Broad Cut Moorings under threat.

[pearley]

https://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/people/boaters-launch-petition-save-moorings-popular-wakefield-canal-3014925

[doratheexplorer]

Sad, but if the risk is increasing then a tough decision was needed.  People are always quick to blame CRT but if they turned a blind eye to the risk and something very bad happened, imagine the blame to CRT then?  They will be losing mooring income so I doubt they've taken this decision lightly.  I imagine their liability insurance simpy wouldn't cover the risk any more.

[noone]

The people there seem quite happy,why not inform them that they need to take out their own insurance if they want to stay?...But of course,they have a "community" there....and we cant be having boater communities on the system!..Crt have a policy to remove online moorings,forcing boaters into marinas (1 removed for every 10 new marina moorings made available). As for crt losing income,those folks will still have to pay to moor somewhere.

Has anyone ever seen the headline.... "Canal and River Trust act to save boater community"?........?

 

[Mac of Cygnet]

6 minutes ago, Leggers do it lying down said:

..Crt have a policy to remove online moorings,forcing boaters into marinas (1 removed for every 10 new marina moorings made available).

 

 

I thought this policy had been quietly dropped?   And the present decision has nothing to do with that anyway.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, Mac of Cygnet said:

 

I thought this policy had been quietly dropped?   

So did I.

[Alan de Enfield]

12 minutes ago, Leggers do it lying down said:

The people there seem quite happy,why not inform them that they need to take out their own insurance if they want to stay?.

If it a 'known' flood risk then would be unlikely to be able to obtain insurance - think of all those folk refused house insurance after the various floods.

 

In the event of 'loss' even their standard boat insurance may be invalidated as they have acted irresponsibly by remaining after being advised of the risk.

 

I'm not a big fan of C&RT (as you may have noticed) but in this instance they are acting in good-faith - what value a 'community spirit' compared to the loss of peoples homes, or, heaven forbid someones life.

[Midnight]

Bad news for the Broadcut boaters who added their own rise & fall poles to keep boats off the towpath. There's been at least 3 boats marooned on the towpath following floods which may have influenced CarRT's decision but these were on the visitor moorings.  I also heard through the towpath telegraph that CaRT are closing moorings at Horbury Basin for the same reason.

[noone]

13 minutes ago, Mac of Cygnet said:

 

I thought this policy had been quietly dropped?   And the present decision has nothing to do with that anyway.

Who knows!?..Maybe it quietly wasn't! ...It just seems to me that with crt,it is always the boater that loses out!?.

Why would they want to stay there if their lives and homes were in danger??.

[Midnight]

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If it a 'known' flood risk then would be unlikely to be able to obtain insurance - think of all those folk refused house insurance after the various floods.

 

In the event of 'loss' even their standard boat insurance may be invalidated as they have acted irresponsibly by remaining after being advised of the risk.

 

I'm not a big fan of C&RT (as you may have noticed) but in this instance they are acting in good-faith - what value a 'community spirit' compared to the loss of peoples homes, or, heaven forbid someones life.

I understand your point but Broadcut is at no greater threat than anywhere else along the Calder Navigation. The 2015 Boxing Day flood devastated Elland. Since the EA added the flood defences at Todmorden, Hebden Bridge & Mytholmroyd the water moves quickly downstream to areas below Brighouse. I've been studying floods in the area for 5 years and have noticed the changing pattern. In February this year not one flood monitoring station above Brighouse recorded a new record level - every monitoring station below recorded levels of around 11" higher than the previous 2015 records.

[Mad Harold]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

If it a 'known' flood risk then would be unlikely to be able to obtain insurance - think of all those folk refused house insurance after the various floods.

 

In the event of 'loss' even their standard boat insurance may be invalidated as they have acted irresponsibly by remaining after being advised of the risk.

 

I'm not a big fan of C&RT (as you may have noticed) but in this instance they are acting in good-faith - what value a 'community spirit' compared to the loss of peoples homes, or, heaven forbid someones life.

