Canal & River Trust seeks boaters' views on licence T&Cs

[Mike Adams]

Who are these idiots? They don't define what a cruise is for start yet if you have a home mooring your must genuinely cruise when away from it. Do I have to go for 24 hours a day?  I've never been on a cruise I just go boating. What has priority the bylaws or the terms and conditions? I can see what they are trying to do but they are just going to get further in to mess. We all know what the problem is but without changing the law its pointless.

[roland elsdon]

2 minutes ago, StationMaster said:

It isn't just about butty's - my plans for next year are scuppered if the rules come in and I don't want to break them. 59' boat through a 57' lock - gone on for years but if I do it next year what might happen to me.

Crt  marshal with tape measure will taser you, cut 2 ft off your boat , and depart. While they are doing it they will accuse you of continuous mooring.

Weasels will eat your flesh in debtors prison. Avoid.

[Rob-M]

The CRT heritage boats may have a problem traveling around Birmingham as I am sure the BCN is officially classified as a maximum length of 70' and width of 7' but the heritage boats are over those dimensions and often travel together as a motor and butty.

[Chewbacka]

14 minutes ago, dor said:

I thought this was how it already was.  The cruise bit resets when you return to you home mooring, so you can go out to your favourite spot on weekend, go back to your home mooring then go back to your favourite spot the next weekend. I don’t see a problem with that.

What they want to stop are “ghost moorings” where someone takes a cheap mooring somewhere but never uses it but stays in a locality somewhere else and basically bridge hopping or not moving at all.

I know of a couple of boats that moor on the tow path for 2 weeks, then early evening go back less than a mile to their home mooring for one night, then early the next morning back to their spot again for another 2 weeks.  I know CRT don’t like it, and I would not be surprised if they wish to stop this as well as ghost moorings.  But as the proposed t&c are written they can go a lot further than this.

[DHutch]

I read through the majority of the questionnaire, skim reading the rest, answering most of the questions, filling in the information towards the end, and then in a moment of unthinking, and having avoided the risky placed 'reset' button the whole way through, used the back button on my mouse rather than the back button on the page, and got a crashed form notification as lost the bloody lot! Arse.

 

Summary of thoughts;

 - A1 as a lot of words, some additional gists that could be a pita, but also no actual definition of what a 'genuine cruise' etc is, hence I am unsure of the point

 - B4 and B7 adds a lot of legwork for the boater, which is a pita, especially given for motor vehicles there is an insurance database for this end

 - C no major thoughts

 - D generally fine?

 - E important that short term day/week licensed boats (mostly open in type) do not have to jump through too many arduous hoops, especially if not near an existing C&RT waterway or BSS inspector. (thinking with my steamboat hat on). Generally more work for the boater for no real gain. Not all boaters have access to the internet, therefore a way of updating details via phone/post/person is required. 

 - F generally find, other than F4 which is very unclear about the fact the usually side fender under way are bad, as well as the need for some full length boats, inc historic craft, to lift front/rear fenders to pass certain lock times. Also where does a historic boat trying to get up Hurleston fit with this?

 - G fine?

 - H fine?

 - I fine?

 

WIll try and enter this to the form again tomorrow!

[Chewbacka]

22 minutes ago, NBDensie said:

ISTM the proposals are very reasonable and should make the position regarding Continuous Moorers much clearer.  Also the strengthening of the rules on boat safety are to be welcomed as are those on tracking the ownership of boats.  OK there are a few sillies that should be cleared up - eg 70ft boats with butties cant travel on the canal system because they would not fit in a lock in that configuration.  The one I picked up was that it seems you have to travel with side fenders down all the time.

 

I think you are misreading the proposal.  As long as you return to your marina after your popping out its no problem - surely that ends your journey.  What would be a problem would be if you travelled up and down the same stretch of canal every day outside your marina without going back home, which would be a very strange thingto do..

Whilst I agree with the intention, if you or I were to sell to a liveaboard you would not have an address for the new owner, if they pay cash they may choose to give a false name.  It is not my responsibility to verify the details of the new owner, so whilst I am happy to pass on to CRT in good faith the details, I can not be held responsible if they are false.  This proposal will hold the seller responsible.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Chewbacka

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, DHutch said:

I read through the majority of the questionnaire, skim reading the rest, answering most of the questions, filling in the information towards the end, and then in a moment of unthinking, and having avoided the risky placed 'reset' button the whole way through, used the back button on my mouse rather than the back button on the page, and got a crashed form notification as lost the bloody lot! Arse.

 

Summary of thoughts;

 - A1 as a lot of words, some additional gists that could be a pita, but also no actual definition of what a 'genuine cruise' etc is, hence I am unsure of the point

 - B4 and B7 adds a lot of legwork for the boater, which is a pita, especially given for motor vehicles there is an insurance database for this end

 - C no major thoughts

 - D generally fine?

 - E important that short term day/week licensed boats (mostly open in type) do not have to jump through too many arduous hoops, especially if not near an existing C&RT waterway or BSS inspector. (thinking with my steamboat hat on). Generally more work for the boater for no real gain. Not all boaters have access to the internet, therefore a way of updating details via phone/post/person is required. 

 - F generally find, other than F4 which is very unclear about the fact the usually side fender under way are bad, as well as the need for some full length boats, inc historic craft, to lift front/rear fenders to pass certain lock times. Also where does a historic boat trying to get up Hurleston fit with this?

 - G fine?

 - H fine?

 - I fine?

 

WIll try and enter this to the form again tomorrow!

So you have no problems with F2

[magpie patrick]

On the maximum dimensions bit - the weasel words are not about exceeding the dimensions, they are that the recommended dimensions may change.... 

