Cavalcade and the NBTA

[Ianws]

32 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

now I don’t mind fisherists so much on a lock landing IF they know what’s what, 

the odd few I’ve encountered have accepted they’re in the wrong place and lift their rods and shuffle back,

I’d rather fisherists on a lock landing to other boats, tourists dangling their feet or the deckchair folk

…the thought of a vegan chocolate bar is quite a shocking,

how’s that work?

the Flapper had a beer on the other week advertised as vegan,

no fish bladders in the making I guess, which isn’t that unusual, 🤷‍♀️

 

If you like proper dark chocolate rather than the sugary milk "chocolate" a lot of it can be vegan. One example https://www.waitrose.com/ecom/products/green-blacks-organic-70-dark-chocolate-bar/065343-33115-33116

[dmr]

21 minutes ago, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

now I don’t mind fisherists so much on a lock landing IF they know what’s what, 

the odd few I’ve encountered have accepted they’re in the wrong place and lift their rods and shuffle back,

I’d rather fisherists on a lock landing to other boats, tourists dangling their feet or the deckchair folk

…the thought of a vegan chocolate bar is quite a shocking,

how’s that work?

the Flapper had a beer on the other week advertised as vegan,

no fish bladders in the making I guess, which isn’t that unusual, 🤷‍♀️

 

 

Vegan chocolate is really very nice. I have always liked dark chocolate and thats pretty much what the vegan stuff is.

I believe its only the finings that makes beer non vegan, there are other ways of making beer clear but the cloudy beers are getting very trendy and are rather good.  Golden Lion had yet another Cloudwater beer on last light and I think that was a bit cloudy. £4.80 so not a session beer but good for the last pint.

 

I regard my vegetarianism a bit like the boating rules that we are talking about. It's a concept and target but Im not going to get upset if I eat (or drink) a couple of cow molecules.  And we do have a dog and run the boat on HVO 😀.

[nbfiresprite]

While planning my retirement, I was looking through the Waterways Ireland T&C's as one possibility for the future.

 

While looking through the details, it seen that anyone wanting to liveaboard full time on the Irish waterways has to pay for the higher price liveaboard licence. The more you plan to stay aboard, the more you pay. That would not go down well with the NBTA or would adding the tourist tax to payable visiter moorings another thing that some councils are looking at. Afterall these overstaying on the towpath in London are a drain on council resources. Unlike those who are on long term paid moorings who are paying council tax on their moorings. 

 

Waterways Ireland also require a upto day Photo of the boat and that the name and index number is clearly displayed on the boat (Not on a bit of paper stuck in a window). This is enforced on Irish waters, any boat with it's name & index not clearly displayed or has no permit is removed pdq.

 

It does seem that Waterways Ireland has far more powers to remove a boat than CRT does S.I. No. 247/1988 - Canals Act, 1986 (Bye-Laws), 1988.

 

Waterways Ireland permits

   

Combined Mooring and Passage Permit (CMP) permits the holder to pass through locks and to moor at the same Public Mooring for up to five days in any calendar month. 

Non-Residential Extended Mooring Permit (NR-EMP) permits the holder to moor in an allocated location for up to one year.  A NR-EMP is non-residential and therefore cannot be used a primary residence, however the holder is permitted to stay overnight for up to 90 days in any one year. 

Residential Extended Mooring Permit (R-EMP) allows the holder to moor in one location for up to one year.  Holders of a R-EMP have no limitation on the number of nights they may stay on board and are permitted to use their vessel as their primary residence.

[___]

7 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

While planning my retirement, I was looking through the Waterways Ireland T&C's as one possibility for the future.

 

While looking through the details, it seen that anyone wanting to liveaboard full time on the Irish waterways has to pay for the higher price liveaboard licence. The more you plan to stay aboard, the more you pay. That would not go down well with the NBTA or would adding the tourist tax to payable visiter moorings another thing that some councils are looking at. Afterall these overstaying on the towpath in London are a drain on council resources. Unlike those who are on long term paid moorings who are paying council tax on their moorings. 

 

Waterways Ireland also require a upto day Photo of the boat and that the name and index number is clearly displayed on the boat (Not on a bit of paper stuck in a window). This is enforced on Irish waters, any boat with it's name & index not clearly displayed or has no permit is removed pdq.

 

It does seem that Waterways Ireland has far more powers to remove a boat than CRT does S.I. No. 247/1988 - Canals Act, 1986 (Bye-Laws), 1988.

 

Waterways Ireland permits

   

Combined Mooring and Passage Permit (CMP) permits the holder to pass through locks and to moor at the same Public Mooring for up to five days in any calendar month. 

Non-Residential Extended Mooring Permit (NR-EMP) permits the holder to moor in an allocated location for up to one year.  A NR-EMP is non-residential and therefore cannot be used a primary residence, however the holder is permitted to stay overnight for up to 90 days in any one year. 

Residential Extended Mooring Permit (R-EMP) allows the holder to moor in one location for up to one year.  Holders of a R-EMP have no limitation on the number of nights they may stay on board and are permitted to use their vessel as their primary residence.

Interesting stuff.

 

You touch upon the issue of Council Tax paid by boaters. Is it not the case that there are many boaters who are living aboard boats effectively as a permanent resident on a designated leisure mooring and not paying council tax?
 

Arguably pretty much the same behaviour as those who move just often enough and just far enough to satisfy the requirements of CRT in respect of boaters without home moorings.

