Not looking good for us

[PD1964]

13 minutes ago, PD1964 said:

 You really don’t have a clue about what’s happening with the canals, your a hire boater, that’s bought your first boat £250K+ picking it up maybe Summer, you boast about your “deep pockets” “Schilling Rudder” I can’t say too much, but your becoming quite laughable up North.

No sorry Laughable, wink wink(or should I put one of your winking emojis on)

[Guest]

33 minutes ago, dmr said:

 

Don't think a dash cam would have helped, we had just got the boat tied up and were walking to the pub. 😀

 

Indeed, but you knew what I meant really?

[Arthur Marshall]

9 hours ago, PD1964 said:

 You really don’t have a clue about what’s happening with the canals, your a hire boater, that’s bought your first boat £250K+ picking it up maybe Summer, you boast about your “deep pockets” “Schilling Rudder” I can’t say too much, but your becoming quite laughable up North.

To be honest, someone who has just invested that amount of dosh on a first boat probably has more interest in what's becoming of the system than someone like me, who may have been trundling round the thing for thirty years but won't be doing it for many more. And hire boaters quite possibly see more of it than eighty per cent of boat owners, judging by the proportion on our mooring that ever go out for more than a day. Most haven't been off the mooring in living memory.

[Paul C]

8 hours ago, M_JG said:

 

Indeed, but you knew what I meant really?

Well yeah but no not really. A trucker or their firm are hardly going to incriminate themselves by handing over their dash cam footage of a bridge strike, especially if the driver didn’t even realise.And the chances of another passing motorist being in precisely the right place for useful dashcam footage, and handing it in, are slim too.

 

Cameras on bridges? Maybe, but they’d need to record all vehicle movements, have a power supply, and there would probably need to be at least 4 of them to adequately cover all the angles to secure an insurance claim.

 

So the fact that you personally have a dashcam is somewhat moot in this situation. And the reality is, CRT trace very few bridge strikes to the perpetrator, so it is a significant maintenance cost to them.

[IanD]

10 hours ago, PD1964 said:

 You really don’t have a clue about what’s happening with the canals, your a hire boater, that’s bought your first boat £250K+ picking it up maybe Summer, you boast about your “deep pockets” “Schilling Rudder” I can’t say too much, but your becoming quite laughable up North.

I'm glad you're amused; I find your attitude prejudiced and pathetic.

 

I don't "boast" about anything; unlike some people (you included, it seems) I see that there are good people (and knowledgeable ones) and a*seholes (and ignorant ones) in all categories of boater, including liveaboards and hirers, shiny and scruffy boats, Northern and Southern, well-off and less well-off, that everybody's needs are different, and whatever is being discussed there's no one "right" solution that's best for everybody. And unlike you I always try and separate out facts (not alternative ones...) from opinions -- because like a*seholes, everyone has one, but some are more full of sh*t than others 🙂

 

But regarding blue signs specifically -- and your apparent sense of humour failure about my post --  I see lots of them every week, including new ones sometimes -- how many do you see? 😉

 

(and as I said it doesn't matter anyway, neither of us is the target for these signs, it's "other people" (non-boaters) and indirectly the government...)

Edited February 21, 2023 by IanD

[peterboat]

57 minutes ago, Paul C said:

Well yeah but no not really. A trucker or their firm are hardly going to incriminate themselves by handing over their dash cam footage of a bridge strike, especially if the driver didn’t even realise.And the chances of another passing motorist being in precisely the right place for useful dashcam footage, and handing it in, are slim too.

 

Cameras on bridges? Maybe, but they’d need to record all vehicle movements, have a power supply, and there would probably need to be at least 4 of them to adequately cover all the angles to secure an insurance claim.

 

So the fact that you personally have a dashcam is somewhat moot in this situation. And the reality is, CRT trace very few bridge strikes to the perpetrator, so it is a significant maintenance cost to them.

We were at Barnby Dun, Jayne was operating the lift bridge when a lorry jumped the lights an siren! He missed the barrier on the approach but removed it on the exit! The barrier hit one of the waiting cars, all caught on dashcam. Fortunately the bridge still worked, the details were sent to CRT as the lorry driver didn't stop

[Guest]

57 minutes ago, Paul C said:

Well yeah but no not really. A trucker or their firm are hardly going to incriminate themselves by handing over their dash cam footage of a bridge strike, especially if the driver didn’t even realise.And the chances of another passing motorist being in precisely the right place for useful dashcam footage, and handing it in, are slim too.

