Jump to content

Fat boats on the North Oxford


Dr Bob

Featured Posts

48 minutes ago, Lily Rose said:

Looks like CRT have been in touch with Miles Away to get him to confirm whether it's Saturday or Sunday for his return from Braunston to Dunchurch Pools. It's a pity they couldn't get him to be even more specific, not sure why not as passages booked through tunnels are at a specific time. Anyway, better than nothing I suppose, at least anyone planning to be in the area on Saturday can relax.

 

On the same principle as seems common for the GU tunnels, they could also fix the booking at the start of the day. In this case the day on the notice starts at 06:00, so from then to 08:00 or 09:00 (can't remember how long it takes) would seem a sensible booking window when traffic will be at its lightest so navigation will be least problematic for them.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lily Rose said:

 

Looks like CRT have been in touch with Miles Away to get him to confirm whether it's Saturday or Sunday for his return from Braunston to Dunchurch Pools. It's a pity they couldn't get him to be even more specific, not sure why not as passages booked through tunnels are at a specific time. Anyway, better than nothing I suppose, at least anyone planning to be in the area on Saturday can relax.

 

Notice Alert

Oxford Canal
Location: Between Braunston to Dunchurch pools Marina, Wide beam passage
Starts At: Bridge 93/94, Braunston Junction
Ends At: Bridge 81, Borstal Bridge

Sunday 28 August 2022 06:00 until Sunday 28 August 2022 19:00

Type: Advice
Reason: Information


 

Update on 26/08/2022:

 

Please be advised the wide-beam boat will now be making the journey on Sunday 28th August only.

We kindly remind customers to take extra care whilst navigating this section.

BUT.  He should not be there at all in any event!

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tracy D'arth said:

BUT.  He should not be there at all in any event!

Why are CaRT entertaining this guy? 
Any boats on there during this move, if they are hit or have to stop because of his movement need to Twitter CaRT, they seam to respond more to Twitter I’ve found then email.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

Why are CaRT entertaining this guy? 
Any boats on there during this move, if they are hit or have to stop because of his movement need to Twitter CaRT, they seam to respond more to Twitter I’ve found then email.

Agreed! 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a bylaw or a license condition requiring boaters to use boats 'appropriate or suitable for the waterway' or something along those lines IIRC.

 

Could anyone cite the exact bylaw or T&C please?

 

Much obliged....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MtB said:

There is a bylaw or a license condition requiring boaters to use boats 'appropriate or suitable for the waterway' or something along those lines IIRC.

 

Could anyone cite the exact bylaw or T&C please?

 

Much obliged....

 

 

 

 

As to Vessels to be used on Canals :

 

Fitness of Vessels

3. No person shall bring use or leave in any canal any vessel which is not in every respect fit for navigation on the canal or part thereof where it is intended to be used.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

As to Vessels to be used on Canals :

 

Fitness of Vessels

3. No person shall bring use or leave in any canal any vessel which is not in every respect fit for navigation on the canal or part thereof where it is intended to be used.

 

Fanx Alan.

 

Is that a bylaw or a T&C?

 

 

(I need to know in case I happen to be composing an email to someone or other...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Fanx Alan.

 

Is that a bylaw or a T&C?

 

 

(I need to know in case I happen to be composing an email to someone or other...)

 

Byelaw No3 of the "General Canal Bye Laws 1965"

 

 

The Licence T&Cs have very similar wording.

 

9. Suitability of the Boat for the Waterway

9.1. The Boat should be fit for navigation on the Waterway where it is intended to be Used.

9.2. You should take reasonable steps to ensure that Your Boat’s Dimensions are suitable for the Waterway you will Use.

9.3. You must make sure that Your Boat will pass through, under or over any structures You will Use.

9.4. You must not cause, or be likely to cause, damage to the Waterway, structures, or any boat because of Your Boat’s Dimensions.

9.5. Your Boat's Dimensions will not, or be likely to, obstruct the Waterway or hinder navigation.

9.6. Conditions 9.2-9.5 apply to the total dimension of two or more boats that are breasted-up, towing or otherwise connected

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

As to Vessels to be used on Canals :

 

Fitness of Vessels

3. No person shall bring use or leave in any canal any vessel which is not in every respect fit for navigation on the canal or part thereof where it is intended to be used.

 

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Byelaw No3 of the "General Canal Bye LAWS 1965"

 

 

The Licence T&Cs have very similar wording.

 

9. Suitability of the Boat for the Waterway

9.1. The Boat should be fit for navigation on the Waterway where it is intended to be Used.

9.2. You should take reasonable steps to ensure that Your Boat’s Dimensions are suitable for the Waterway you will Use.

9.3. You must make sure that Your Boat will pass through, under or over any structures You will Use.

9.4. You must not cause, or be likely to cause, damage to the Waterway, structures, or any boat because of Your Boat’s Dimensions.

9.5. Your Boat's Dimensions will not, or be likely to, obstruct the Waterway or hinder navigation.

9.6. Conditions 9.2-9.5 apply to the total dimension of two or more boats that are breasted-up, towing or otherwise connected

Someone should send that to C&RT to remind them of there own rules.  :judge:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Byelaw No3 of the "General Canal Bye Laws 1965"

 

 

The Licence T&Cs have very similar wording.

