Continious Cruising London Ring

[Leonie]

Perhaps you could give us some tips Leonie. Which days do you tend to travel between moorings and when, if there is a trend, is the best time to aim to be moored up by ?

 

withoutapaddle

 

I tend to travel between moorings somewhere between Friday evening and Sunday afternoon depending on whether or not I'm having a social life that week I aim to be moored up by dinner time as I hate to starve. Seriously though, I do have to be fairly organised but try not to rigid so don't have too many 'tips' beyond, 'do whatever makes you happy and doesn't hiss your neighbours off'. Good luck

[Lady Muck]

Take the 'the canals are getting full' protests with a grain of salt as for ever new CC in and around London, there is someone moving to dry land/out of the area or taking up a permanent mooring. Also, if the worst case scenario does happen and the mooring you come to is full... and this is stupendously rare as most moorings in London allow double breasting and accommodate quite a few boats... then simply move on to the next one.

I'll probably regret posting this as the 'you arent' doing it properly' hellfire posters come out of the woodwork but I just want to redress the balance with actual facts from someone who does indeed CC in London.

 

But numbers are going up, it's been pretty obvious to me, just from looking out of the window. I can't remember where I saw it quoted (BW user group minutes possibly?) on the Lee and Stort it's gone from 30 to 300 ccers in about five years. There might be room for everyone now, but for how long?

 

I'm not trying to be negative about ccers, or accuse anyone of 'not doing it properly', because I think most boaters are doing it properly, it's just that so many people get a boat without realising how unsecure it is, whether you have a mooring or not and I just think the OP needs to be informed about what is going on within BW.

 

They see the number of towpath moored boats in London as a problem, you only have to read any BW London user group meeting minutes to see the huge amount of complaints they get from other canal and river users who want something done. Or read a canal mag or visit a Yahoo group and hear the complaints from boaters who are on holiday but can't find anywhere to moor on their visit to the capital. That's where the bad feeling comes from. It wasn't a problem before it got so popular!

 

They have talked about doing everything from axing the River Only license, to refusing boaters who abuse the rules a new license. (I cannot find the relevant consultation notes, perhaps someone else could provide a link?) I dunno how feasible this is, but look at the moorings auction, that did happen! The other thing in discussion is living on leisure moorings, there is discussion about trying to make that harder to do, Lord only knows what impact that would have in the London area!

 

Changes brought about by BW because of the popularity of boating in the London area will affect all of us liveaboards, be us residential moorers paying council tax, leisure moorers, living on a mooring, towpath moorers, all of us in some way.

[Chris Pink]

But numbers are going up, it's been pretty obvious to me, just from looking out of the window. I can't remember where I saw it quoted (BW user group minutes possibly?) on the Lee and Stort it's gone from 30 to 300 ccers in about five years. There might be room for everyone now, but for how long?

 

So what is it about living on a boat in London that's so popular?

 

I can see the rural / semi-rural appeal in most of the country but living nomadically on the urban canals, what is the appeal?

 

There must be few who have been doing it for years but surely far more will be there for a year or two and then move on to land of another canal.

 

Is it solely the cost? or the urban flora and fauna or the industrial chic?

[sueb]

But numbers are going up, it's been pretty obvious to me, just from looking out of the window. I can't remember where I saw it quoted (BW user group minutes possibly?) on the Lee and Stort it's gone from 30 to 300 ccers in about five years. There might be room for everyone now, but for how long?

 

I'm not trying to be negative about ccers, or accuse anyone of 'not doing it properly', because I think most boaters are doing it properly, it's just that so many people get a boat without realising how unsecure it is, whether you have a mooring or not and I just think the OP needs to be informed about what is going on within BW.

 

They see the number of towpath moored boats in London as a problem, you only have to read any BW London user group meeting minutes to see the huge amount of complaints they get from other canal and river users who want something done. Or read a canal mag or visit a Yahoo group and hear the complaints from boaters who are on holiday but can't find anywhere to moor on their visit to the capital. That's where the bad feeling comes from. It wasn't a problem before it got so popular!

