Move to a new parish every 14 days

[carlt]

For example non-payment of the not-parliamentar-legislated annual fee is enforced by taking boats out of the water under 'Section 8' (parliamentary legislated) procedures.

A poor example. You are comparing a badly written piece of legislation which gives BW no powers of enforcement, therefore it has to make up its own, with Section 8 which gives them power to remove boats from the water which are unlicensed, sunken or abandoned (though they have still been known to abuse this power).

 

The legislation concerning 14 day, 48 hour and long term moorings needs to be rewritten, in order that there is no ambiguity and BW, as the enforcing authority, has the power to actually enforce.

[Athy]

BW, as the enforcing authority, has the power to actually enforce.

...a power which, with recent cuts in the numbers of bankside staff, they will be increasingly unable to exert.

[carlt]

...a power which, with recent cuts in the numbers of bankside staff, they will be increasingly unable to exert.

There are plenty of patrol officers, to cover their relative patches.

 

When I worked for the County Council my area covered over 500 miles of roads (including a town). I walked every mile once every 3 months and drove it (at survey speed) once a month.

 

I was also responsible, on top of enforcement, for maintenance inspections, ordering works, meeting Councillors (parish, town, district and county) and gang supervision.

 

If there are 10 patrol officers then they would cover less waterways than I covered roads and, as their sole duty is enforcement (with far fewer "offences" to log and take action on) I don't see why it shouldn't be possible, with effective legislation, to be as effective at enforcement as the Highway Authorities (usually) are.

 

I didn't have "wardens" to do my job for me, either, though there were one or two over-keen parish clerks to humour.

Edited April 9, 2009 by carlt

[PeterScott]

... I spent the whole of the 80s moving my boat around the system, at weekends, whilst either being at college or working full time, and living in a house. I didn't have a permanent mooring until I moved to France, in 89. ...If you boat for 4 hours a week, you're keeping BW more than happy. I used to do more than that just to charge batteries. ... Travelling around the country lanes of the Midlands, for an hour, is a lot less stressful than 60 minutes of commuter hell, in the city, you know.

 

OK, I can see that's an enjoyable lifestyle and better than commuting every day: if there was a permanent mooring as well as the fourteen-day stops being four hours' cruising apart, that would satisfy the Act. And I agree that paying for a mooring which is never used is an inefficient way of collecting money from boaters for the good of the Waterways.

 

OTOH, to actually be a continuous cruiser (ie without a home mooring), rather than getting away with pretending to be one requires more than satisfying the fourteen-day mooring limit. On looking it up, I see that it is all written into Primary Legislation, the British Waterways Act 1995 which says that BW can refuse a licence unless "either— (i) the Board are satisfied that a [home] mooring ... will be available for the vessel ... or (ii) the applicant ... satisfies the Board that the vessel ... will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period [of the licence] without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances. (my emphases)

 

and BW offer further guidance (ie explanation of how the Board may be satisfied about the genuine navigation of the system) here with the summary that: Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network, or a significant part of it .... It is the boater's responsibility to satisfy BW that they keep to the rules.

 

As BW have the wording of their Act to support them in exercising their discretion in all the circumstances on whether to accept a CC application, the only ways to change their mind is by Complaints procedure, Ombudsman, judicial review or by Parliament changing the Act.

[carlt]

OK, I can see that's an enjoyable lifestyle and better than commuting every day

 

I was commuting every day for up to an hour, it was my choice and quite bearable, and, despite your implications, I was issued with a licence every year therefore I was satisfying the board that the vessel was used bona fide for navigation. (my emphases)

 

Whether it satisfies your requirements is neither here nor there, but thank you for your concern.

[churchward]

OK, I can see that's an enjoyable lifestyle and better than commuting every day: if there was a permanent mooring as well as the fourteen-day stops being four hours' cruising apart, that would satisfy the Act. And I agree that paying for a mooring which is never used is an inefficient way of collecting money from boaters for the good of the Waterways.

 

OTOH, to actually be a continuous cruiser (ie without a home mooring), rather than getting away with pretending to be one requires more than satisfying the fourteen-day mooring limit. On looking it up, I see that it is all written into Primary Legislation, the British Waterways Act 1995 which says that BW can refuse a licence unless "either— (i) the Board are satisfied that a [home] mooring ... will be available for the vessel ... or (ii) the applicant ... satisfies the Board that the vessel ... will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period [of the licence] without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances. (my emphases)

 

and BW offer further guidance (ie explanation of how the Board may be satisfied about the genuine navigation of the system) here with the summary that: Continuous cruisers must be engaged in a genuine progressive journey (a cruise) around the network, or a significant part of it .... It is the boater's responsibility to satisfy BW that they keep to the rules.

 

As BW have the wording of their Act to support them in exercising their discretion in all the circumstances on whether to accept a CC application, the only ways to change their mind is by Complaints procedure, Ombudsman, judicial review or by Parliament changing the Act.

 

I have not done it myself but I would have though that it is quite possible to satisfy the words of the Act and the guidance by moving around the canals but still only be an hour so's commute away from a place of work particularly in the Midlands. The canals twist and turn all over the place going for miles that a journey in a straight line would do in only a very few and all at 4mph or less. A weeks holiday afloat (many more journey hours than a CCer would expect to do) may only find you traveling a 100-150 canal miles or so in total.

 

In any case personally I can't get worked up about folk who work the system (and within the law/rules) to their own advantage good luck to them! It's more or less what we all try and do everyday in our own way.

 

I do object of course to people who break the law purposely not because that can't afford something but just don't want to pay.

[Smelly]

Oh gawd... here we go again.

 

You know, I never tire of electrical threads as I learn something in the midst of the bickering, but the constant re-iterating of "there must be a line" which there isn't; becomes tiring.

 

Anyone fancy Galvanic Isolator for supper?

 

Where are you going for your holidays?

[sueb]

I have not done it myself but I would have though that it is quite possible to satisfy the words of the Act and the guidance by moving around the canals but still only be an hour so's commute away from a place of work particularly in the Midlands. The canals twist and turn all over the place going for miles that a journey in a straight line would do in only a very few and all at 4mph or less. A weeks holiday afloat (many more journey hours than a CCer would expect to do) may only find you traveling a 100-150 canal miles or so in total.

 

In any case personally I can't get worked up about folk who work the system (and within the law/rules) to their own advantage good luck to them! It's more or less what we all try and do everyday in our own way.

 

I do object of course to people who break the law purposely not because that can't afford something but just don't want to pay.

It was getting to skittles (by boat) every friday that BW found difficult.

Sue

[FadeToScarlet]

I wish I could be a continuous cruiser on the canals, because moving only every weekend would be luxury compared to my current lifestyle involving moving every two days- and commuting to work by public transport, not being able to afford to insure and run a car!

[PhilR]

Perhaps the boaters who complain should chill a little, live and let live , or go back to the concrete jungle from whence they came.

 

I would be very interested to hear what your definition/understanding is of *boaters who complain* and *go back to the concrete jungle from whence they came*