Jump to content

Jenna Patel

Featured Posts

Byron bay for hippies ....1970s maybe ......$750,000 for a spot in a council caravan park!(no freehold,just a caravan spot with a shack on it)......holiday rentals at $20,000 a week!.....shares in a hippy land commune back in the hills sell for millions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since no one else has, I'll point out that boats are more likely to have showers than baths. Finding a boater in a bath is harder as a result and I wouldn't recommend filling in an on-line survey in the bath unless the gadget is waterproof.

Edited by Jen-in-Wellies
  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

Since no one else has, I'll point out that boats are more likely to have showers than baths. Finding a boater in a bath is harder as a result and I wouldn't recommend filling in an on-line survey in the bath unless the gadget is waterproof.

.................... according to Biscuits this topic is limited to street-lighting, and no, I didn't read the questions - better things to do  ....  but Jen, surely the issue isn't about waterproof writing materials, it would be more about whether, during these gloomy winter months, you could fill in the questionnaire while sitting in the bath if the street-lighting in the vicinity is inadequate for you to see what you are doing.  I am of course assuming that the socially-challenged boat dwellers in this notorious location will only have candles for their bathroom lighting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/11/2021 at 11:28, Murflynn said:

I might comment that many folk who live in boats moored along the Avon and the western end of the K&A canal may not be complying with the Authority's rules related to mooring and/or living aboard and therefore some or most of them are unlikely to give you honest answers to your questions.  Are you aware of C&RT's position on these matters?  If not, there are thousands of relevant posts on hundreds of threads on this website, which you may like to read as background material.

Are you aware of the number of vile rabid anti-itinerant-boat-dweller posts that appear on this site? 
Its ok. We report them all...

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jenna Patel said:

Hi Roland, 

thank you for your response.  
 

we are trying to reach out to all riverside users and used this channel to contact boaters but they are not our only/ biggest interest group. 
 

we are looking at ways to make the riverside more accessible and feel safer for all users. So we 100% appreciate your feedback thank you so much!

 

kind regards, 

 

jenna 

The research that we have done indicates that the recreational pedestrian traffic on the towpath feels safer when there are plenty of [itinerant boat-dweller] boats moored up instead of an empty towpath. And my first-hand experience is that the scumbag drug-dealing bandits (from the hosues) that sometimes frequent the towpaths (esp in London, Reading, etc etc and dare I suggest Bath) are scared off by the boaters.
We chew and spit out scumbags for breakfast.
Anyone else want to negotiate?

Jenna, try secretariat@bargee-traveller.org.uk - we'll see you straight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Street lighting? We aspire to facilities. Perhaps a bit more basic than street lighting. Like potable water.
Refuse collection that is actually collected.
And Elsan points less than 10-miles apart.
When was the last time that a house-dweller travelled 10-miles to empty the bog?
I see some pretty petty comments here to be frank.
We do what we do for the reasons that we do that we don't have to justify: we just do and we DEMAND respect for that.
One day we will get electric hook-ups to charge traction batteries. 
But for today the greatest risk to the safety on the towpath is, in my view, seeing off the rabid anti-itinerant-boat-dwellers. 
And of course I use the phrase advisedly and on a tempered basis. You want to hear what I _really_ think...?
 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

Street lighting? We aspire to facilities. Perhaps a bit more basic than street lighting. Like potable water.
Refuse collection that is actually collected.
And Elsan points less than 10-miles apart.
When was the last time that a house-dweller travelled 10-miles to empty the bog?
I see some pretty petty comments here to be frank.
We do what we do for the reasons that we do that we don't have to justify: we just do and we DEMAND respect for that.
One day we will get electric hook-ups to charge traction batteries. 
But for today the greatest risk to the safety on the towpath is, in my view, seeing off the rabid anti-itinerant-boat-dwellers
And of course I use the phrase advisedly and on a tempered basis. You want to hear what I _really_ think...?
 

 

I don't think most people object to itinerant boat-dwellers [dic: "Itinerant : travelling from place to place"] who actually do what it says on the tin, regardless of how scruffy or shiny their boats are.

 

What most people object to is those who have a CC license -- or worse still, none at all -- and then moor against the rules, either hogging short-term visitor moorings or bridge-hopping to try and evade CART restrictions, or just plain sitting doggo until CART eventually try and move them on -- if this ever happens. And then play the "but think of the children!" card if they are told to move on, in spite of the numerous rulings from CART about what is and isn't allowable to count as continuous cruising.