 

They have talked about doing everything from axing the River Only license, to refusing boaters who abuse the rules a new license. (I cannot find the relevant consultation notes, perhaps someone else could provide a link?) I dunno how feasible this is, but look at the moorings auction, that did happen! The other thing in discussion is living on leisure moorings, there is discussion about trying to make that harder to do, Lord only knows what impact that would have in the London area!

 

Changes brought about by BW because of the popularity of boating in the London area will affect all of us liveaboards, be us residential moorers paying council tax, leisure moorers, living on a mooring, towpath moorers, all of us in some way.

There is another consultation in August.

Sue

[fender]

So what is it about living on a boat in London that's so popular?

 

I can see the rural / semi-rural appeal in most of the country but living nomadically on the urban canals, what is the appeal?

 

The appeal of canals in London is enough for people to take desperate measures and build their own boats on the towpath!

 

http://www.waterscape.com/blog/authors/pat...ed-shed-is-dead

[debbifiggy]

.I've always stayed 14 days at Islington with no hassle and have never stayed at Camden because it's always full.

 

The bottom line is that just about anything is possible if you are up to the graft and if I'd have read these forums before taking my challenging lifestyle on, I'd have thought it impossible. I'm very grateful that I began living the life before reading about it here...

 

Take the 'the canals are getting full' protests with a grain of salt as for ever new CC in and around London, there is someone moving to dry land/out of the area or taking up a permanent mooring. Also, if the worst case scenario does happen and the mooring you come to is full... and this is stupendously rare as most moorings in London allow double breasting and accommodate quite a few boats... then simply move on to the next one.

 

I'll probably regret posting this as the 'you arent' doing it properly' hellfire posters come out of the woodwork but I just want to redress the balance with actual facts from someone who does indeed CC in London.

 

Hope this helps xxx

 

Sorry for editing but a few points.

 

You can only stay at Islington for 14 days in the winter and it is always almost full. No triple berthing.

 

The canals in London are full to bursting with continuous cruisers and most aren't playing the game. Expect to see some high profile removals of the worst offender including squatters at various locations. Data has been collected over a period of time now of boat movements (or lack of) and BW knows exactly who to target. Unfortunately because all the people concerned live aboard their craft it involves a lot of time and cost to BW to take them to court to evict them from the canal. It's money that would be better spent on maintaining the canal and developing new moorings to meet the demand.

 

The number of wide beam craft now coming in London is also increasing the visitor mooring space shortage as they take up twice the amount of room and you can't breast up a narrowboat to a wide beam without restricting the navigation and breaking site rules.

 

People really need to start getting into their heads that cruising between 3 or 4 points only does not make a genuine progressive journey according to the continuous cruising terms and conditions. The sheer number of craft in London now makes this impossible and there's new people arriving every week with quite frankly with not a clue about boating either, it's just cheap housing to them.

 

If you want to be a genuine continuous cruiser then you should be doing at least Milton Keynes to Bishops Stortford on a regular basis. Even Uxbridge to Waltham Town would be ok. But if you only intend to do Little Venice to Victoria Park, or the East London Ring, or shuffle between Harefield to Cowley, forget it.

 

Hope that helps,

D

[carlt]

Unfortunately because all the people concerned live aboard their craft it involves a lot of time and cost to BW to take them to court to evict them from the canal.

What an unfortunate use of words.

 

When I was involved in enforcement issues regarding travellers, on the public highway, I never begrudged the time or the money from my budget, I spent, ensuring the welfare requirements of the families, whose lives I was having a direct effect on, were fully addressed.

 

Fortunately I believe there are employees, within BW, who share my attitude.

 

 

If you want to be a genuine continuous cruiser then you should be doing at least Milton Keynes to Bishops Stortford on a regular basis. Even Uxbridge to Waltham Town would be ok. But if you only intend to do Little Venice to Victoria Park, or the East London Ring, or shuffle between Harefield to Cowley, forget it.

