Constant cruising

[Alan de Enfield]

24 minutes ago, Mikexx said:

 

Some do, and some don't. Some of the older ones, and their moorers, make no contribution to CaRT.

 

Why do you think otherwise?

I know - I have previously had moorings in both 'types', but the majority by far are subject to the NAA which requires them to demand licences from their moorers.

[doratheexplorer]

13 hours ago, sirweste said:

 

 

I've had the same job and a no home mooring (so been CCing) for 3.5 years now. So I'm an example of how I haven't messed it up for the "rest" of you, how permanent fixed location employment and CCing are not exclusive and how you won't fall foul of regulation. 

The "spirit of the licence" is a load of nonsense and is, in general, people's way of imposing their opinion, of how the canals should be used, onto others.

I don't have a massive annual range, I also don't just hop around one village (as in Matty's example). I explore, visit favorite places (more than once or twice), move to new locations based on festivals / christmas parties / events etc.

 

If CRT are happy, then that's what matters. Simple. 

 

I personally have no interest, other than the conveniences, in living in a marina i.e. floating caravan park. While I had zero interest in the canals when I bought my boat 4 years ago I now love them and cherish the ability to live in a new place every month or two. While CCing is a bit tougher than regular living at times it's well worth it, all you folks permanently moored are missing out in my opinion.

Some of the shite that folk sprout on here would make you / a newbie think that canals are a different place to what they are.

 

Credit to @doratheexplorer's contribution to this thread, standing up to the extremists, sticking up for common sense.

Aww thanks sir

Seems like common sense sometimes takes a back seat to finding any old reason to rage about things. 

[Dr Bob]

8 hours ago, Mikexx said:

 

...... is contributing to the waterways considerably more than those in marinas who don't pay a license, apart from the exceptional excursion on the canals. Yet it is those in marinas who seem to complain the most about CCers who are also holding down a job.

Where on earth does this come from?

Anyone in a marina not paying a license will not be using the canals, so lets forget about them.

Are those in marinas complaining about CCers who are holding down jobs? I''m not. I started this argument by saying CC'ing and working were mutually exclusive. That was a bit tongue in cheek. I have absolutely no issue with working CCers. I do have an aversion to CMers. There is a huge difference. A HUGE difference. My post was to alert the OP (who has since done a runner) so he understood the difference between CC'ing and CM'ing.

This should not be about 'them' and 'us'.

[ditchcrawler]

9 hours ago, Mikexx said:

 

What is ironic is the person who moves the minimum distance every 2 weeks is contributing to the waterways considerably more than those in marinas who don't pay a license, apart from the exceptional excursion on the canals. Yet it is those in marinas who seem to complain the most about CCers who are also holding down a job.

There are very few in marinas that dont pay a licence

 

[sirweste]

@Dr Bob Nowhere in your original replies did you mention anything about "constant moorers". But anyhow, the tongue in cheek doesn't work very well over blank text does it, it genuinely looked like you were against CCers who move around a single fixed location - as I do

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

Aww thanks sir

Seems like common sense sometimes takes a back seat to finding any old reason to rage about things. 

No problem! It does, especially about topics like this, gets the extremists riled right up!!!

[Dr Bob]

15 hours ago, sirweste said:

 

I've had the same job and a no home mooring (so been CCing) for 3.5 years now. So I'm an example of how I haven't messed it up for the "rest" of you, how permanent fixed location employment and CCing are not exclusive and how you won't fall foul of regulation. 

 

 

.....and I fully agree with you. I applaud your ability to work and CC. You, and many other that have responded are not 'messing it up' for the 'rest' of us. Again I fully agree. Well done.

Unfortunately, there are many others who are registered as CC'ers who CM. They are the ones that will 'mess it up'. By intentionally overstaying on moorings, the CRT are 'sensitized' to the issue so try to impose restrictions to stop the problem. This then inconveniences others. CM'ing will mess it up for the rest of us.

I would guess ALL of the non CC'ers who have responded on this thread are not against CC'ers in any way. I guess they are against CM'ers who break the rules.

I do disagree with your comment on the 'spirit of the rules'. The problem with the law is that it is very difficult to define excatly the difference between CC'ing and CM'ing and is open to different interpretation. The law has not been tested in any significant way so until legal precedence is set, we will not know. Therefore I (and I guess many others) will use the 'spirit of the law' as my guide to what is right and wrong.

 

[sirweste]

10 hours ago, Boater Sam said:

In my book Sirweste you are boating as I would interpret the spirit of the licence, but you are not a load of nonsense. Long may you continue to be an example to others as a perfect CCer.

Interesting, from your original posts I genuinely wouldn't have thought I'd meet your "spirit of the licence" interpretation. I don't go very far y'know and I tend to lurk around one area for a bit before changing it up. In the summer I was at the same spot for about 5 weeks out of 7, love that spot

[Mikexx]

41 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

There are very few in marinas that dont pay a licence

 

If that is the case then I apologise.

