British Waterways By-Laws

[mayalld]

But they are an "interesting" read............................

 

For example, at least a quarter of boats on the system, (including us, currently ), could be prosecuted for not having the vessels name painted on the outside.

 

Not only this, it must have a port of registration or an owner displayed too.

 

All to be visible at 20 yards.

 

Well BW could raise a bit of revenue out of all of us naughty people who don't currently comply to those exacting requirements.

 

Read them again!

 

5(3) exempts pleasure craft from most of this.

 

Just because you believe them to be current doesn't make any difference. These are supposed to by-laws, not an act of faith! How can I cure my ignorance if I can't find a copy of them that I know to be current and from the correct source?

 

Richard

 

It has been drawn to your attention that these bye-laws existed.

 

In the absence of evidence that they have been repealed, they remain in force.

[Smelly]

In the absence of evidence that they have been repealed, they remain in force.

 

So we can shoot Welshmen in Chester then?

[Trilby Tim]

Bye law number 133(a)... "Thou shalt not shoot people with a longbow or otherwise in Chester after Dark"

 

See I knew it was an urban myth!

By-law number 133(b )... " Unless they're Welsh"

Edited August 20, 2008 by Tim Swait

[RLWP]

It has been drawn to your attention that these bye-laws existed.

 

In the absence of evidence that they have been repealed, they remain in force.

 

I have no problem with these statements.

 

I do have a problem if I cannot find the bye-laws to read so that I know what to comply with.

 

I don't think I have to comply with a pdf on a website that is nothing to do with BW. After all, I could write such a document, host it and claim it to be the "true document".

 

Hi Fender,

 

Those links are interesting, I'll have a browse

 

Richard

 

Oh yes, of course you can shoot welshmen in Chester. All of the laws of physics work exactly the same there as anywhere else.

[mayalld]

So we can shoot Welshmen in Chester then?

 

Afraid not, because there never was a statute that said that (and no matter how many times the myth is repeated, it won't become true!)

 

In 1403, the Earl of Chester (who would LATER become Henry V) issued a decree that any Welshman found in the city after dark would be decapitated (nothing to do with a bow and arrow, that is just later embelishment).

 

It wasn't a law permitting other people to carry out an action. It was a decree informing the Welshmen what Henry intended to do to them if he caught them in the city.

[Silkhay]

I got a reply, they're quite quick - I received this link ...

 

http://www.britishwaterways.co.uk/newsroom...display/id/1225

 

not quite the full By-laws, but interesting article, have asked if there is the actual by-laws online also.

 

I've emailed BW a few times recently, and they've always been pretty quick in replying.

 

 

 

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=v1oLotZ3lFU

You need to be aware that this prosecution was under the Bye-Laws for the Gloucester and Sharpness Canal and river Severn Navigation which are different to the "BW By-Laws" applicable to most of the rest of the Inalnd Waterways System

[mayalld]

I have no problem with these statements.

 

I do have a problem if I cannot find the bye-laws to read so that I know what to comply with.

 

I don't think I have to comply with a pdf on a website that is nothing to do with BW. After all, I could write such a document, host it and claim it to be the "true document".

 

Only if you wanted to find yourself on the wrong side of the law.

 

You do need to remember, in this internet age, that there is no rule that says that any body must promulgate its bye-laws on the web.

 

As long as they provide a copy on request, you are deemed to know about them

 

The fact that somebody else has hosted a copy on the web is a bonus.

[grahoom]

You need to be aware that this prosecution was under the Bye-Laws for the Gloucester and Sharpness Canal and river Severn Navigation which are different to the "BW By-Laws" applicable to most of the rest of the Inalnd Waterways System

 

yup - that's what it says

On 9 May 2006 British Waterways successfully prosecuted a boater under the 1962 Bye-laws relating to the Gloucester & Sharpness Canal and River Severn Navigation, following an incident at Gloucester Docks on 7 February 2005.

 

I was just posting a response from BW when I asked for the By-laws..

[alan_fincher]

For example, at least a quarter of boats on the system, (including us, currently ), could be prosecuted for not having the vessels name painted on the outside.

 

Not only this, it must have a port of registration or an owner displayed too.

 

All to be visible at 20 yards.

 

Read them again!

 

5(3) exempts pleasure craft from most of this.

OK, I have read them again, and I now believe neither of us is in fact correct.

 

5 (3) only exempts pleasure craft from 5 (1) (ii) and 5 (1) (iii), as well as 5 (2), I believe, and there is not an exemption for 5 (1) (i). (Otherwise it would surely say "pleasure craft are exempted from this bye-law).

 

Therefore I sick to my guns that even a pleasure boat should have it's name on the outside, clearly legible at 20 yards.

 

I'll concede the place of registration, or owner is not required.

 

If you really wish to continue being pedantic, the actual wording is.....