Acting in good faith,or covering their back?

All the long term moorers on the Calder know it is a volatile river and take precautions like mooring on a scaffold pole with a slip ring to account for the rise and fall.

Yes,I know a couple of boats floated onto the towpath,but that was due to poor mooring by the skippers.

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Mad Harold said:

Acting in good faith,or covering their back?

All the long term moorers on the Calder know it is a volatile river and take precautions like mooring on a scaffold pole with a slip ring to account for the rise and fall.

Yes,I know a couple of boats floated onto the towpath,but that was due to poor mooring by the skippers.

I obviously have no idea of C&RT's thinking behind this, but, as a business owner I know that I have a legal duty of care to ensure that any risks to my customers are minimised or completely removed.

 

Even if your customers suggest that they are happy to sign something saying that they absolve you of the responsibility, you cannot do it.

It is illegal to 'contract out of your legal responsibilities', and in the case of the 'customer' they cannot 'contract out of their legal rights'.

Any such 'agreement' would be worthless in court.

 

A risk assessment will have been conducted and the findings (no doubt) have shown a propensity for flooding, in which case the boats need to be moved.

 

What benefits do you see C&RT getting from closing the moorings ?

What do think is 'behind' the closure if it is not the flood-risk ?

[Jon57]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I obviously have no idea of C&RT's thinking behind this, but, as a business owner I know that I have a legal duty of care to ensure that any risks to my customers are minimised or completely removed.

 

Even if your customers suggest that they are happy to sign something saying that they absolve you of the responsibility, you cannot do it.

It is illegal to 'contract out of your legal responsibilities', and in the case of the 'customer' they cannot 'contract out of their legal rights'.

Any such 'agreement' would be worthless in court.

 

A risk assessment will have been conducted and the findings (no doubt) have shown a propensity for flooding, in which case the boats need to be moved.

 

What benefits do you see C&RT getting from closing the moorings ?

What do think is 'behind' the closure if it is not the flood-risk ?

So the same would apply to leased moorings in a high risk area. So more than likely CRT will not renew the lease when present contract expires.

[noone]

BWML Bath Marina! (and it can get worse than that!)...Closed...or open?......

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, Jon57 said:

So the same would apply to leased moorings in a high risk area. So more than likely CRT will not renew the lease when present contract expires.

I have no-eyed-deer.

 

Whilst 'we' can argue about 'mans effect on the climate' there can be no question that for whatever reason the weather (and maybe the climate) is changing, look over the last few years and we are seeing weather that we have never seen before - 'freak' storms, micro-bursts, gales etc etc. We now have so many 'storms' that we even name them - we didn't do that 20, or even 10 years ago.

 

I had planned to paint the boat once the travel restriction lifted in mid July - from the 15th July to the end of July there were only 4 days when it didn't rain - and much of it was RAIN, not drizzle.

 

Flooding will become more commonplace and, yes, I'm sure that inland waterbased activities will be affected.

[Phoenix_V]

There are plenty of moorings around the system where flood is a known risk just look at those on the Avon where I believe Blackrose moors and quite a few on the Thames. If the risk is increasing perhaps crt should discuss wth their moorers how best to mitigate the risk and perhaps reinvest some of the income they have had from them over the years.

Alternatively perhaps all non ponton tidal moorings should be closed.

[Higgs]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

What benefits do you see C&RT getting from closing the moorings ?

What do think is 'behind' the closure if it is not the flood-risk ?

 

CRT have been receiving money for the moorings, and boats are built to be on water. CRT could spend some money on improving the capability of the moorings to cope with rises, which wouldn't be the prohibitive sum hinted at to stop the flooding. Cheaper to spend no money, send the boats off packing and collect the moorings fees when they pull up somewhere. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Higgs

[David Mack]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_V said:

 just look at those on the Avon where I believe Blackrose moors and quite a few on the Thames.