 

Many marinas are such boaters aren't obliged to have a license, and so obtain week, or month licences to cover the time they are outside of the marina. There are some who live-aboard and never leave. I knew one who couldn't venture out for months due to river levels.

[sirweste]

"spirit of the licence" was the phrase that was used earlier. In my opinion there's no such thing. I base my general cruising pattern on the guidelines presented by CRT. I make sure they're happy as a minimum. This year I may end up doing not much more than the required 30 odd miles range, but they are happy, so I'm within the rules (that they have made up). No spirit, just the rules.

Some years I've done a big trip out so massively exceeded the required range. Just depends what life's up to really.

[Jerra]

3 minutes ago, Mikexx said:

Many marinas are such boaters aren't obliged to have a license,

Many marinas?   As far as I am aware they are in a very definite minority.  It might be more correct to say some marinas or even a few marinas but many is doubtful to say the least IMO.

[Alan de Enfield]

38 minutes ago, sirweste said:

No problem! It does, especially about topics like this, gets the extremists riled right up!!!

It does raise the question over the "intent", and the meaning of 'Bona Fide navigation'.

 

In C&RT Vs Myers the Judge said :

 

7.22.3
I consider the requirement imposed by CRT that a substantial part of the network is used cannot be justified by relying solely on section 17(3). That section requires “bona fide navigation throughout the period of the licence” not “bona fide navigation throughout the canal network”. The requirement is temporal not geographical.

 

Thus, it is not the distance moved, but 'why you moved'.

 

If you simply move every 14 days to comply with the Law, then you are not Bona Fide navigating.

 

If you move every 14 days because you enjoy boating then you are Bona Fide navigating.

 

However, it is up to the boater to convince C&RT that they are moving because they want to, and not because C&RT or the Law requires them to move.

Edited March 12, 2019 by Alan de Enfield

[Naughty Cal]

On 05/03/2019 at 12:33, Alan de Enfield said:

We had limited Guinness drinkers and ended up throwing more away than we sold so we changed over to 'surger' cans which even hardened Guinness drinkers said was a 'nice pint' and when used on the commercial ultra sound machine the head was as good as any Dublin pulled pint.

 

It was easy & convenient to keep in the 'drinks fridges' at 5*C, freeing up more space in the cellar.

 

Apparently the 'domestic' surger unit sold in supermarkets was a bit of a failure.

Liam refuses to drink those. He says if he wants a can he will have one at home.

[doratheexplorer]

2 hours ago, sirweste said:

@Dr Bob Nowhere in your original replies did you mention anything about "constant moorers". But anyhow, the tongue in cheek doesn't work very well over blank text does it, it genuinely looked like you were against CCers who move around a single fixed location - as I do

 

You weren't the only one who thought that - it's led to most of the arguing on this thread.  Saying it was tongue in cheek - looks more like back-peddalling.

[Murflynn]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

...................................... it is up to the boater to convince C&RT that they are moving because they want to, and not because C&RT or the Law requires them to move.

which will be hard to prove, given the terms of the original post.

[doratheexplorer]

2 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

.....and I fully agree with you. I applaud your ability to work and CC. You, and many other that have responded are not 'messing it up' for the 'rest' of us. Again I fully agree. Well done.

Unfortunately, there are many others who are registered as CC'ers who CM. They are the ones that will 'mess it up'. By intentionally overstaying on moorings, the CRT are 'sensitized' to the issue so try to impose restrictions to stop the problem. This then inconveniences others. CM'ing will mess it up for the rest of us.

I would guess ALL of the non CC'ers who have responded on this thread are not against CC'ers in any way. I guess they are against CM'ers who break the rules.

I do disagree with your comment on the 'spirit of the rules'. The problem with the law is that it is very difficult to define excatly the difference between CC'ing and CM'ing and is open to different interpretation. The law has not been tested in any significant way so until legal precedence is set, we will not know. Therefore I (and I guess many others) will use the 'spirit of the law' as my guide to what is right and wrong.

 

You don't need to worry that the law hasn't been tested or fall back on vague terms like 'spirit of the law' - CRT have helpfully provided guidance as to what they want.  Even better, if a boater is on the wrong side of the line, they will send warning letters before taking any action. 

1 hour ago, Naughty Cal said:

Liam refuses to drink those. He says if he wants a can he will have one at home.

The majority of drinks served in pubs can be had at home.  I didn't realise people only went to pubs to try mystery drinks, I thought there was a lot more to it than that.

[Alan de Enfield]

15 minutes ago, Murflynn said:

which will be hard to prove, given the terms of the original post.

Indeed 

 

We sometime wander so far off the subject that we forget the original question.

 

"Can anyone suggest a route with 14day moorings and facilities, that would keep CRT happy for 12months.Working full time in Solihull and new to canal system?"

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

"Can anyone suggest a route with 14day moorings and facilities, that would keep CRT happy for 12months.Working full time in Solihull and new to canal system?"