 

"so as to be clearly legible at all times at a distance of 20 yards".

 

Knowing you were keen to debate issues around darkness and poor visibility, I'd welcome your views on whether I have to make it visible in a pea-souper smog at night time, and what steps I must take to achieve this

[Bagpuss]

What do the bye-laws say about mooring on water points?

[alan_fincher]

What do the bye-laws say about mooring on water points?

At the time the bye laws were written I'm sure most water points were beside locks, which would traditionally have been where working boatmen and boatwomen filled their cans, if not at one of their laying over bases.

 

Thirty or forty years ago, it was perfectly usual that you were blocking a lock, filling your tanks, (which of course were generally a fraction of current sizes, showers being largely unheard of even on pleasure boats).

 

I can well remember seeing a fairly luxurious boat towing Joe and Rose Skinner's "Friendship" down through Berkhamsted lock, (I can't recall which). Joe stepped from the boat and filled one can in about 30 seconds, being his day's requirements, (the other one presumably being still full). Then his "tow" hitched up it's hosepipe, and blocked the lock for around an hour longer.

 

Siting water pipes away from locks is something which (down here at least) has only occurred since the 1970s.

 

There are still locks south of Berkamsted where the lock is rendered virtually unusable if a boater has gone up there to it to fill up. (I think one of the Nash ones, from memory, but could be wrong).

[RLWP]

Well, BW have certainly delivered! A copy of the byelaws 1965 and the British Waterways Act 1995 have just dropped through the door. Amazing, prompt service - well done BW.

 

Richard

 

Appears to be a different document to this: http://www.hnboc.org.uk/download/BWbyelaw.pdf

[mayalld]

OK, I have read them again, and I now believe neither of us is in fact correct.

 

5 (3) only exempts pleasure craft from 5 (1) (ii) and 5 (1) (iii), as well as 5 (2), I believe, and there is not an exemption for 5 (1) (i). (Otherwise it would surely say "pleasure craft are exempted from this bye-law).

 

Therefore I sick to my guns that even a pleasure boat should have it's name on the outside, clearly legible at 20 yards.

 

I'll concede the place of registration, or owner is not required.

 

If you really wish to continue being pedantic, the actual wording is.....

 

"so as to be clearly legible at all times at a distance of 20 yards".

 

Knowing you were keen to debate issues around darkness and poor visibility, I'd welcome your views on whether I have to make it visible in a pea-souper smog at night time, and what steps I must take to achieve this

 

I did say "most" :-)

 

However, as you rightly say, the bit about "visible at all times" is a bit tricky.

 

Well, BW have certainly delivered! A copy of the byelaws 1965 and the British Waterways Act 1995 have just dropped through the door. Amazing, prompt service - well done BW.

 

Richard

 

Appears to be a different document to this: http://www.hnboc.org.uk/download/BWbyelaw.pdf

 

How is it different??

[Chris Pink]

Appears to be a different document

 

is it possible to publish it in some way? Scan/OCR or suchlike?

[RLWP]

is it possible to publish it in some way? Scan/OCR or suchlike?

 

Hi Chris. Possibly, but if you send an email to BW, you will probably have your own set by Monday! It would also be inconsistent for me to host an unofficial copy of the byelaws after ranting about the copy on the HNBOC website...

 

 

Hi Mayalld, It has a BW logo, British Waterways 1965 on the front, it is A4, different font, to start with. Apart from that, I've only had it for just over an hour so I don't know about the content...

 

Richard

[RLWP]

Right, as far as I can see this is the same document as the HNBOC one but better printed. The only difference I can find is that there is a paragraph (5) and the signatures left off the 1975 amendment.

 

Richard

[mayalld]

Right, as far as I can see this is the same document as the HNBOC one but better printed. The only difference I can find is that there is a paragraph (5) and the signatures left off the 1975 amendment.

 

Richard

 

Para 5 and the signatures on the left hand side of the next to last page on the HNBOC version are a part of the 1976 amendment, not the 1975.

 

1975 had only 4 paragraphs, and was repealed by the 1976 amendment.

[RLWP]

Para 5 and the signatures on the left hand side of the next to last page on the HNBOC version are a part of the 1976 amendment, not the 1975.

 

1975 had only 4 paragraphs, and was repealed by the 1976 amendment.

 

(sigh)

 

Yes you are right.

 

As far as I can see this is the same document as the HNBOC one but better printed. The only difference I can find is that there is a paragraph (5) and the signatures left off the 1976 amendment.

 

Richard

[mayalld]

(sigh)

 

Yes you are right.

 

As far as I can see this is the same document as the HNBOC one but better printed. The only difference I can find is that there is a paragraph (5) and the signatures left off the 1976 amendment.

 

Richard

 

That is quite an ommision, as para 5 is the one that increases the maximum penalty to 100 pounds from 25