 

Personally I've found some of the "crusties" (not a term I'd use, but one often bandied around) to be lovely helpful people, and some of the "shiny boaters" (ditto) to be obnoxious selfish gits, which just goes to prove that you can't judge a book by its cover. And I've also found the opposite to be true sometimes, which just shows the danger of making sweeping generalisations about people...

 

Doesn't stop some other people doing it though, thinking (or stating) that someone with an expensive boat with polished brass is somehow superior to someone with a scruffy one with logs on the roof... 😞

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

43 minutes ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

And Elsan points less than 10-miles apart.
When was the last time that a house-dweller travelled 10-miles to empty the bog?

 

Hmm looks like some of the home truths have 'hit home'.

I wonder if those home owners are paying for the services of street lights, water, toilets. refuse collection, etc.

 

How much do you pay in water rates, how much council tax are you paying, if you want services then expect to pay for them like the vast majority of the population.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that the standard to which CaRT aspire is a max of 8 hours cruising between elsan disposal points (of course boaters know that they have to allow for the fact that someone may have tipped unsuitable material down it and that they have to go an extra day's cruising for an empty)

 

We would all like the canal system to have extra facilities that meet our particular situation but the reality is that, in the immediate future, we have to live with what we have got and hope that it is at least maintained.

 

The key, of curse, is that the facility standards are based on the assumption that boaters are generally cruising . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

I thought that the standard to which CaRT aspire is a max of 8 hours cruising between elsan disposal points (

 

1 hour ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

And Elsan points less than 10-miles apart.

 

He must have one of those human powered pedal narrowboats that seem to be all the fad on the K&A.

 

Surely if the elsans are 10 miles away that is only 3 (?) hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

I thought that the standard to which CaRT aspire is a max of 8 hours cruising between elsan disposal points  

 

The key, of curse, is that the facility standards are based on the assumption that boaters are generally cruising . . . 

That could be once a year for some boaters 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

He must have one of those human powered pedal narrowboats that seem to be all the fad on the K&A.

 

Surely if the elsans are 10 miles away that is only 3 (?) hours.

Pedal power... 


... and there I was thinking that this thread was about street lights !!
Actually CRT is asking the NBTA to come up with a draft spec for "how far between facilities" etc. The IWA came up with a spec as well - but more focussed on recreational boaters (as most of their members are). We started work looking at theirs and amending it for the NBTA membership in the late summer. The NBTA's brief is to support itinerant live-aboards... and going 10 miles to empty the bog (even if planned into a boat move) is a bit beyond the pale.
So we are looking at 2 hours cruising maybe, but we are also in the process of setting up a questionnaire to ask our members. Also there are geographic differences. Its a bit of a pain to go 1/2 way up Caen Hill for example. And in London it is different again. So it needs some study.


 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, MtB said:

I don't see why 10 miles between Elsan points is any sort of a problem, unless your goal is to move less than ten miles between bog emtyings. 

The obligation is to move to anew place every 14 days (or longer if reasonable in the circumstances [and reasonable cannot be laid down in advance]) and "place" is undefined but stems from the evidence: place on the map; local knowledge; either side of a clear obstruction; a village -> outside the village -> next village (3 places); a different borough;  and so on.
The differences in the needs of itinerant live-aboards and recreational boaters are stark. 
So for example the NHS worker who needs to get to an early shift isn't going to be best pleased to have to drive 20 miles having walked down the muddy towpath in the dark, are they? But that is what the legislation + the "Ts & Cs" say.... (no amount of banging saucepans mitigates that). and we've got a few of them....

 

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Hmm looks like some of the home truths have 'hit home'.

I wonder if those home owners are paying for the services of street lights, water, toilets. refuse collection, etc.

 

How much do you pay in water rates, how much council tax are you paying, if you want services then expect to pay for them like the vast majority of the population.

The "services" that we get are paid for out of the licence fees. CRT giving us something for nothing? I don't think so.
Yes, it does look like the "home truths" have hit home: that there is a sector of the boating community (that mirrors the established community) that will not rest until the itinerant boat-dwellers are gone. Well, Mr de Enfield, we're here to stay !

  • Love 1
  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

The differences in the needs of itinerant live-aboards and recreational boaters are stark. 

 

You repeatedly use the term itinerant - maybe you and the "National Boats Travel Nowhere" society should consider the meaning of the word - yes there is a huge difference between the "No Boats Travel Anywhere" members and the rest of the boaters. The vast majority of boaters are 'itinerant', you are just squatters.

