Amsterdam then? Plenty of houseboats in that city. Keith

You'll need to ask Tonka what a linger linger is. Keith

Sounds about right. Keith

I don't see this as particularly good news, it could mean returning to 24 hours maximum stay at most EA moorings but we shall see. When TVM ran the trial I thought it a great idea and was disappointed when they didn't get the contract, but I take it from this announcement that EA aren't allowed to award such contracts anyway. Keith

The one above Southcote Lock is fairly well hidden and could easily be overlooked but it extends all the way to Southcote hatches. Towney and Aldermaston Locks also have embankments above them unless I'm mistaken. Keith

My own experience of the current ( in 2018 at least ) owner/skipper is that he is an absolute gent and very considerate boater. Keith

It still is! http://www.tranquilrose.co.uk/cruising-schedule-2021.php Keith

The Kennet Navigation has a number of embankments so as it was completed in 1724 do they deserve a place in your league table? Keith

No, whoever it was disappeared sharply after they'd done the damage. Keith

I've known of sloppy/fresh poop being disposed of in bins by people who have never seen a composting loo let alone own one. Waste from composting loos, provided it has shavings or similar added regularly and stored for a couple of months, is almost dry and odourless so there is no reason why it shouldn't go to landfill. I've also known of people emptying their cassette toilets into the cut. No doubt there have been instances of pump out tanks being discharged into canals. Perhaps the only answer to all these bandits is to ban toilets on boats altogether and install public loos every hundred yards along all waterways. Keith

Exactly. As all hoses are now only attached temporarily the risk is reduced, in my eyes at least. The big question is, have the water companies insisted on the current set up or has EA just gone ahead on the assumption that what they've done will pass any inspection? My guess is the latter. Keith

Your comment about the spade and digging holes to empty the toilet reminded me of when I enquired about a houseboat mooring on the Basingstoke canal a few years ago. The mooring had power hook up and mains water but no sewerage facilities. When I asked what the previous tenant did I was told that they buried it in the small piece of land next to the mooring, they'd been doing that since the 1960s! Keith

The category has nothing to do with the river water, it is about risk. As I said earlier, the old set up of permanently attached hoses presented a risk of the end of the hose being left lying either on the ground or in the river. Both these scenarios could lead to contamination should back flow occur for any reason e.g. if the water main was interrupted for repairs. Some interesting info here- https://www.arrowvalves.co.uk/media/wysiwyg/pdfs/Water_Regs_Tutorial_2-HU_Taps.pdf Keith

Not any more it doesn't. There are just 1/2'' taps now. Keith

And some of them spend those two weeks on their boat in the marina. Keith

I do this and try to make sure that it's 30 metres from any water course, which I believe meets the regulations. Keith

I gave up my long term mooring ( after 8 years ) because a) I was retiring so no longer needed the security b) it would mean more money in my pocket even taking into account increased fuel costs c) because spending months on end seeing the same faces and view defeats the object of living on a boat and d) long term moorings mean spending at least two days each way travelling over the same ground every time you go out. Also, your point about increasing fees, how would that improve matters? Has charging more tax on 4x4s reduced their numbers? Keith

We drink it of course! Have you never heard of Bear Grylls? Keith

It used to be ( and probably still is ) that any boat arriving at Teddington lock had to declare that if had a sea toilet ,whereupon it would be sealed by the lock staff before it was allowed to continue onto the non tidal Thames. Keith