blodger

Why not start a poll to see what people believe yes, no or don't know or care?

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?

A lot of canals need to be maintained for land drainage/flood control & water supply; the latter of which earns a considerable sum

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!

So what is the skewed result here then? or on the related thread? and, do you feel unable to comment oppositely?

And I do not think any boater and certainly not those engaged in the 'boater discussions' is unaware of the bigger picture and CaRT's remit and, the bigger picture is no excuse for inadequate boater involvemnet in CaRT.

CaRT would like blind support for any of its endeavours; There's probably a majority giving it so the minority do not count?

Very true

Chalk and cheese where membership is meant to bring dividends

The fly in that ointment is that I do not think membership has worked in NHS Foundation Trusts for patients!

And I would say the opposite. There are boaters not bothering to do Llangollen as a consequence.

It is surprising that two thirds of the approching 400 that have voted so far are in favour of 25.00 overstaying charges introduction

Yes. 100/200 watts of solar would obviate a lot of genny/engine running. I would also double the battery capacity by adding a matching battery so as to operate only at high 'State Of Charge' levels

. What else should we be doing to make boaters happier and more trusting of us without prejudicing our other funding streams?. It seems prety clear and obvious if you are intent on maintaining your current user consultation paraphenalia then the formula used for boater representation within it needs amending drastically?

We’re just sad that he’s taking his bat and ball home because he sees only one way of skinning the cat. Is not this a case of trying to turn the tables, I understood from the e-mail extract that John Dodwell had closed the game?

I presume Chris Leah of the Wooden Canal Boat Society and his colleagues peruse CWDF and have enough on with the 5 wooden boats they have. In May they launched a restored Hazel for fitting out as a therapeutic holiday boat at their Heritage Boatyard in Stalybridge. So these days they have the ways and means to do proper restoration work instead of just keeping them afloat. I am not clever enought to do the utube links but search wooden canal boats an a few videos come up including a couple of Hazels dramatic sideways launch

It is good to see one's comments in print and it shows the wide disparity of views that get hidden within a percentage otherwise. I was surprised how high enforcemnent game as a priority given its costs. I think it is important that say over half of overstayers get a patrol notice fortnightly and perhaps there should be a a sort of points system akin to driving licence points based on the number of patrol notices predicating the further action etc that is easily understood. Practice probably varies but it seems that patrol notices stop for a boat that has not moved or known transgressors ignored with the consequence that they think they have gotten away with it or they have tacit permission. Just an observation

Perhaps that needs adding to the agenda of these ad hoc local boater meetings if auctioning moorings and, presumably more expensive ones, as a CaRT policy/procedeure is leading to diminished use and adding to congestion elsewhere. CaRT can change such policy without recourse to revising the 1995 Act?

You mean just ignore the provisions of the 1995 act

If it were possible to implement I suspect they would find that it did not cure any of the 'congestion' problems that current and imminent enforcement and improvement therein are in the main expected to resolve They would have to go further and say that you must not leave your home mooring without good reason!

Surely, the maps should be for those issued with a patrol notice for non-compliance, not everyone. I have often thought that patrol notices were pretty uninformative and not worth collecting

I would say the opposite as it is not the direction I would like CaRT to take though it would not affect me much if they did, depending on what former overstayers at VMs did instead?

I am sure he and CaRT will not necessarily see it that way

To cure no charge when starting or on tickover increasing the wattage of the charge warning light often fixes. There will be threads on here about putting a resistor in parallel with the charge lamp to do the same. Wiring in another light does the same and seeing whether it works for your alt and speeds