 

9. Suitability of the Boat for the Waterway

9.1. The Boat should be fit for navigation on the Waterway where it is intended to be Used.

9.2. You should take reasonable steps to ensure that Your Boat’s Dimensions are suitable for the Waterway you will Use.

9.3. You must make sure that Your Boat will pass through, under or over any structures You will Use.

9.4. You must not cause, or be likely to cause, damage to the Waterway, structures, or any boat because of Your Boat’s Dimensions.

9.5. Your Boat's Dimensions will not, or be likely to, obstruct the Waterway or hinder navigation.

9.6. Conditions 9.2-9.5 apply to the total dimension of two or more boats that are breasted-up, towing or otherwise connected

When you see it set out in black and white it seems ridiculous that Miles Away (and other boats too large for their local waterway) should be pandered to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I must admit to having always argued that the Bye Law No3 is actually meaning is 'capable' of navigating the waterway as in has sufficient engine power, will not run out of fuel, will not sink etc etc, rather than it has the dimensions to fit.

 

3. No person shall bring use or leave in any canal any vessel which is not in every respect fit for navigation on the canal or part thereof where it is intended to be used.

 

Rather than "Dimensionally fit the canal or part of ........................."

 

Which is why I believe that the Licence conditions have now included the extra clauses (in addition to the 'fit for navigation')

 

23 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

9.1. The Boat should be fit for navigation on the Waterway where it is intended to be Used.

9.2. You should take reasonable steps to ensure that Your Boat’s Dimensions are suitable for the Waterway you will Use.

 

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There appear to be a lot of "offended of behalf of...." type of posts; however the important metric is how many who have actually been affected, then emailed CRT about it. If one email is received then CRT may well choose to act proportionately, and do nothing. After all, they have been not bothering to enforce byelaws for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

9.2. You should take reasonable steps to ensure that Your Boat’s Dimensions are suitable for the Waterway you will Use.

 

 

This one bothers me as weasel worded. 

 

So imagine, I have a boat nearly twice as wide as is suitable for the waterway I will use. What "reasonable steps" should I take to reduce its width?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MtB said:

 

 

This one bothers me as weasel worded. 

 

So imagine, I have a boat nearly twice as wide as is suitable for the waterway I will use. What "reasonable steps" should I take to reduce its width?

I guess there is the tricky situation of boaters who will take their boats through waterways where the boat is slightly over the published maximum dimensions, for example old working boats which have spread a bit or are maximum length but published but owners are happy to risk taking them through a lock where the published maximum dimensions are smaller than their boat.  If the statement was along the lines of you mustn't exceed the published dimensions there would be a lot of ex working boats that wouldn't be able to go far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob-M said:

I guess there is the tricky situation of boaters who will take their boats through waterways where the boat is slightly over the published maximum dimensions, for example old working boats which have spread a bit or are maximum length but published but owners are happy to risk taking them through a lock where the published maximum dimensions are smaller than their boat.  If the statement was along the lines of you mustn't exceed the published dimensions there would be a lot of ex working boats that wouldn't be able to go far.

 

 

I have to say, my old ex working boat is pretty much bang on 7ft wide last time I measured it. I'm seriously hoping it hasn't suddenly spread to 12ft wide since I last used it.

 

But even if it has, does all this mean I'm fine to take it up the North Oxford? 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

  If the statement was along the lines of you mustn't exceed the published dimensions there would be a lot of ex working boats that wouldn't be able to go far.

That's my concern too about people pushing this argument. There are several canals where CRT's stated maximum dimensions are a little less than those of boats which have used them for years - boats which in some cases were specifically built to just fit locks in order to maximise carrying capacity.

Bear in mind that the CRT's definition of boat length includes bow and stern fenders and projecting rudders, so many modern and historic nominal 70 footers would be over-length on that basis, and lifting fenders or pushing rudders across to fit, as has long been common practice in some shorter locks, would not be an answer. Neither would owners of 58-60 ft boats be allowed to pass through Calder and Hebble locks diagonally.

The better answer, as as been suggested before on the forum, would be a strategic width barrier of say 8-9 feet maximum, just to the north of Braunston Turn.

And while that would create a problem for some wideboats already moored in places like Barby and Dunchurch marinas, CRT could make it absolutely clear with any future applications for home moorings for wide boats in those marinas (and others on narrow canals), that their licence allows the boat to be kept in the marina but does not permit it to pass through the marina entrance into the main canal. Indeed, if such a condition were to be added to the Network Access Agreement, the enforcement burden would largely be transferred to the marina operators.

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, David Mack said:

That's my concern too about people pushing this argument. There are several canals where CRT's stated maximum dimensions are a little less than those of boats which have used them for years - boats which in some cases were specifically built to just fit locks in order to maximise carrying capacity.

Bear in mind that the CRT's definition of boat length includes bow and stern fenders and projecting rudders, so many modern and historic nominal 70 footers would be over-length on that basis, and lifting fenders or pushing rudders across to fit, as has long been common practice in some shorter locks, would not be an answer. Neither would owners of 58-60 ft boats be allowed to pass through Calder and Hebble locks diagonally.

