Playground for the Rich

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, Tonka said:

Yes but some of those marina owners had to dig a marina so as they could get more hire boat licences. Then where potentially out of pocket because BW didn't reduce the online moorings.

But they nearly all have online moorings outside their marinas and in one case, on the Ashby, taking over 14 day moorings

[Heartland]

And I’ve never really found myself feeling I’m in a playground for the rich when passing through Tipton. 

 

As noted in previous threads there are some areas that are "no go areas". And, there are others like Tipton where it is nice to see as many boats as possible and it is also of use to be able to moor up and not be prevented from doing so by the expensive, or private, moorings that might exist (such as on the Halifax Arm). I recall taking a boat along the Warwickshire Avon and passing a large house and grounds where there was a Peocock complete with bright plumage. So navigating the waterways brings boaters into contact with all classes of Society.

[Momac]

Banks are being instructed to help. 

Back in the early 90's interest rates rose rapidly. We underpaid for awhile with agreement from the bank. Of course our debt increased.

6% mortgage interest isn't that bad. The very low interest in recent years was abnormal.

Also many folks are still on a deal so the interest rate rises have not hit them yet.

Living on a boat would not be a choice for most people especially if they have children.

And it has been said many times that living on a boat is not a cheap way of living.

Edited July 15, 2023 by MartynG

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

3 minutes ago, MartynG said:

indecent 

Spell checker and typing errors often come up with better words 

 

1 hour ago, Heartland said:

So navigating the waterways brings boaters into contact with all classes of Society.

Yes and often shatters assumptions

[Momac]

42 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Spell checker and typing errors often come up with better words 

 

I have corrected that . 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

I think my original question should really have asked “Do the public see the Inland waterways as a playground for the rich?”

 

 

[Tonka]

1 minute ago, Goliath said:

I think my original question should really have asked “Do the public see the Inland waterways as a playground for the rich?”

 

 

But we are mostly boat owners so may not be able to answer 

[Mike Todd]

On 14/07/2023 at 15:48, Bargebuilder said:

We did the entire length of the K&A last year and it is amongst the most poorly maintained canals that we've travelled. Pump failure held us in the Caen Hill flight for a week and there were numerous broken paddles and leaky gates and gates that wouldn't open fully. One lock just above Bristol took just shy of an hour to fill!

 

Of course boats do cause damage, but the problems we encountered were mainly due to neglect and repairs are done on a 'fire fighting' basis.

I think that that is a bit unfair, overall. remember that this is a restored canal and, like most of them, the emphasis was on getting it open and  making the surface of the water look good. The banks are eroding fast - rarely piled ans the usage is well above the levels anticipated when it was handed over to BW. The pumps and associated works at both Caen Hill and Crofton have been given extensive makeovers this year (leading to extended limitations on opening). The closure at Heathy Close (Wootton Rivers) was quite long but resulted from substantial boater damage - of course, the age of some gates means that accidents will happen. (Another problem with restored canals is that all the gates life expire at the same time!) Given that this meant that the gates had to go back to base for repair and that concrete works were needed to repair damages, it seems to me that CaRT managed to re-open it in remarkably short time. The recent announcement on future funding means that we will all be suffering from lack of maintenance before long. Don't blame CaRT, tackle the decision makers.

[BoatinglifeupNorth]

39 minutes ago, Goliath said:

I think my original question should really have asked “Do the public see the Inland waterways as a playground for the rich?”

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Tonka said:

But we are mostly boat owners so may not be able to answer 

As Tonka says’s we’re boat owners, well some of us are and some aren’t. Maybe you should put it on a more general public forum and get back to us with the non boating public’s response.

 If you do, don’t tell people on here where you have asked the question, so responses/views can’t be manipulated. Needs to totally biased.

Edited July 15, 2023 by BoatinglifeupNorth

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

16 minutes ago, BoatinglifeupNorth said:

 

As Tonka says’s we’re boat owners, well some of us are and some aren’t. Maybe you should put it on a more general public forum and get back to us with the non boating public’s response.

