Midnight

I never claimed it would save £millions but it would prevent a few stoppages. Why would the government remove £10m from the grant? Therese Coffey said CRT's role is to maintain the waterways - never mentioned non essentials.

Junior fishing courses on EA waters, two tone van livery, lock poetry, sponsored Facebook adverts ........(add your own here) and I promised not to mention blue signs again so I won't. .... all would fix a paddle or two and prevent a stoppage.

We had similar experience up here. Repairs at Figure of Three cost around £3.5m. A colleague, who was one of the first to go through after it reopened told me they hadn't fixed the hydraulic valve on the offside gate which had been broken for years. When I asked the Regional Director why, he told me it had been fixed but obviously broke again (instantly???). Lightweights!!

To be fair to C&RT, and naturally I always am, there was over 2m of fresh recorded at Aldwark Bridge last week. Flooding up to the top step in the pic is considered trivial by us tough Yorkshire types. 😅

Lock 8 was supposedly worked on in the winter program but clearly bodged! How hard is it to fix a paddle before the other one breaks and causes a stoppage? "Wait until it breaks completely" policy is a disgrace. And don't blame lack of money it's same cost and cheaper than a sponsored Facebook advert

Rochdale & HNC both currently closed again and it's only April 15 "Please be advised navigation remains closed at Lock 28 West on the Diggle Flight on the Huddersfield Narrow Canal due to broken paddles". "We continue to experience significant water management problems at lock 8 on the Rochdale Canal. Leakage through the lock gates is creating ongoing local difficulties in navigation," What happened to Winter Maintenance? When will the C&RT apologists realise Parrry & Co are a waste of space?

With a permanent mooring you would get a license and state your Home Mooring

Maybe they should fix the Vazon Bridge and have a sliding canal 😆

Reported on NBW NBTA said "CRT’s licence surcharge came into effect on 1st April the assciations tells. Unchallenged, the policy will allow CRT to raise licence fees on itinerant boaters in order to price them off the water. " If C&RT raised all licenses to the level of the surcharge would that price everyone off the water or would the NBTA be happy to be paying same as Home Moorers? IMO it would be a good idea for C&RT - extra money and less admin headache.

I live 1400ft above sea level so be nice and I'll let you moor to our front garden.

Fix a few paddles on the Rochdale & Huddersfield though.

Not if they closed the BCN, Grand Union, Coventry and Oxford canals and put the money into keeping the Yorkshire waterways open. (playing another Devil's Advocate). 😜

Yes that may happen and the danger is the extra would probably just get spent on more & more non-essentials. At least it would be a better option than this surcharge idea which is going to be an administrative headache. It wouldn't, but it would fix a few paddles. Many stoppages are caused by minor issues. Letting the ground staff fix a few instead of bringing in contractors might get canals open a lot faster and save a few bob for the bigger jobs.

No I think CRT should increase license fees equally, I think Parry should stop making promises he can't keep, I think the money he has could be better managed. I think the small amount of money that could be redirected from non essentials would fix a few paddles and make life a little bit better on the water. As @Alan de Enfield said "One can disagree with C&RTs management practices but agree they need more income."

I'm also fed up with the CRT apologists. There you go, ......

https://www.narrowboatworld.com/15285-a-criminal-offence Parry in the dock? There is a God! 😆

The Pocklington canal is undergoing restoration. It's a beautiful rural location but access to it isn't straightforward. Easiest route is from Selby on an ebb tide then through Barmby barrage onto the Yorkshire Derwent (EA visitor license required from the lock keeper). There's very few moorings on the river and stretch between the river and canal is challenging. Very shallow with an awkward bend. The first mile of the canal is slow going, shallow and weedy. It's navigable to Bielby now but best moorings and decent pub are at Melbourne. Absolutely worth a visit.

Yes that's the problem. 25 years ago they said "global warming" and we all.thought deckchairs and pina colada. If they had said "global p!ssing down" we would all be steering electric boats.

I think your idea of probably forgetting to tell them will be the standard. 😆

There's very little CRT does that makes sense. Just drink beer and chill 😎 If I see you in summer, we'll drink some more.

I think CRT will expect you to pay. In a marina the EoG would be included in most cases, but in a farmer's field, on a 5 month, stopover, you may be liable to pay the EoG to directly to CRT. Having paid 12 months CCer surcharge you may (or may not) feel you are paying twice for the same thing. Afterall the surcharge is supposedly to cover extended use of the 'facilities' which include mooring. In a debt recovery action you may have a good argument.

I wasnt suggesting anything. Perhaps my question wasn't clear. What would be the position if having paid the CCer surcharge the boater refused to pay the EoG charge for a mooring less than 6 months on the grounds that he/she had already been charged for 12 months usage. If usage includes additional mooring would CRT be charging twice for the same thing?

On the grounds that a CCer refused to pay EoG having been accepted and charged for being a CCer. Only hypothetical as I have a home mooring just wondering if the admin of the surcharge will e complicated. Better all round if we all pay same rate. Still reasonable even if it's the higher of the two.

Whilst I think the baton twirlers campaign is going nowhere I do think the surcharge system is flawed and probably will be dropped before too long. One scenario that has me puzzled is: Boater A is a continuous cruiser so pays the surcharge. Then when winter comes takes an end of garden mooring in a farmer's field for 5 months. Not a home moorer so must be a CCer. He pays the farmer £X a month to tie up to the bank and should pay C&RT EoG charge to float on the water, but hang on he's aleady paid the CCer surcharge. C&RT can't have it both ways so what's the outcome if it went to court?

Didn't work when they tried it with me either and I don't have a traders license.