 

 

Neither of which are CR's responsibility. Other navigation authorities and mooring providers may take a different view to CRT.

(And Blackrose no longer moors on the Avon)

[Phoenix_V]

2 hours ago, David Mack said:

 

Neither of which are CR's responsibility. Other navigation authorities and mooring providers may take a different view to CRT.

 

That was my point other navigation authorities cope perfectly well with far worse.

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, Phoenix_V said:

That was my point other navigation authorities cope perfectly well with far worse.

Other Navigation Authorities (operating on Rivers) generally have 'flood proof' moorings - floating pontoons.

 

These can 'take up', up to 15 feet of flooding (the C&RT ones at Newark for example)

 

C&RT has inherited a 200 year old system that was built to be usable in the conditions 'of the day', we now expect the same infrastructure to be able to cope with the extreme conditions that we are getting more and more frequently.

[matty40s]

6 hours ago, Midnight said:

I understand your point but Broadcut is at no greater threat than anywhere else along the Calder Navigation. The 2015 Boxing Day flood devastated Elland. Since the EA added the flood defences at Todmorden, Hebden Bridge & Mytholmroyd the water moves quickly downstream to areas below Brighouse. I've been studying floods in the area for 5 years and have noticed the changing pattern. In February this year not one flood monitoring station above Brighouse recorded a new record level - every monitoring station below recorded levels of around 11" higher than the previous 2015 records.

Its the same as protecting Meadowhall is making Rotherhams and below floods worse every year.

[Midnight]

2 hours ago, matty40s said:

Its the same as protecting Meadowhall is making Rotherhams and below floods worse every year.

Not well thought out schemes. Years ago I watched as the EA ripped out all the willows along the Yorkshire Ouse tributaries and drained the moors. Their reasoning was the newly built flood defenses at York could cope with the water so move it as quickly as possible down there. It worked reasonably well until they had trouble with the Foss barrage. The flood defense works in the upper Calder Valley move the water quickly to the lower valley where there is no additional flood management. Broadcut does indeed flood which is why the berth holders installed their own rise & fall system after Boxing Day 2015 - although I did hear CaRT weren't too happy about that at the time.

[RonnieF1967]

15 hours ago, Midnight said:

Not well thought out schemes. Years ago I watched as the EA ripped out all the willows along the Yorkshire Ouse tributaries and drained the moors. Their reasoning was the newly built flood defenses at York could cope with the water so move it as quickly as possible down there. It worked reasonably well until they had trouble with the Foss barrage. The flood defense works in the upper Calder Valley move the water quickly to the lower valley where there is no additional flood management. Broadcut does indeed flood which is why the berth holders installed their own rise & fall system after Boxing Day 2015 - although I did hear CaRT weren't too happy about that at the time.

They actually thought they had provided them! We have provided them to assist with the flooding, so far they have stood up to the test and yes it can get a bit hairy in the peak of the flood but no more so than at other sites, Horbury Basin, and Elland as previously mentioned. The boats who ended up on the towpath in Dec 2015 had no means of keeping them over the water, the scaffold poles and support do that now.  No one has mentioned the elephant (a pontoon on the river that is never used) sell it for scrap and use the money to improve the moorings.

[Slim]

A combination of budget constraints (that will only get worse) and the onward creep of the compensation / blame culture

[pearley]

6 hours ago, RonnieF1967 said:

No one has mentioned the elephant (a pontoon on the river that is never used) sell it for scrap and use the money to improve the moorings.

Is that the one upstream of the lock on the river? If so, we used it last year. Must admit I was surprised to see it. I know we haven't been there for a few years but was expecting the short landing on the left as you approach.

[PeterF]

I have used the floating pontoon several times.

 

I read the article, it said they would become summer only moorings. If this is due to flooding, I am sure it was a June flood that put Pipistrelle on the bank some 12 years or more ago. That was the one that was nearly sunk when it was finally dragged back into the cut. Thread on here somewhere.