 

Cameras on bridges? Maybe, but they’d need to record all vehicle movements, have a power supply, and there would probably need to be at least 4 of them to adequately cover all the angles to secure an insurance claim.

 

So the fact that you personally have a dashcam is somewhat moot in this situation. And the reality is, CRT trace very few bridge strikes to the perpetrator, so it is a significant maintenance cost to them.

 

I wasn't suggesting somebody would incriminate themselves by submitting their own footage.

 

I was also speaking generally about the benefits of having a dash cam, not that I was likely to capture a bridge strike on a bridge which is the responsibility of CRT.

 

 

[MtB]

I very much agree with IanD about the blue signs. They are helpful in raising public and government awareness of canals in the most general way. In a few years when an important canal or two gets permanently closed due to structural failure and lack of funds to fix it, the media will latch onto it properly and there will be a public outcry, and the groundwork for this is being laid now with the forest of blue signs. Yes on the surface they are fun to poke fun at but underneath, I think most of us realise instinctively that there is more to them than just telling us what we as boaters already know, that life is better by water. 

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

To be honest, someone who has just invested that amount of dosh on a first boat probably has more interest in what's becoming of the system than someone like me, who may have been trundling round the thing for thirty years but won't be doing it for many more. And hire boaters quite possibly see more of it than eighty per cent of boat owners, judging by the proportion on our mooring that ever go out for more than a day. Most haven't been off the mooring in living memory.

yes, some truth in that but that dosh is relative though ain’t it. 
although it’s not quite what you were referring to , someone could equally be pouring £10K, or £2K life savings into a boat and still have that passion or commitment to the canals. I know a few without boats who have the passion too. 
 

if anything is to spoil life on the cut it’ll be them with the deep pockets throwing their weight around 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[noddyboater]

1 hour ago, peterboat said:

We were at Barnby Dun, Jayne was operating the lift bridge when a lorry jumped the lights an siren! He missed the barrier on the approach but removed it on the exit! The barrier hit one of the waiting cars, all caught on dashcam. Fortunately the bridge still worked, the details were sent to CRT as the lorry driver didn't stop

We had the bridge get stuck there one Christmas eve, it was nearly down but not quite although the barriers had lifted. 

We did what we could to alert motorists not to risk it but the clever tw@t who chose to ignore us ripped his sump off!

Laugh? I had to open another bottle of whisky. 

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

yes, some truth in that but that dosh is relative though ain’t it. 
although it’s not quite what you were referring to , someone could equally be pouring £10K, or £2K life savings into a boat and still have that passion or commitment to the canals. I know a few without boats who have the passion too. 
 

if anything is to spoil life on the cut it’ll be them with the deep pockets throwing their weight around

I certainly found it more pleasant, both to live on and as leisure, when boats were cheaper and had less electronic gubbins inside. The cut was a lot quieter then as people didn't need to run gennies or engines for hours a day just to do the washing or watch TV. I reluctantly accept that people just want floating mansions now and I suppose they all need microwaves as they don't know how to cook.

Anyway, only be the ones with deep pockets left soon.

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I certainly found it more pleasant, both to live on and as leisure, when boats were cheaper and had less electronic gubbins inside. The cut was a lot quieter then as people didn't need to run gennies or engines for hours a day just to do the washing or watch TV. I reluctantly accept that people just want floating mansions now and I suppose they all need microwaves as they don't know how to cook.

Anyway, only be the ones with deep pockets left soon.

 

I see from your quote that Goliath's continuing his usual sniping at people who love the canals and may well be more committed to the future of the canals and boaters than he is but just happen to be better off, it must be tiring for him carrying those all chips around.

 

I keep suggesting ways (e.g. license fee graduation) to make people like me pay more and people like you pay less precisely to stop the canals turning into a millionaires ghetto -- which is the last thing that I want! -- but somehow this keeps getting ignored or even shot down in flames by certain people... 😞

Edited February 21, 2023 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

you always assume I don’t care, I want something for free, I’m not committed to the future of the canals, and in your words I’m an asshole. 
 