 

itinerant
/ɪˈtɪn(ə)r(ə)nt,ʌɪˈtɪn(ə)r(ə)nt/
 
  1. Travelling from place to place.
    "itinerant traders"
     
     
    Maybe you should look to rename yourselves to the "Non-Itinerant boaters" at least it would be more honest & representative of you and you ideals.
     
    If you were truly 'itinerant' then 10 miles distance between facilities would be no problem for you.
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IanD said:

 

I don't think most people object to itinerant boat-dwellers [dic: "Itinerant : travelling from place to place"] who actually do what it says on the tin, regardless of how scruffy or shiny their boats are.

 

What most people object to is those who have a CC license -- or worse still, none at all -- and then moor against the rules, either hogging short-term visitor moorings or bridge-hopping to try and evade CART restrictions, or just plain sitting doggo until CART eventually try and move them on -- if this ever happens. And then play the "but think of the children!" card if they are told to move on, in spite of the numerous rulings from CART about what is and isn't allowable to count as continuous cruising.

 

Personally I've found some of the "crusties" (not a term I'd use, but one often bandied around) to be lovely helpful people, and some of the "shiny boaters" (ditto) to be obnoxious selfish gits, which just goes to prove that you can't judge a book by its cover. And I've also found the opposite to be true sometimes, which just shows the danger of making sweeping generalisations about people...

 

Doesn't stop some other people doing it though, thinking (or stating) that someone with an expensive boat with polished brass is somehow superior to someone with a scruffy one with logs on the roof... 😞

So:
1. "itinerant" is just that (and emphasises "no mooring"). Its what we do.
2. the majority of our members really do move itinerantly becuase they get pissed off with land-side prejudice. Unsurprising really.
3. "evade" is an obnoxious term. Meanwhile (and noting that disabilities are regularly hidden) to jump to a conclusion on first blush (without knowing the facts - which you may not know or ever know or indeed have any right to know) is also offensive; almost all of my (at any rate) cases always have a sub-text in which there is a disability of other vulnerability involved (including references to boaters near Bradford on Avon - and its not in my gift to discuss any of that, is it now??) the sub-text usually gives rise to Reasonable Adjustments. So did you know that the CRT Welfare Officer (that'll be the one that the NBTA Chair wrote the job sepc for - that one) is so over worked, over subscribed that in April CRT are taking on a second? What does that say? Quite: that there are lots of problems here - clue: no high horses, no prejudice and no empathy failures, if you don't mind....
4. You want to prevent children going to school? Line up with the other rabid right-wingers, just over there....
5. Crustie refers to bread not people. Unless they want to be referred to as crusty hippies. Personally I'm a professional if you don't mind. So next time you are up in front of a judge that (unbeknown to you) is a boat-dweller: you going to call him "crustie"? Didn't think so.... Imaginary scenario? Actually not.
6. "Boat-polishers" - equally derogatory (well we have to get a dig in now and again .. but not without reason) sits in the same place as casting derision at people who drive Rollers of live in big houses. Karma is not far off their heels m'thinks.
7. I've seen some really scruffy houses. Not my business to be critical. Iv'e seen some you could eat your dinner off the kitchen floor ... also not my business. Just as it is none of their business whether I have wood on my roof or not. Tell you what though: when the snow is a foot thick on the ground and there is a power gut that takes out those hydrocarbon fuelled gas boilers so the heating goes down... and I pop out to get some more logs off the roof, bung them in the wood burner and struggle to keep the salon temperature under 28C... so roofs are really useful. "Logs?" you say? Well, I am looking at how the whole thing goes together #PhDzeroCarbonBargeeTraevllers.

The bottom line is this: there is no place for prejudice. The itinerant boat-dwelling community has been subjected to prejudice for a long time and more so in the past 10 years. 
So when the students from Bath say "we're studying how to make the towpath safer" and I reply "by addressing the prejudice" I'm on the money. 
The last time someone came thundering down the towpath at me wielding  a knife and I said "is there a problem here, oh and I'm a boater" and he ran off in the opposite direction I guess it had nothing to do with the felling axe I was holding ready to CHOP HIS HEAD OFF !! Ok I wasn't going to chop his head off. Maybe just his hands ;)


 

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

You repeatedly use the term itinerant - maybe you and the "National Boats Travel Nowhere" society should consider the meaning of the word - yes there is a huge difference between the "No Boats Travel Anywhere" members and the rest of the boaters. The vast majority of boaters are 'itinerant', you are just squatters.