[rasputin]

or E5?

[Arthur Marshall]

Is this CRT's "Get Tony Dunkley" department working overtime?

[DHutch]

1 minute ago, magpie patrick said:

On the maximum dimensions bit....       ....words are not about exceeding the dimensions, they are that the recommended dimensions may change.... 

Indeed.

[Captain Pegg]

9 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

The CRT heritage boats may have a problem traveling around Birmingham as I am sure the BCN is officially classified as a maximum length of 70' and width of 7' but the heritage boats are over those dimensions and often travel together as a motor and butty.

The conditions about dimensions really annoyed me. CRT apparently don’t understand the practical application of their own dimensions. I explicitly pointed out the above in my responses. I do wonder though if anyone will read the comments let alone hold any serious review.

[Chewbacka]

20 minutes ago, NBDensie said:

 There are two different things I think.  The first is what are the rules.  The second is the process if the rules are broken.  The proposed changes (and AFAIK the original) dont really cover the second.

But the proposal does.  If you do not follow the rules you will now be non-compliant with the T&Cs that you agreed to, therefore they can revoke your licence.  We all know what happens to unlicensed boats.............

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Is this CRT's "Get Tony Dunkley" department working overtime?

Especially the bit covering a BSS exemption 

[DHutch]

4 minutes ago, StationMaster said:

So you have no problems with F2

Yes. F2 and F3 combined, give rise to concern, I did detail that on the now lost form, but then forgot to mention above.

 

3 minutes ago, rasputin said:

or E5?

E5 is a carry over from previous, and no, I have no issue with it.

 

Daniel

[Nightwatch]

I have to say, this excellent forum is just a very small proportion of boaters. But what I read here is the general opinion is that CRT are being a bit anti boater.
 

My own opinion has been that give them time to sort themselves our we could see improvements to preventive maintenance matters and evidence of good management practice. Sadly, maintenance seems to be re-active everywhere with no maintenance unless it’s broken.

 

Water levels at different locations throughout the system have become long term issues. And it’s been raining!! during all these years.

 

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Nightwatch

[Captain Pegg]

2 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

On the maximum dimensions bit - the weasel words are not about exceeding the dimensions, they are that the recommended dimensions may change.... 

I objected strongly to that to saying that CRT must acknowledge they have a legal duty to uphold minimum navigation dimensions within which they cannot permanently amend the maximum craft dimensions.

 

The whole thing is aimed at a certain type of boater but isn’t clever enough not to lay traps for all boaters. From a PR perspective it reads very poorly.

4 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Is this CRT's "Get Tony Dunkley" department working overtime?

It does read like that

[DHutch]

46 minutes ago, StationMaster said:

How many more threads on same subject...

 

Happy to delete mine if necessary.

Topics merged.

[TheBiscuits]

11 minutes ago, DHutch said:

B4 and B7 adds a lot of legwork for the boater, which is a pita, especially given for motor vehicles there is an insurance database for this end

 

Depends how picky they are.  Currently providing insurer, policy number and expiry date is all they require, and they do check if it's valid.

 

If they do feel they need ask for more details, an upload of the certificate and schedule in the licensing website should be sufficient, but it's probably only if they have reason to doubt the provided information.

 

Not too hard I would say.  

[Captain Pegg]

45 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

I started the ‘questionnaire’. Gave up within three minutes. Far too complicated.

I felt like that but I persevered because it needs boaters that aren’t of the mould they are trying to target to respond. It’s important because I think some of the changes are wrong. In some cases I feel the intent is wrong and in others they are using the wrong vehicle to tackle something that needs to be tackled.

 

Some of this stuff is best left alone without change to the parent legislation. Otherwise it’s a fudge that could impact us all down the line.

[Nightwatch]

I may well have another go, but I’m not at all confident I will complete the task.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, DHutch said:

Topics merged.

Sadly that just confuses things. But hopefully at least it will garner people enough to actually look through what is being proposed.

[Captain Pegg]

4 minutes ago, Nightwatch said:

I may well have another go, but I’m not at all confident I will complete the task.

You can skip individual sections. We’ll all have different knowledge of the implications and different emotions about each section so just pick the ones you think you have a strong view or knowledge regarding and skip the others.

[TheBiscuits]

1 hour ago, Rob-M said:

The CRT heritage boats may have a problem traveling around Birmingham as I am sure the BCN is officially classified as a maximum length of 70' and width of 7' but the heritage boats are over those dimensions and often travel together as a motor and butty.

 

47 minutes ago, Captain Pegg said:

I objected strongly to that to saying that CRT must acknowledge they have a legal duty to uphold minimum navigation dimensions within which they cannot permanently amend the maximum craft dimensions.

 

It's not just the BCN that's listed on the maximum craft dimensions as 2.13m / 7 ft.

 

Aren't quite a few historic boats built to 7 feet and half an inch?  They won't be allowed to use any of the narrow canals then ...

[Rob-M]

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

 

It's not just the BCN that's listed on the maximum craft dimensions as 2.13m / 7 ft.

 

Aren't quite a few historic boats built to 7 feet and half an inch?  They won't be allowed to use any of the narrow canals then ...

I specifically referenced the BCN as the heritage working boats are based at Icknield Port so need to navigate the locks to go anywhere.

 

 

[TheBiscuits]

7 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

I specifically referenced the BCN as the heritage working boats are based at Icknield Port so need to navigate the locks to go anywhere.

 

 

 

Ok.  I thought you were specifically referring to the 70ft length limit for the BCN, and had missed the significance of the extra half inch on the width.