But we are all members of the public and deal with other members of the public day to day. 
 

So we ought to have a view. 
 

Don’t forget the idea of a playground for the rich has come up a few times on this forum. 

 

 

Edited July 15, 2023 by Goliath

[Mike Todd]

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

I think my original question should really have asked “Do the public see the Inland waterways as a playground for the rich?”

 

 

But the public don't make these sorts of decisions. Most would not know the pros and cons at all.

[Momac]

1 hour ago, Goliath said:

I think my original question should really have asked “Do the public see the Inland waterways as a playground for the rich?”

 

 

I honestly don't think the great majority of the public are aware of the geography of the inland waterways in the UK. So I think you would get a don't know from most of the public.

[Bargebuilder]

56 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

I think that that is a bit unfair, overall. remember that this is a restored canal and, like most of them, the emphasis was on getting it open and  making the surface of the water look good. The banks are eroding fast - rarely piled ans the usage is well above the levels anticipated when it was handed over to BW. The pumps and associated works at both Caen Hill and Crofton have been given extensive makeovers this year (leading to extended limitations on opening). The closure at Heathy Close (Wootton Rivers) was quite long but resulted from substantial boater damage - of course, the age of some gates means that accidents will happen. (Another problem with restored canals is that all the gates life expire at the same time!) Given that this meant that the gates had to go back to base for repair and that concrete works were needed to repair damages, it seems to me that CaRT managed to re-open it in remarkably short time. The recent announcement on future funding means that we will all be suffering from lack of maintenance before long. Don't blame CaRT, tackle the decision makers.

To describe many of the lock gates and paddles on the K&A as being in a poor state of repair can't really be argued with, as demonstrated by the amount of warning tape adorning the said equipment; at least it did last summer.

 

I feel sad for the volunteers who gave generously of their time and money to restore the canal to the high standard that we enjoyed when we first navigated it some 15 years ago, only for them to watch things slip in more recent years.

 

C&RT may have no option but to neglect the maintenance due to a lack of money, but that doesn't stop it being sad.

 

Perhaps they could afford to do more repairs if the many, many unlicensed boats paid their fair share.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

26 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

But the public don't make these sorts of decisions. Most would not know the pros and cons at all.

 

22 minutes ago, MartynG said:

honestly don't think the great majority of the public are aware of the geography of the inland waterways in the UK. So I think you would get a don't know from most of the public.

do we take it then that the notion of the Inland Waterways as a playground for the rich is from a minority of boaters who post here?

 

 

[Tonka]

17 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

To describe many of the lock gates and paddles on the K&A as being in a poor state of repair can't really be argued with, as demonstrated by the amount of warning tape adorning the said equipment; at least it did last summer.

 

I feel sad for the volunteers who gave generously of their time and money to restore the canal to the high standard that we enjoyed when we first navigated it some 15 years ago, only for them to watch things slip in more recent years.

 

C&RT may have no option but to neglect the maintenance due to a lack of money, but that doesn't stop it being sad.

 

Perhaps they could afford to do more repairs if the many, many unlicensed boats paid their fair share.

According to CRT there is not that many

[Bargebuilder]

1 minute ago, Tonka said:

According to CRT there is not that many

Then they have worked really hard since last year, which if true is great news. I'll let others who have travelled from Bristol to Reading this year comment.

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

Didn’t it get to a point where CRT got so fed up with people reporting non licensed boats they removed the ability online to report them ?

[Bargebuilder]

23 minutes ago, Goliath said:

Didn’t it get to a point where CRT got so fed up with people reporting non licensed boats they removed the ability online to report them ?

The western end of the K&A certainly isn't exclusively a playground for the rich, although the rich will pass through it occasionally.

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Bargebuilder said:

 

Perhaps they could afford to do more repairs if the many, many unlicensed boats paid their fair share.

 

51 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

 I'll let others who have travelled from Bristol to Reading this year comment.

