blodger
-
Posts
1,735 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by blodger
-
-
Yes you are right but what I was trying to day (badly) is while all this is happening we are not communicating and in the mean time things are happening or not happening within CRT and we need to be talking to them.
In some ways we are I hope through this forum.
BLHA, Boat Licence Holders' Association appeals to me. If it end up too wide of licence holders then I begin to loose interest.
-
Most people will join something if it is free but would they be commited? Time would tell. I guess the people who act as officers would need a fair bit of three own money, I can assure you that traveling to all the meetings and meetings with CRT take a lot of loose change. Out of interest I have looked at my Railway Account and in the last 10 months have spent £837 just to attend all the meetings.
Unfortunately, I think you are right. There would have to be a membership fee to endeavour to cover the associations basic costs so that fundraising was for canal use rather than expenses/core costs.
Servicing a free membership could be inordinately expensive if it takes off
-
Dean. It seems if you took this poll to narrowboatworld you could get a massive affirmative vote
-
How would the funds be raised? From what sources?
I would advocate a much simpler association, with free membership, but not limited to licence holders - anyone who agrees with the aims of the association could join. The association would then campaign for boaters and generally the maintenance of navigation on the canals, representing to C&RT, and could also assist members' fund raising (and spending) campaigns (as any such campaigns would likely be fairly local).
I think the common bond of licence holding is important. Affiliate membership for others would be my recommendation
-
Anyone can open the narrowboatworld web page and vote. Why is it portrayed as a boater's vote?
-
I am presuming you are meaning that along with fundraising willbe seats at decision making within CaRT or at least equivalence to NABO?
-
IMO we don't want to go down that route if you want a free membership I think you can get IWA with a subscription to the Towpath Telegraph not sure what message that sends out but thats an issue for them. For me what's needed is more members with a passion for the waterways who can volunteer some time to bring issues to CRT's or members attention that they should be aware of.
The daily survey of Stoke Breune visitor moorings is a great example of how much more powerful a submission to the SEVM consultation would have been if we had a similar exercise for Foxton and other sites at the time. A lesson learnt for me where in future NABO perhaps could tap into the goodwill of forum members if there was a common interest.
I am not after free membership. The OP says why not NABO. I am just thinking that NABO has an opportunity to recruit if it wants to and, an incentive might help
Even if CaRT deigns only to communicate with them regarding boaty things they need to do something to be more attractive to the majority of boaters!
-
So 90% ish of boaters are unrepresented. A frightening thought
Perhaps the ball is in Nabo's court; If they want to increase membership and be more representative and, if they have been following the connected threads on here, they could offer discounted membership to CWDF contributors for a limited period?
-
Nice and informative. Honestly wouldn't of guessed they were in favour of overstaying charges.
Worth saving the 25.00 membership fee for the first overstaying fine then methinks
-
They don't seem obliged to. Even though there has been alot of critisism of 'boaters' being self-centred, I get the feeling it is because the initial hope of dialogue with CRT has been tarnished by tokenism.
And it is incumbent that CaRT now advise what changes they plan re-consultation/liaison in lieu of the previous lacking channels
-
Comparisons are of little value unless you are comparing like for like. There are a few fundamental differences between the NT and CaRT. In some cases people have expressed a common wish for a subscription membership, but the view is held for a number of different reasons. One I believe is, the hope that a membership gives some ownership of the problems the waterways face. That membership would encourage transparency and that the membership could also influence direction.
Every disgruntled and marginalised boater is a bad advocate for a charity. Being a boater requires a large financial outlay and a real long term commitment to the waterways. One thing's for sure, until boaters feel themselves to be valued and respected. The war of words and deeds will descend even further into the mire. We lose because of our commitment and the directors will walk away on a good pension. Only then will the level of their commitment to the waterways become apparent. For boaters it is often a lifestyle choice and for some its a job.
I still believe that a subscription membership and what that entails is the way forward. It is a single rallying point that can draw together the many disparate opinions. It will be opposed by the Directors and trustees because they will see it as taking away part of their powerbase. That I feel would be a good position because at this time its a very one sided event.
I too see merit in a subscription membership but only if the membership elected the trustees of the charity from its membership with the trustees employing the management. If that means the canals become a linear nature reserve rather than a navigation so be it. That is democracy. Maintaining the navigation could however be the primary constitutional aim and objective. Regardless. changing to a membership base would mean virtually starting again as changing your constitution is not easy with the charity commission.
-
But that excludes hirers.
It excludes possibly more than hirers but I sincerely think CaRT sees boaters as the licence payers and the rest as part of the 10m
-
Boater = person with a boat and not alot in the old bank acount
Perhaps in the context of dialogue with CaRT a boater to them is someone who is paying a licence fee
-
I asked the question because the term is used as if we are all the same, with the same views and aspirations, and yet a quick look at this forum suggests the opposite. So i ask again, what exactly do people understand when the word boater is used? And let's, just as a novelty, take the smart Alec comments as read! :-)
With regard to the "boaters meetings" held so far (and I have attended two so far) they cannot represent more than the personal views of those who take the trouble to attend, but if you want a dialogue with CRT I would suggest that you you are going to have to do one of two things: form a new organisation, which might taKe a long time to become acknowledged by CRT or join an existing one which is accepted as representing at least reasonable proportion of the boating community.