 

 

I can! I can!  Me! Me!

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, doratheexplorer said:

I can! I can!  Me! Me!

I am sure you can, but, by his own admission, irrespective of how far he travels the vessel to which the application relates will be not be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid.(Bona Fide being temporal not geographical)

 

Whilst your movements are because of the 'love of boating'

[doratheexplorer]

24 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I am sure you can, but, by his own admission, irrespective of how far he travels the vessel to which the application relates will be not be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid.(Bona Fide being temporal not geographical)

 

Whilst your movements are because of the 'love of boating'

Please don't comment on my 'movements' - it's unsavoury.  My real reason for boating is so I can charge up the battery on my eco-fan.

[sirweste]

Interesting one this. Sometimes I navigate to a new location simply because I've hit the 15th day, other times I navigate to enable a water fill up sometimes simply to get somewhere new and finally (very rarely; usually if there's someone round as an activity to do) to just go boating.

 

I don't see how you can draw a distinction really, I am still genuinely navigating, just the reason for navigation changes from week to week

[Paul C]

18 minutes ago, sirweste said:

Interesting one this. Sometimes I navigate to a new location simply because I've hit the 15th day, other times I navigate to enable a water fill up sometimes simply to get somewhere new and finally (very rarely; usually if there's someone round as an activity to do) to just go boating.

 

I don't see how you can draw a distinction really, I am still genuinely navigating, just the reason for navigation changes from week to week

"Bona fide for navigation". Its part of the legal wording; and it would be determined by a court or judge. If you believed you were genuinely navigating but an opponent in court (probably CRT) didn't, both sides would be obliged to construct an argument to convince the judge (or jury in higher courts) their was right and the others was wrong. Without guidance on each and every possible scenario, I don't think its possible to say what might happen in court.

[Murflynn]

20 minutes ago, sirweste said:

Interesting one this. Sometimes I navigate to a new location simply because I've hit the 15th day, other times I navigate to enable a water fill up sometimes simply to get somewhere new and finally (very rarely; usually if there's someone round as an activity to do) to just go boating.

 

I don't see how you can draw a distinction really, I am still genuinely navigating, just the reason for navigation changes from week to week

 

not worthy of a meaningful reply.

[doratheexplorer]

If we're going to try and make everyone without a mooring, stick to the exact letter of the law then we'd need to have a think about what navigation actually is.  Bona Fide for navigation implies that you are making use of your boat for a specific purpose - transporting goods, taking people on trips, getting people from one side of an expanse of water to another etc...  of course, nobody would be pleased with this very narrow definition.  CRT seem to understand this too, so they don't get too hung up on it.  So long as you're moving about every couple of weeks and generally not bothering people - they're happy.  Why other boaters adopt this superior position over what others are doing still completely escapes me.

[mrsmelly]

31 minutes ago, sirweste said:

Interesting one this. Sometimes I navigate to a new location simply because I've hit the 15th day, other times I navigate to enable a water fill up sometimes simply to get somewhere new and finally (very rarely; usually if there's someone round as an activity to do) to just go boating.

 

I don't see how you can draw a distinction really, I am still genuinely navigating, just the reason for navigation changes from week to week

This is quite interesting. I have cced many many times over the last thirty years of living aboard and at other times taken a mooring depending on work etc. I have absolutely never spent 14 days on any mooring, I like cruising too much so at worst stay a couple of days before moving on. If I were working in one area and staying in one spot 14 days that would be as bad as having a full time mooring. We cced all last year to include many different canals and rivers because  we can,  but otherwise the benefits of having a mooring and coming and going as you please outweigh the costs involved. The last time we worked and cced we moved every 7 days anyway for water but that did my head in being so long on one spot all be it with miles inbetween each mooring. It takes all kinds I suppose.

[Jerra]

2 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

If we're going to try and make everyone without a mooring, stick to the exact letter of the law then we'd need to have a think about what navigation actually is.  Bona Fide for navigation implies that you are making use of your boat for a specific purpose - transporting goods, taking people on trips, getting people from one side of an expanse of water to another etc...  of course, nobody would be pleased with this very narrow definition.  CRT seem to understand this too, so they don't get too hung up on it.  So long as you're moving about every couple of weeks and generally not bothering people - they're happy.  Why other boaters adopt this superior position over what others are doing still completely escapes me.

Why does it have to have a purpose?

 

My dictionary defines Navigation as:

 

the process or activity of accurately ascertaining one's position and planning and following a route.

 

So IMO all that needs discussed is what constitutes a route and what is accepted as Bonafide.

 

For me a route is what you use to get to a destination and Bonafide genuine without the intention to deceive.   So for me bonafide navigation isn't hanging around in as small an area as you can possibly get away with.  Few people I know would suggest that when they set off to go 10 miles or so they had accurately ascertained their position and planned a route to a destination.  Perhaps if you were desperate to twist the definitions you might but I doubt the "man on the Clapham omnibus" would.