Could you cite the bit of the BW Act, Byelaws or even BW's interpretation of these laws, which allows a BW employee to make that statement?

Edited July 15, 2009 by carlt

[Chris Pink]

People really need to start getting into their heads that cruising between 3 or 4 points only does not make a genuine progressive journey according to the continuous cruising terms and conditions. The sheer number of craft in London now makes this impossible and there's new people arriving every week with quite frankly with not a clue about boating either, it's just cheap housing to them.

 

Two statements here that show an interesting insight into the BW mind (or at least the enforcement division).

 

in answer to one; what gives you the right to override the law?

 

'bona fide navigation' and 'genuine progressive journey' are not synonymic even if the 2nd implies the first.

 

and the 2nd;

There's a concern in BW (enforcement) that boats are not being used correctly? 'correctly'? Excuse me but again where is it written into the BW corporate mission that BW can tell anyone how they may use the canals? Other than in accordance with the law.

 

Could you cite the bit of the BW Act, Byelaws or even BW's interpretation of these laws, which allows a BW employee to make that statement?

 

it would be a mistake to confuse the enforcement division (although a rapidly growing power base within British Waterways) with British Waterways.

[carlt]

it would be a mistake to confuse the enforcement division (although a rapidly growing power base within British Waterways) with British Waterways.

 

Possibly. but I don't think I made that mistake:

 

Fortunately I believe there are employees, within BW, who share my attitude.

[Chris Pink]

Possibly. but I don't think I made that mistake:

 

I had noticed that, i was just enjoying a bit of rhetoric with my morning coffee.

[alan_fincher]

Two statements here that show an interesting insight into the BW mind (or at least the enforcement division).

 

in answer to one; what gives you the right to override the law?

 

'bona fide navigation' and 'genuine progressive journey' are not synonymic even if the 2nd implies the first.

 

Yes I agree wholeheartedly

 

and the 2nd;

There's a concern in BW (enforcement) that boats are not being used correctly? 'correctly'? Excuse me but again where is it written into the BW corporate mission that BW can tell anyone how they may use the canals? Other than in accordance with the law.

 

On the other hand I may be missing something here. Where has that statement come drom, as I can't see it in Debbi's post.

[carlt]

On the other hand I may be missing something here. Where has that statement come drom, as I can't see it in Debbi's post.

I assumed Chris was referring to this statement:

 

The sheer number of craft in London now makes this impossible and there's new people arriving every week with quite frankly with not a clue about boating either, it's just cheap housing to them.

[alan_fincher]

I assumed Chris was referring to this statement:

Another question about interpretation of original meanings then, possibly ?

 

Edited to say.....

 

Actually Chris' post start off....

 

Two statements here that show an interesting insight into the BW mind (or at least the enforcement division).

 

And the second "statement" listed is

 

There's a concern in BW (enforcement) that boats are not being used correctly?

 

Top me that implies that this is a statement that Debbi made - it isn't - it isn't even close to a statement Debbi made.

 

This is always an emotive enough topic, so it's best not to put words into people's mouths.

 

So, I still don't think that part of Chris' post is reasonable, (whilst agreeing wholeheartedly with the first).

Edited July 15, 2009 by alan_fincher

[Chris Pink]

Top me that implies that this is a statement that Debbi made - it isn't - it isn't even close to a statement Debbi made.

 

This is always an emotive enough topic, so it's best not to put words into people's mouths.

 

So, I still don't think that part of Chris' post is reasonable, (whilst agreeing wholeheartedly with the first).

 

OK Alan, just for you, and only because you're Phylis' current toy boy.

 

...and the 2nd;

There's a concern in BW (enforcement) that boats are being used by people 'with quite frankly with not a clue about boating'

Excuse me but again where is it written into the BW corporate mission that BW can tell anyone how they may use the canals? Other than in accordance with the law.