Howard
And there you are back to the fact that existing organisations do not fully represent the variety of boaters or sufficiently for many to be inclined to join them in the hope of improving them. CaRT are happy with the way things are and can carry on regardless. I do not see anything wrong with another subset of boaters, those that are internet savvy using CWDF, interfering as they have and gaining acceptance rather than being shrugged off.
-
I'm afraid I don't know who John Sloan is and that was one of my points that I was trying to make. John Sloan did not email me nor did he telephone me or write and ask me if I wanted to attend (I am not complaining about that, why should he contact me in those ways ). I do not always read the forums and when I do I generally
only look at the recent posts list rather the view new content. So I may well have missed that invitation. As I have said I am moored in the Selby Boatyard and there at least a half dozen other boaters there, probably more, who also had the right to ask for one of the limited places at those meetings for northern boaters. There are at least three of those boaters who have never even heard of CWDF but might have wanted to go to one of those meetings but were never given the opportunity to make that known. Canal World Discussion Forums is not the centre of the boating world therefore a lot of boaters, I would hazard a guess at the majority, have no idea about the discussions that go on this forum or that this forum even exists and that, to my mind at least, is unfair on some boaters who are paying their way like the rest of us
Pete
I do not think anyone is suggesting that CWDF is the centre of boating but a lot of boaters do use it and an initiative was undertaken because of it. I do not see what is unfair about it. It was attempting to address the unfainess of the lack of boater influence on CaRT. Sally Ash is intimating that it can continue by some re-jigging of its consultations and liaisons about which we are awaiting, etc.
-
Silly question here...
What are the advantages to the batteries you have to top up, as opposed to the batteries you don't have to do anything with (i think these are called sealed?)?
The ones you can top up are usually cheaper and it means you can test indivisual cells with a hydrometer. To stop gassing in the sealed ones thay have added other metals to the lead which in my view diminish their performance and longevity. Even sealed batteries need to breath and as a result loose electolyte which you cannot replace. Sealed are often called no or low maintenance.
Get into conversation with other boaters and listen to some of their advice and take it with a pinch of salt; Everyone has their preference based upon their experience.
-
The other alternative is to set up a new organisation, though that would be a lot more work than working with an existing one. If it's primary aim is to make an impact on how CRT run the waterways, I'm not sure that many would join or gain funding to support its work. I feel that the top priority is to focus on how to raise major funding for our waterways.
One thing that the economic recession brings home to nearly everyone is the necessity to make the most of what one has.
Throwing more money at problems or into services is currently not an option.
I do not see a boater's organisation's top priority would be raising money for the waterways. CaRT as a charity has that within its remit. Even then I would not see it as its top priority. In changing to CaRT from BW there should have been a major management overhaul not carrying on with the same old fudge. IMHO CaRT needs to manage its resources better and in that it needs the support of those that use what it is charitably offering.
-
What am I wrong about? Please clarify
Did you miss the smiley. It's deadly serious humour
-
Thanks. I think Cotswoldman, Jenlyn and anyone else prepared to devote effort to improve management of our waterways might achieve more through joining an organisation, commanding the trust and support of fellow members and representing their views at meetings with CRT.
It has not missed you that that organisation does not exist hence this endeavour then?
-
I am interested in this as accusations have been made and I would be interested in any evidence. Anyone can make accusations. Are all the other organisations implicated?
Why not start a poll to see what people believe yes, no or don't know or care?
-
It would be churlish to criticise somebody for seeking to improve.
Sally joined this forum for about ten minutes a couple of years ago but then withdrew from the fray; her voluntary return to that fray should at least engender respect for her.
Yes, but I would say it was a positive result of the meetings that someone with the title 'head of boating' who to put it politely 'was out of touch' earned boaters respect thereby for the first time in years
-
I note that Sally Ash, CaRT Head of Boating, has been given plaudits for her role and involvement in the boater discussions. Correct me if this is not a sea change in the esteem with which she was previously held?
-
ER, not quite: if there were no boats, we would not need to have canals. They were (though it's often forgotten by many people nowadays) built so that boats could navigate them. Anglers could find other waters in which to fish, ramblers could ramble around other parts of the countryside and, doubtless, a certain section of the cycling public could find other places through which to hurtle.
A lot of canals need to be maintained for land drainage/flood control & water supply; the latter of which earns a considerable sum
-
Regarding management of the canal system, by far the most efficient way of organising boater involvement is via discussion with representatives from organisations. CRT simply cannot afford to devote resources with everyone who would like their opinion to be heard. By joining one or more organisation that supports your view, you are more likely to be listened to.
Boaters are in general the greatest supporters of our waterways, but also stand to lose most if CRT fails to run a sustainable business. What I think we need is a new organisation driven by enthusiastic boaters to explore ways of raising funds for our waterways or to tackle work that would otherwise need to be done by CRT employees or contractors. Alternatively, an existing organisation could take this on.
I think what Sally is saying is that maybe they need to re-jig how they consult & liaise with related organisations to ensure the boaters' voice is heard without another organisation informal or formal.
Cinically, what they do not want is effective boater input but watered down boater input as previously!
Association, a suggestion.
in General Boating
Posted
Yes we are in trouble. What I mean is they will follow what is said on here just as they will be taking note and comfort from the meaningless poll results on "Narrowboatworld" with regards to overstaying fines