 

Yet members of CWDF will mostly advise the former group of how to go about their business but deride the latter group. A key difference being that the latter is more visible and tends to have less aesthetically pleasing boats.

@agg221 cites some examples of real people working probably outside of the requirements, a couple of them with obvious awareness of their impact, at least one of which could be described as being vulnerable.

 

Now while I don’t advocate the canals being used as an official social housing overflow I do wonder if there are Councils who are secretly glad that the canal is housing folk that they would otherwise have more expense in dealing with. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing for CRT politically in the current climate.

 

As far as London goes the demographic of liveaboards is different from other parts of the country. Many London boat dwellers would be able to afford land based accommodation if employed in similar jobs in the Midlands or North. They are also helping to provide services that support the local economy. It’s a very subtle balance, that’s how free markets work, and one that doesn’t have simple engineered solutions.
 

Edited April 20 by Captain Pegg

[nbfiresprite]

1 hour ago, Captain Pegg said:

Interesting stuff.

 

You touch upon the issue of Council Tax paid by boaters. Is it not the case that there are many boaters who are living aboard boats effectively as a permanent resident on a designated leisure mooring and not paying council tax?
 

 

That depend very much on the local council when it comes to council tax on leisure moorings. As is my own case in my ongoing battle with the privately owned Anglia Revenues Partnership (who run council tax collection for some councils) over my leisure mooring at Foxes. On which council tax has been charged since 2017. I don't liveaboard full time, only three nights a week the other four days at my home in Dorset. You have to prove to Foxes that you have your main home elsewhere to get a mooring.

 

The point being made was the large drain on funding that a large group of liveaboards can be for a councils like Hackney, Town Hamlets and Islington & Camden. With them demanding access to council services which cost these councils a great deal of money to provide after the NBTA took them to court. 

 

[___]

2 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

That depend very much on the local council when it comes to council tax on leisure moorings. As is my own case in my ongoing battle with the privately owned Anglia Revenues Partnership (who run council tax collection for some councils) over my leisure mooring at Foxes. On which council tax has been charged since 2017. I don't liveaboard full time, only three nights a week the other four days at my home in Dorset. You have to prove to Foxes that you have your main home elsewhere to get a mooring.

 

The point being made was the large drain on funding that a large group of liveaboards can be for a councils like Hackney, Town Hamlets and Islington & Camden. With them demanding access to council services which cost these councils a great deal of money to provide after the NBTA took them to court. 

 

 

That does seem strange as presumably the point of the marina wanting to verify the permanent address is because they don't have permission for reidential moorings and therefore those moorings don't (or didn't) attract council tax. Nonetheless I'm confident in saying there are many people holding leisure mooring contracts that are effectively permanently resident on their boat and not subject to council tax. Those doing so in a marina are presumably compliant with the terms of their mooring contract; those on CRT permit moorings possibly not.

 

They are folk trying to make the system work for them in a way that authorities accept or at least tolerate. No different from most boaters living on the towpath. As a couple of posters have touched upon consequence is a large part of the practical application of rules and regulations. It's never as simple as a black and white application of the written word; our legal system recognises no such thing exists. The moral high ground is a precarious place to position oneself in any case; and all too easy if the system has largely worked in your favour as a result of the good fortune of the circumstances around your birth.

 

As for those issues in London I'm not aware of the specific detail - as for the NBTA I regard the term 'bargee' in much the same way as 'CMer' - but I did suggest earlier in the thread that the people who should be most upset about towpath mooring are local residents rather than other boaters. Eradicating London liveaboards would solve some issues; and create another set of issues. I'm also not sure blaming campaigning organisations for legal rulings we don't like is particularly valid in a democratic society, assuming one supports the basis of our society.

 

 

Edited April 20 by Captain Pegg

[Ewan123]

On 18/04/2024 at 17:51, beerbeerbeerbeerbeer said:

Any pointers, recommendations or advice is welcome 👍

 

If you're on the way up the Lee, avoid stopping at King's Weir - looks like a lovely picnic spot but local scrotes regularly kick/brick in boat windows there. Just round the corner from near the rowing club and up and you'll be alright. The Lea and Stort have some really lovely areas once you get above Enfield.

 

In case you moor in the stretch below Tottenham lock at all, beware the levels react quite dramatically to rainfall; above the lock and it's much more tame.

 

Hertford Common is a nice "wild" mooring spot if you have a long enough gangplank.

 

The most northerly laundrette on the Lea is at Hoddesdon but public transport is good enough to get there from further up.

[David Mack]

On 20/04/2024 at 09:02, Captain Pegg said:

 

Now while I don’t advocate the canals being used as an official social housing overflow I do wonder if there are Councils who are secretly glad that the canal is housing folk that they would otherwise have more expense in dealing with. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing for CRT politically in the current climate.

Local authorities already have too few resources (and available homes) to deal with the current (land based) homeless population. Boat dwellers are mostly well enough off/ insufficiently vulnerable that they wouldn't get rehoused by councils anyway. So I doubt it would make much difference to councils. 

Van dwellers who park on local streets and annoy residents are probably more of an issue for councillors.

[MtB]

3 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Van dwellers who park on local streets and annoy residents are probably more of an issue for councillors.

 

 

Oh and there's another thing. Van dwellers hogging CRT car parks! Often attracted by the water, waste disposal and Elsan services in many canalside car parks. I personally know one van-lifer who relies totally on CRT facilities.

 

It was turning into quite a problem around here before Covid, but for now it seems to have eased.