I’ve no chip on my shoulder, I simply think you’re very conceited. 
 

you can make it out to be a money thing if it makes you feel better

 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

48 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

I see from your quote that Goliath's continuing his usual sniping at people who love the canals and may well be more committed to the future of the canals and boaters than he is but just happen to be better off, it must be tiring for him carrying those all chips around.

 

I keep suggesting ways (e.g. license fee graduation) to make people like me pay more and people like you pay less precisely to stop the canals turning into a millionaires ghetto -- which is the last thing that I want! -- but somehow this keeps getting ignored or even shot down in flames by certain people... 😞

I think all of us , especially those who live permanently on the canals, are about as committed to the future of the system as we can be. Doesn't stop us having opinions about some specific types of boatowners - but they are generalisations, and doubts about the future. There are certainly a lot of brand new expensive boats tied up in marinas that never cruise, and there's nothing wrong with that,  folk like a floating weekend cottage, but it could be argued that whether the locks will work in ten years time hardly affects them, while those of us who spend months cruising every year do have a valid concern.

There's no practical way to make rich people pay more than poor people (if the tax system can't manage it, CRT won't) and as they're getting the same service,  why should they? I suspect Goliath, like me, doesn't give a toss about money as long as he can maintain his boat, eat and keep warm. No-one needs more than that, though it's nice to have a bit spare to buy trombones with. Or melodeons.

And this being a discussion forum, everything gets shot down in flames,  and so it should. Anything left standing at the end might be worth considering, having survived the furnace.

[IanD]

40 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I think all of us , especially those who live permanently on the canals, are about as committed to the future of the system as we can be. Doesn't stop us having opinions about some specific types of boatowners - but they are generalisations, and doubts about the future. There are certainly a lot of brand new expensive boats tied up in marinas that never cruise, and there's nothing wrong with that,  folk like a floating weekend cottage, but it could be argued that whether the locks will work in ten years time hardly affects them, while those of us who spend months cruising every year do have a valid concern.

There's no practical way to make rich people pay more than poor people (if the tax system can't manage it, CRT won't) and as they're getting the same service,  why should they? I suspect Goliath, like me, doesn't give a toss about money as long as he can maintain his boat, eat and keep warm. No-one needs more than that, though it's nice to have a bit spare to buy trombones with. Or melodeons.

And this being a discussion forum, everything gets shot down in flames,  and so it should. Anything left standing at the end might be worth considering, having survived the furnace.

 

I'm not arguing with your last line, debate is good; what annoys me is people arguing just for the sake of it, being perpetually negative against any constructive ideas, refusing to face facts (or making them up), or sniping or making personal attacks on other people because they don't like what they're saying. Goliath has done this so many times now that I simply refuse to engage with him any more (as do some others), it's pointless and just leads to bile being spewed out on the forum.

 

There are perfectly good ways to make richer people pay more for their boating, because as the earlier CART review pointed out boat size is an indirect indicator of wealth -- as is boat age, richer people tend to have bigger and newer boats. Charging big/wide boats more (area charging) and small/narrow ones less (if the total stays the same) is one way to do this, which it seems is one of the things CART are considering -- though it will obviously meet resistance from the minority (not me!) who have to pay more.

 

Another way would be by age of boat, maybe vary this over a 2:1 range like length and width do -- keep the fee as it is for median age boats (e.g. 12 years), increase it for newer ones (e.g. +40% for brand new dropping linearly), decrease it for older ones (e.g. dropping to -30% for 25yo and above), which would again keep the total the same. This would mean people like me with expensive new boats (who can afford it, or they couldn't have bought the boat) pay more, and long-standing cruisers on old boats pay less -- or when the fees go up, the old boats pay the same as today and the new boats a *lot* more...

 

It's all about trying to protect the less well-off from the inevitable license fee increases, which seems fair to me -- though again, I'm sure some will disagree because they don't see why they should pay more so others should pay less, which is why they want a flat fee increase... 😞

Edited February 21, 2023 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

19 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I think all of us , especially those who live permanently on the canals, are about as committed to the future of the system as we can be. Doesn't stop us having opinions about some specific types of boatowners - but they are generalisations, and doubts about the future. There are certainly a lot of brand new expensive boats tied up in marinas that never cruise, and there's nothing wrong with that,  folk like a floating weekend cottage, but it could be argued that whether the locks will work in ten years time hardly affects them, while those of us who spend months cruising every year do have a valid concern.

