C&RT License Survey

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

34 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Pay by use seems an enormously sensible model for infrastructure which nobody other than Boat users has any need for. 

 

It is entirely possible that wonderful society enhancing families of random people would find a disused lock with one end stanked orf and a bit of water flowing over the weir a considerably more useful asset for picnics and perhaps a summer dip than a working lock annexed by Boat owners with Harold Shipman beards. 

 

It not all about a small group with paid access. This is a public amenity. 

 

 

 

 

 

It is a lot more fun swimming on a lock which Boats can never use. 

But would/will they pay their pound £  to use it?

will they contribute more through Council Tax to pay for the occasional swim?

perhaps a surcharge for continuous swimmers ?

 

[magnetman]

The cost of a disused canal with minimal maintenance, no enforcement of Boats and water transfer as the main aim would be massively less than the current spend. DEFRA or no DEFRA, CRT or no CRT a non functioning canal is going to cost less whatever anyone says. 

 

I think it would make a huge difference if there were no Boats to deal with.

 

In the past canals were seen as bins, some became derelict and over time due to the efforts of various people and organisations they had a renaissance. 

 

In the modern age of pressure on land use, austerity (even the Labour geyser admits this) and wealth transfer upwards it seems unlikely that canals will survive if the people who need them to be in working order complain about paying more. 

 

I think there is a very real risk of canals being lost. Obviously a large part of the user base is fuddy duddies so it is a bit of a foregone conclusion really. 

 

Canals are land with water on top. 

 

When land use becomes a hot topic things begin to change. 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2023 by magnetman
grammar and removed mild sex references

[Machpoint005]

4 hours ago, Cheshire cat said:

You are wrong no matter how much you and I are irritated by it

 

They are interchangeable

 

Not really, or at least, not with equal weight.

 

It's interesting that the OED definition of the verb license uses practise (verb). 

 

The "interchangeablity" makes no sense. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Momac]

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

 

 

I think it would make a huge difference if there were no Boats to deal with.

 

 

Perhaps you should be the first to give up your boat (assuming you do own a boat).

 

 

 

 

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

7 minutes ago, magnetman said:

The cost of a disused canal with minimal maintenance, no enforcement of Boats and water transfer as the main aim would be massively less than the current spend. DEFRA or no DEFRA, CRT or no CRT a non functioning canal is going to cost less whatever anyone says. 

 

with minimal maintenance, CRT are currently promoting non functional canals,

which makes me wonder why they need any further government funding?

 

 

[MtB]

7 hours ago, magnetman said:

Yes but if the price of secondhand Boats came down you might find people who have disposable income but little capital could buy a Boat and enjoy it. 

 

Its not all about running costs its also about the cost of buying a decent Boat in the first place. 

 

I have detected a strange phenomenon over the yars which was that the price of second hand narrow Boats went up. This can't happen because it is a depreciating asset (hysteric boats excepted). 

 

Something going on with licence fees being too low I think. 

 

 

 

Too much demand ? 

 

Yep. A racing certainty. Not only are rust-bucket scrappers changing hands for £30k but the £300k new boat builders also have their order books rammed full. Is this because:

 

A) Boat buyers are profligate spendthrifts?

Or 

B ) The liveaboard CC offering is ridiculously cheap and too good to turn down? 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

^^

is this a consultation?

 

11 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Yep. A racing certainty. Not only are rust-bucket scrappers changing hands for £30k but the £300k new boat builders also have their order books rammed full. Is this because:

 

A) Boat buyers are profligate spendthrifts?

Or 

B ) The liveaboard CC offering is ridiculously cheap and too good to turn down? 

How do you explain the hobby boater spending £300K on a boat they use for a fortnight once a year?

 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

5 hours ago, IanD said:

 

I don't think you understand how to analyse/combine multiple choice questions, and your analysis is wrong because the choices and numbers in the survey results are not what you seem to think they are.

 

No doubt you disagree...

 

What you're suggesting also doesn't make any sense when you look at the fact that CCers are outnumbered about 4:1 by HMers and wideboaters are also similarly outnumbered by narrowboaters. Which means it's unsurprising that far more boaters think CCers amd wideboats should pay more than everyone should see the same increase, which is exactly what the survey shows.

 

It *would* have been surprising if the most popular option had been to keep the status quo, because most boaters would be worse off than choosing the other options.

I note that you did not take up the challenge of publishing your own calculations...

 

... and what you call three multi choice questions were, in fact, binary choice ...

 

[Arthur Marshall]

40 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

How do you explain the hobby boater spending £300K on a boat they use for a fortnight once a year?

 

There's a lot of idiots about. Rich ones, or at least they start off that way.

There are several boats where I moor that haven't moved in years. Not lived on. There was one on my last mooring that had been sunk for ten years, licence and mooring fees all paid up. People have intentions.

[Momac]

9 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

There's a lot of idiots about. Rich ones, or at least they start off that way.