 

itinerant
/ɪˈtɪn(ə)r(ə)nt,ʌɪˈtɪn(ə)r(ə)nt/
 
  1. Travelling from place to place.
    "itinerant traders"
     
     
    Maybe you should look to rename yourselves to the "Non-Itinerant boaters" at least it would be more honest & representative of you and you ideals.
     
    If you were truly 'itinerant' then 10 miles distance between facilities would be no problem for you.

... and maybe I should just report you to the EHRC? 

  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

So:
1. "itinerant" is just that (and emphasises "no mooring"). Its what we do.
2. the majority of our members really do move itinerantly becuase they get pissed off with land-side prejudice. Unsurprising really.
3. "evade" is an obnoxious term. Meanwhile (and noting that disabilities are regularly hidden) to jump to a conclusion on first blush (without knowing the facts - which you may not know or ever know or indeed have any right to know) is also offensive; almost all of my (at any rate) cases always have a sub-text in which there is a disability of other vulnerability involved (including references to boaters near Bradford on Avon - and its not in my gift to discuss any of that, is it now??) the sub-text usually gives rise to Reasonable Adjustments. So did you know that the CRT Welfare Officer (that'll be the one that the NBTA Chair wrote the job sepc for - that one) is so over worked, over subscribed that in April CRT are taking on a second? What does that say? Quite: that there are lots of problems here - clue: no high horses, no prejudice and no empathy failures, if you don't mind....
4. You want to prevent children going to school? Line up with the other rabid right-wingers, just over there....
5. Crustie refers to bread not people. Unless they want to be referred to as crusty hippies. Personally I'm a professional if you don't mind. So next time you are up in front of a judge that (unbeknown to you) is a boat-dweller: you going to call him "crustie"? Didn't think so.... Imaginary scenario? Actually not.
6. "Boat-polishers" - equally derogatory (well we have to get a dig in now and again .. but not without reason) sits in the same place as casting derision at people who drive Rollers of live in big houses. Karma is not far off their heels m'thinks.
7. I've seen some really scruffy houses. Not my business to be critical. Iv'e seen some you could eat your dinner off the kitchen floor ... also not my business. Just as it is none of their business whether I have wood on my roof or not. Tell you what though: when the snow is a foot thick on the ground and there is a power gut that takes out those hydrocarbon fuelled gas boilers so the heating goes down... and I pop out to get some more logs off the roof, bung them in the wood burner and struggle to keep the salon temperature under 28C... so roofs are really useful. "Logs?" you say? Well, I am looking at how the whole thing goes together #PhDzeroCarbonBargeeTraevllers.

The bottom line is this: there is no place for prejudice. The itinerant boat-dwelling community has been subjected to prejudice for a long time and more so in the past 10 years. 
So when the students from Bath say "we're studying how to make the towpath safer" and I reply "by addressing the prejudice" I'm on the money. 
The last time someone came thundering down the towpath at me wielding  a knife and I said "is there a problem here, oh and I'm a boater" and he ran off in the opposite direction I guess it had nothing to do with the felling axe I was holding ready to CHOP HIS HEAD OFF !! Ok I wasn't going to chop his head off. Maybe just his hands ;)


 

... and maybe I should just report you to the EHRC? 

 

And which law have I broken, telling the truth is not illegal.

As the EHRC's function is to Enforce the equality Act 2010, maybe you could identify which parts or section I have contravened ?

 

Threats are not acceptable on the forum, (which you agreed to when you signed up), so unless you intend to carry it out maybe you'd like to withdraw your threat - either s**t or get off the pot.

If the cap fits than so be it accept what you really are - A non-Itinerant boater, otherwise 10 miles between facilities would not be a problem.

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

37 minutes ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

w
The last time someone came thundering down the towpath at me wielding  a knife and I said "is there a problem here, oh and I'm a boater" and he ran off in the opposite direction I guess it had nothing to do with the felling axe I was holding ready to CHOP HIS HEAD OFF !! Ok I wasn't going to chop his head off. Maybe just his hands ;)

You seem to be related to frangar.

 

Having said that, he is a bit more subtle when he talks about what he does when he comes face to face on the towpath ;) 😉 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nick_theboatman2 said:

The obligation is to move to anew place every 14 days (or longer if reasonable in the circumstances [and reasonable cannot be laid down in advance]) and "place" is undefined but stems from the evidence: place on the map; local knowledge; either side of a clear obstruction; a village -> outside the village -> next village (3 places); a different borough;  and so on.
The differences in the needs of itinerant live-aboards and recreational boaters are stark. 
So for example the NHS worker who needs to get to an early shift isn't going to be best pleased to have to drive 20 miles having walked down the muddy towpath in the dark, are they? But that is what the legislation + the "Ts & Cs" say.... (no amount of banging saucepans mitigates that). and we've got a few of them....