The better answer, as as been suggested before on the forum, would be a strategic width barrier of say 8-9 feet maximum, just to the north of Braunston Turn.

And while that would create a problem for some wideboats already moored in places like Barby and Dunchurch marinas, CRT could make it absolutely clear with any future applications for home moorings for wide boats in those marinas (and others on narrow canals), that their licence allows the boat to be kept in the marina but does not permit it to pass through the marina entrance into the main canal. Indeed, if such a condition were to be added to the Network Access Agreement, the enforcement burden would largely be transferred to the marina operators.

When I've taken the CRT Heritage boats, Scorpio and Leo, through Brades Staircase it is extremely tight but they will fit through with a bit of jiggling around and making sure the stern is hard against the cill with the rudder in the correct position and no fenders bow or stern.  They exceed the published length for the lock though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob-M said:

When I've taken the CRT Heritage boats, Scorpio and Leo, through Brades Staircase it is extremely tight but they will fit through with a bit of jiggling around and making sure the stern is hard against the cill with the rudder in the correct position and no fenders bow or stern.  They exceed the published length for the lock though.

And owners of other full length historic boats have all had similar experiences!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, David Mack said:

That's my concern too about people pushing this argument. There are several canals where CRT's stated maximum dimensions are a little less than those of boats which have used them for years - boats which in some cases were specifically built to just fit locks in order to maximise carrying capacity.

Bear in mind that the CRT's definition of boat length includes bow and stern fenders and projecting rudders, so many modern and historic nominal 70 footers would be over-length on that basis, and lifting fenders or pushing rudders across to fit, as has long been common practice in some shorter locks, would not be an answer. Neither would owners of 58-60 ft boats be allowed to pass through Calder and Hebble locks diagonally.

The better answer, as as been suggested before on the forum, would be a strategic width barrier of say 8-9 feet maximum, just to the north of Braunston Turn.

And while that would create a problem for some wideboats already moored in places like Barby and Dunchurch marinas, CRT could make it absolutely clear with any future applications for home moorings for wide boats in those marinas (and others on narrow canals), that their licence allows the boat to be kept in the marina but does not permit it to pass through the marina entrance into the main canal. Indeed, if such a condition were to be added to the Network Access Agreement, the enforcement burden would largely be transferred to the marina operators.

They cannot unilaterally add any provisions to existing NAAs (nor the 'connection agreements' that pre dated them). This is surely a boat licencing issue regulating navigation and should be dealt with as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Rob-M said:

When I've taken the CRT Heritage boats, Scorpio and Leo, through Brades Staircase it is extremely tight but they will fit through with a bit of jiggling around and making sure the stern is hard against the cill with the rudder in the correct position and no fenders bow or stern.  They exceed the published length for the lock though.

 

Isn't there a requirement to have/use bow and stern fenders:

 

"Vessels to have fenders ready for use

 

6. Every vessel navigated on any canal shall have ready for immediate use proper fenders of suitable material and in good condition and the master of such vessel shall use such fenders whenever there is a risk of the vessel striking against any other vessel or against any wall, lockgate, bridge or other thing."

 

Thus, the argument that a slightly oversize historic boat can shorten itself by lifting them, is rendered moot if we're going to observe and apply the byelaws uniformly to widebeams and others.

 

Or in other words, "be careful what you wish for", historic moaners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

And while that would create a problem for some wideboats already moored in places like Barby and Dunchurch marinas, CRT could make it absolutely clear with any future applications for home moorings for wide boats in those marinas (and others on narrow canals), that their licence allows the boat to be kept in the marina but does not permit it to pass through the marina entrance into the main canal.

Except one does not apply to CRT for a home mooring 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, David Mack said:

The better answer, as as been suggested before on the forum, would be a strategic width barrier of say 8-9 feet maximum, just to the north of Braunston Turn.

And while that would create a problem for some wideboats already moored in places like Barby and Dunchurch marinas, CRT could make it absolutely clear with any future applications for home moorings for wide boats in those marinas (and others on narrow canals), that their licence allows the boat to be kept in the marina but does not permit it to pass through the marina entrance into the main canal. Indeed, if such a condition were to be added to the Network Access Agreement, the enforcement burden would largely be transferred to the marina operators.

 

The ideal place for a strategic barrier would be where bridge 86 used to be. This is a 'pinch' point but on a straight bit of canal so it is not going to hold up any more traffic than at present. It would be very easy to install.

I dont think New and Used Boats would be happy, they have launched a number of new widebeams in at Dunchurch this year as the marina now has a very good boat lift (as an alternative to Mercia which was the only viable place to launch them). Most of these launches have left the marina to enter the 'wide' network at Braunston so more widebeam traffic on the narrow North Oxford.

BTW, very good boat lift and good support for DIY blacking. I know, we are out of the water at the moment. Great service there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tacet said:

Except one does not apply to CRT for a home mooring 

When one applies to CRT for a licence one states either the boat's home mooring, or that one is going to cruise continuously not staying in one place for more than 14 days etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.