How do you know which boats are unlicensed? Although licences are supposed to be displayed, CRT have made it clear that licence display is not actually necessary for them to check which boats are licensed. So inevitably some boaters never get around to displaying their boat licences. And passing boaters and towpath walkers may get a misleading impression about the level of licence evasion.

CRT have a pretty good idea which boats are unlicensed and are pursuing them in the background, out of sight of most boaters.

 

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

15 minutes ago, Bargebuilder said:

The western end of the K&A certainly isn't exclusively a playground for the rich, although the rich will pass through it occasionally.

The K and A is for Glampers,

but probably not exclusive to them either

Edited July 15, 2023 by Goliath

[Bargebuilder]

11 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

How do you know which boats are unlicensed? Although licences are supposed to be displayed, CRT have made it clear that licence display is not actually necessary for them to check which boats are licensed. So inevitably some boaters never get around to displaying their boat licences. And passing boaters and towpath walkers may get a misleading impression about the level of licence evasion.

CRT have a pretty good idea which boats are unlicensed and are pursuing them in the background, out of sight of most boaters.

 

Apart from no, or out of date licences being displayed, I have no idea as to which boats aren't licensed, but you have a look and see what you think.

 

If the CRT inspector I spoke to is to be believed, it costs so much to go after a non-payer and ultimately remove a boat from the water, they just don't bother. Inspectors aren't even encouraged to challenge a non-payer, they simply apply a sticker to the offending boat.

[MtB]

15 minutes ago, David Mack said:

CRT have a pretty good idea which boats are unlicensed and are pursuing them in the background, out of sight of most boaters.

 

Are they though?

 

How would we know this? I can imagine them pursuing the unlicenced boats showing ID (boat name/CRT number/old licence disc), but what about the growing plethora of totally anonymous boats with all ID carefully removed? How can you assert CRT are pursuing them too? Why would there be so many boats nowadays with ID removed if there was no benefit to them removing it all?

 

There is no evidence available to the public (as far as I can see) that CRT pursue anonymous unlicenced boats at all. These boats seem to just carry on boating completely unaffected by the need for the licenses, BSS and insurances that the rest of us pay for.

 

Yes some here may suggest that all anonymous boats are fully insured, BSSed and licensed but Occam's Razor suggests they are probably not. 

 

[Bargebuilder]

3 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Are they though?

 

How would we know this? I can imagine them pursuing the unlicenced boats showing ID (boat name/CRT number/old licence disc), but what about the growing plethora of totally anonymous boats with all ID carefully removed? How can you assert CRT are pursuing them too? Why would there be so many boats nowadays with ID removed if there was no benefit to them removing it all?

 

There is no evidence available to the public (as far as I can see) that CRT pursue anonymous unlicenced boats at all. These boats seem to just carry on boating completely unaffected by the need for the licenses, BSS and insurances that the rest of us pay for.

 

Yes some here may suggest that all anonymous boats are fully insured, BSSed and licensed but Occam's Razor suggests they are probably not. 

 

In my experience, some, but not all boat safety inspectors can be really picky, failing a really well maintained boat quite rightly because of a tiny but important infringement.

 

If a BSS certificate is needed to get a licence, I would suggest that there are a large number of boats that haven't seen a BSS inspector for years and therefore couldn't be licensed. Of course, looks can deceive.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, Bargebuilder said:

In my experience, some, but not all boat safety inspectors can be really picky, failing a really well maintained boat quite rightly because of a tiny but important infringement.

 

If a BSS certificate is needed to get a licence, I would suggest that there are a large number of boats that haven't seen a BSS inspector for years and therefore couldn't be licensed. Of course, looks can deceive.

 

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the point I was making in my post you quoted!

 

 

[Bargebuilder]

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the point I was making in my post you quoted!

 

 

You mentioned the probable lack of BSS compliance.

 

The C&RT's own 2022 survey concluded that nearly 6% of boats are not correctly licensed. It's not a stretch to suggest that a fair proportion of these are neither insured or have a BSS certificate.