Oh dear!! I can think of plenty of NHS workers who travel much further than that to work, often along wet, muddy country lanes, in the dark and sometimes in the snow.
It isn't just non-moving boaters you know! 

And your subsequent postings suggest that it is you who is prejudiced.

Edited by Graham Davis
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember Nick from early 2011 when he tried to hijack the movement against BW Moorings Strategy on the Lee and Stort, one of Sally Ash's blue sky thinking ideas slipped in under the radar in early Feb after the coldest winter on record.

 

A swift mobilisation of local concerned boaters formed to not only challenge the illegally short consultation process done at a time of year guaranteed to have little or no response, but also to engage with the wider public...towpath users, cyclists, rowing clubs, cruising clubs, Environmental experts, Fishing groups and the Lea Valley Rangers...NONE of whom had been consulted.

 

The proposals would have been catastrophic for the rivers, water levels, fish levels, other wildlife, along with lack of facilities in some of the zones.

 

Nick came along with the same ideas from Kanda, along with Panda Smith, pushing the ethnic based traveller persecution angle.

 

Thank goodness this was pushed away at the time, all the involved groups provided proper research to BW on why the proposals should not only be shelved, but ditched completely.

It was dropped, and Sally left soon afterwards.

Cheers but no thanks Nick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, matty40s said:

I remember Nick from early 2011 when he tried to hijack the movement against BW Moorings Strategy on the Lee and Stort, one of Sally Ash's blue sky thinking ideas slipped in under the radar in early Feb after the coldest winter on record.

 

A swift mobilisation of local concerned boaters formed to not only challenge the illegally short consultation process done at a time of year guaranteed to have little or no response, but also to engage with the wider public...towpath users, cyclists, rowing clubs, cruising clubs, Environmental experts, Fishing groups and the Lea Valley Rangers...NONE of whom had been consulted.

 

The proposals would have been catastrophic for the rivers, water levels, fish levels, other wildlife, along with lack of facilities in some of the zones.

 

Nick came along with the same ideas from Kanda, along with Panda Smith, pushing the ethnic based traveller persecution angle.

 

Thank goodness this was pushed away at the time, all the involved groups provided proper research to BW on why the proposals should not only be shelved, but ditched completely.

It was dropped, and Sally left soon afterwards.

Cheers but no thanks Nick.

Hmm. Seems your memory isn't quite up to scratch then. Because the NBTA was behind the demand for proper consultation. The NBTA represents itinerant boat-dwellers. And as I recall the other key stakeholders were pushing their own constituency (and, on first blush) at the expense of the itinerant live-aboards. The proposals were bad all round which is why the NBTA was objecting to them. Most of all we were objecting to the conduct of Sally Ash. She left shortly afterwards because we made it clear to the SoS what was going on in BW at the time (ie her conduct) and he wanted his "get shot of BW" order. Which he did. And when Parry took over she was out. With her OBE, bless. But her conduct was pretty despicable (per MSSG on the K&A for example). 
You refer to "me" but I was representing the NBTA - its members... you a member? As was Panda Smith (representing the KANDA constituency, affiliated to the NBTA seeing as Panda is was and still is the NBTA Chair). 
As for "ditched" not exactly, because the Safety Zones on the Lee (introduced absent consultation) have been causing great difficulties - unless you are a rower of course and this was all about giving rowers preference over the itinerant boat-dwellers. And since when has recreational use carried preference over "home"?
By the way who do _you_ represent? Because as I understand it NBTA London has approximately 15,000 members.
 

  • Haha 1
  • Unimpressed 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

And which law have I broken, telling the truth is not illegal.

As the EHRC's function is to Enforce the equality Act 2010, maybe you could identify which parts or section I have contravened ?

 

Threats are not acceptable on the forum, (which you agreed to when you signed up), so unless you intend to carry it out maybe you'd like to withdraw your threat - either s**t or get off the pot.

If the cap fits than so be it accept what you really are - A non-Itinerant boater, otherwise 10 miles between facilities would not be a problem.

There is no threat here, merely a statement of fact.
s.13(1).

Edited by nick_theboatman2
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.