There's no practical way to make rich people pay more than poor people (if the tax system can't manage it, CRT won't) and as they're getting the same service,  why should they? I suspect Goliath, like me, doesn't give a toss about money as long as he can maintain his boat, eat and keep warm. No-one needs more than that, though it's nice to have a bit spare to buy trombones with. Or melodeons.

And this being a discussion forum, everything gets shot down in flames,  and so it should. Anything left standing at the end might be worth considering, having survived the furnace.

Yes, I don’t see why the wealthy should pay more to use the canals and I’ve said that before.

Firstly why should they pay more for the same service as you say. Perhaps they’re usually paying more to CRT anyway by having a longer/bigger boat and maybe they’re paying a small fortune too with good moorings.

But also it’d bring a sense of entitlement if they did pay more.  The wealthy would not pay extra through a sense of altruism, they’d want something extra in return for it.

 

And no I’ve never given much of a toss for money. Which is why I gave up a career and sold the house before moving on to a boat to travel about.

[Paul C]

Charging based on age, and/or a new boat one-off charge, is quite a good idea. How it would be implemented, I have no idea, because the age of a boat is somewhat indeterminate.

[Momac]

Just now, Paul C said:

............the age of a boat is somewhat indeterminate.

Doesn't  your insurer ask for the year of construction ?

Do Narrowboats built since the late 1990's or whenever it was that the RCD was introduced   not have a HIN (Hull Identification Number). which will be  a clue to the year of construction?

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

7 minutes ago, Paul C said:

Charging based on age, and/or a new boat one-off charge, is quite a good idea. How it would be implemented, I have no idea, because the age of a boat is somewhat indeterminate.

It’s too complex, and it’s been said before it’d cost more to implement some of these ideas than would be got in return.

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, Paul C said:

Charging based on age, and/or a new boat one-off charge, is quite a good idea. How it would be implemented, I have no idea, because the age of a boat is somewhat indeterminate.

 

Most boats have a construction date (e.g. 1998) which is already recorded by CART. There would be a few "special cases" (like with cars) which would have to be dealt with separately, but it should work for the great majority of boats, be simple to calculate and administer, and -- like charging by area -- difficult to evade.

 

So unlikely to happen, then... 😞

[Momac]

8 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Most boats have a construction date (e.g. 1998) which is already recorded by CART. 

Iagree . Does anyone really own a boat and not understand its age, even if approximately?

I checked my C&RT account and the year of construction is already on C&RT records. If not known exactly an estimate would be accepted.

 

 

 

 

[Cheshire cat]

The age would only need to be discovered once. After that it would sit alongside the index number on record. If it's going to cost to implement charge a registration supplement. Easily done if the will exists.

[David Mack]

38 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I checked my C&RT account and the year of construction is already on C&RT records

Only because you or a previous owner has declared it when licencing the boat. CRT has no independent verification of any of the boat data on their records.

 

Post RCD boats should have all the relevant documentation, but I imagine as the years pass this may get separated from the boat. And there may be no reliable records for pre RCD craft, home built boats etc.

 

[LadyG]

On 07/02/2023 at 19:41, Midnight said:

One of the questions I put to Sean McGuinley last year was would CRT consider mothballing the Hudderfield and Rochdale to divert resources into keeping the Leeds and Liverpool open. The answer was an emphatic 'No'.

They just mothball all three regularly now.

Nope, in spite of info to the contrary the Rochdale is navigable, I love it, well Hebden Bridge anyway.

Not managed to go far,  but I expect to travel further if another boat appears and we can double up.

Vlockies are currently hibernating. I need them to help out, if I'm going to tha end,  or I might end up in bandit territory.

Edited February 21, 2023 by LadyG

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

5 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Nope, in spite of info to the contrary the Rochdale is navigable, I love it, well Hebden Bridge anyway.

Not managed to go far,  but I expect to travel further if another boat appears and we can double up.

Vlockies are currently hibernating. I need them to help out, or I might end up in bandit territory.

Thought you’d gone back on the Leeds Liverpool?