There are several boats where I moor that haven't moved in years. Not lived on. There was one on my last mooring that had been sunk for ten years, licence and mooring fees all paid up. People have intentions.

I suspect every marina/mooring site  has boats that never move and are at best rarely visited .

Providing such boats and their owners are not in any way restricting the navigation nor in debt  we should be grateful to them.

 

[magnetman]

10 hours ago, MartynG said:

Perhaps you should be the first to give up your boat (assuming you do own a boat).

 

 

 

 

 

I own 4 motorised Boats. 

 

The Boat I have on CRT land never moves and is on a lock free stretch of canal (residential mooring). Other Boats are on the Thames so yes I am a bit biased as not personally interested in using canals for Boating. 

 

I'm not advocating a disused canal but I do think people using Boats paying more makes some sense in a way. 

 

 

 

[Momac]

10 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

 

 

How do you explain the hobby boater spending £300K on a boat they use for a fortnight once a year?

 

Boating has never been a cheap hobby. 

 

I don't add up the cost precisely but without the boat there would obviously be a significant annual cost saving. This would  be sufficient to fund an alternative lifestyle like a number of  breaks staying in nice b&b's  and holidays abroad. Or alternatively as some people have done there is the motorhome/caravan option which has strong similarities with boating but more manageable costs .

 

We do seem to be moving towards boating being less affordable and the alternative options  requiring less commitment / more manageable costs  and looking better value for money which is not good for the future of boating on the inland  waterways.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

34 minutes ago, MartynG said:

Boating has never been a cheap hobby. 

 

I don't add up the cost precisely but without the boat there would obviously be a significant annual cost saving. This would  be sufficient to fund an alternative lifestyle like a number of  breaks staying in nice b&b's  and holidays abroad. Or alternatively as some people have done there is the motorhome/caravan option which has strong similarities with boating but more manageable costs .

 

We do seem to be moving towards boating being less affordable and the alternative options  requiring less commitment / more manageable costs  and looking better value for money which is not good for the future of boating on the inland  waterways.

 

 

My plan is just to downsize, get what I can for my old tub and spend it on a smaller cruiser, 30 foot or thereabouts, inboard engine.

[Momac]

3 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

My plan is just to downsize, get what I can for my old tub and spend it on a smaller cruiser, 30 foot or thereabouts, inboard engine.

My plan is .....

 

The chief officer and I have ambitions for spending more time afloat using our present boat (in retirement or semi-retirement) . As a bonus the cost per day reduces with greater use.🙂

 

[ditchcrawler]

17 hours ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

How do you explain the hobby boater spending £300K on a boat they use for a fortnight once a year?

 

That long

[IanD]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

That long

Owning a boat you only use occasionally doesn't make sense, certainly not from a money point of view. Neither does buying a brand new one. Actually, neither do lots of other things people spend money on... 😉

[Arthur Marshall]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

Owning a boat you only use occasionally doesn't make sense, certainly not from a money point of view. Neither does buying a brand new one. Actually, neither do lots of other things people spend money on... 😉

The only things really worth buying are things you use regularly. Ignoring food and fuel, that leaves books, trombones, melodeons and guitars. Everything else is just keeping the economy going so rich people can get richer.

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The only things really worth buying are things you use regularly. Ignoring food and fuel, that leaves books, trombones, melodeons and guitars. Everything else is just keeping the economy going so rich people can get richer.

You forgot saxophones... 😉

[magnetman]

Boats are essential if one uses them for accomodation while choosing to have no other options in this regard. 

 

Watch it doesn't sink! 

 

So yeah. I'll add Boats. And strong Cider. 

 

And a piratical attitude. 

 

All these arrr essential..

 

[Arthur Marshall]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

You forgot saxophones... 😉

Two of those is enough... I thought you'd appreciate the inclusion of melodeons.

Edited December 24, 2023 by Arthur Marshall

[IanD]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Two of those is enough... I thought you'd appreciate the inclusion of melodeons.

I did, thank you 🙂

 

If two saxophones is enough, why does my wife have four? And all different sizes? 😉

 

[don't ask how many melodeons I've got...]

Edited December 24, 2023 by IanD

[tree monkey]

9 hours ago, IanD said:

I did, thank you 🙂

 

If two saxophones is enough, why does my wife have four? And all different sizes? 😉

 

[don't ask how many melodeons I've got...]

So exactly how many melodeons do you have?

[MtB]

15 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The only things really worth buying are things you use regularly. Ignoring food and fuel, that leaves books, trombones, melodeons and guitars. Everything else is just keeping the economy going so rich people can get richer.

 

I'd add to the list digital multi-meters. I have them all over the place and use them every day. 

 

 

[Bristolfashion]

17 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The only things really worth buying are things you use regularly. Ignoring food and fuel, that leaves books, trombones, melodeons and guitars. Everything else is just keeping the economy going so rich people can get richer.

But once you've got a King 2B, a Conn 88H and a pBone, what more do you need?

[magnetman]

I like knitting needles.