 

It is true that my original comment was badly worded (even with this correction) so maybe I should have said;

 

Debbiefiggy's statement implies that people should be trained or tested before they use a boat on the canals. It is not British Waterway's place to make this statement as there is no law requiring people 'to have a clue about boating' before they use a boat.

 

I think it would be less important to make this point if Ms Figgy was not a BW enforcement officer for that particular waterway and therefore her statement can be read as giving, if not the corporate line, an insight into her methods and targets for enforcement.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Chris Pink

[carlt]

Another question about interpretation of original meanings then, possibly ?

I don't disagree with you.

 

I was merely pointing out the bit of Debbi's post that I thought Chris was referring to.

 

Debbi makes no secret of the fact that she believes there is a "correct" motive, for owning a boat so it would easy to misinterpret her post, if she's had a sudden change of opinion.

[Naughty Cal]

OK Alan, just for you, and only because you're Phylis' current toy boy.

 

Less of the toy boy

[alan_fincher]

Debbiefiggy's statement implies that people should be trained or tested before they use a boat on the canals. It is not British Waterway's place to make this statement as there is no law requiring people 'to have a clue about boating' before they use a boat.

Yes, I think what you are saying is fair enough.

 

I suspect it is difficult for somebody who both works for BW, but is also a boater who cares for the waterways, to make any statement. As you imply, if they do so, there can be confusion about which hat they are wearing at the time. A shame though if they can never make comment, for this reason.

 

Whatever the rights and wrongs are here, I think most of us would agree, whatever their role, that we would prefer BW to be staffed by people who know and love boats and canals, rather than those who don't.

 

I have been quite public that since being "educated" by the forum, I have heavily revised my views about continuous cruisers. So even an olf f**t like me can be persuaded to be more moderate.

 

However, as a non London based boater, it would be nice to visit, and not have to fighting like mad to find suitable moorings, though! I can't claim to be thrilled by the widebeam invasion.

[Leonie]

Sorry for editing but a few points.

 

The canals in London are full to bursting with continuous cruisers and most aren't playing the game. Expect to see some high profile removals of the worst offender including squatters at various locations. Data has been collected over a period of time now of boat movements (or lack of) and BW knows exactly who to target. Unfortunately because all the people concerned live aboard their craft it involves a lot of time and cost to BW to take them to court to evict them from the canal. It's money that would be better spent on maintaining the canal and developing new moorings to meet the demand.

 

D

 

Sounds like interesting times are ahead. I'd have thought data was always being collected about boat movements though so am surprised to learn that this has been something new? Possibly I'm reading your post wrongly. I would certainly hope BW knows exactly who to target before they make any removal moves. The mention of squatters certainly explains why I do seem to see certain same boats at each mooring with every pass I make.

 

Can we edit your sweeping generalisation about London CCrs down from 'most' to 'some' though? We get enough negative press as it is. We certainly don't need enforcement officers publicly badmouthing us enmasse.

[Chris Pink]

Yes, I think what you are saying is fair enough.

 

I suspect it is difficult for somebody who both works for BW, but is also a boater who cares for the waterways, to make any statement. As you imply, if they do so, there can be confusion about which hat they are wearing at the time. A shame though if they can never make comment, for this reason.

 

Whatever the rights and wrongs are here, I think most of us would agree, whatever their role, that we would prefer BW to be staffed by people who know and love boats and canals, rather than those who don't.

 

I have been quite public that since being "educated" by the forum, I have heavily revised my views about continuous cruisers. So even an olf f**t like me can be persuaded to be more moderate.

 

However, as a non London based boater, it would be nice to visit, and not have to fighting like mad to find suitable moorings, though! I can't claim to be thrilled by the widebeam invasion.

 

I do actually agree with you, and the thrust of Debbie's argument and Lady Muck. I too would like, when i visit London, to be able to moor, though I have never had a problem. I would also have some sympathy for the concept of a universal helmsperson's certificate for boats over 20'.

 

The widebeam invasion has to be laid at least in part at the door of BW, it is them that licence these craft which are, with some notable exceptions, not really suited to cruising style navigation.

 

There is also a complete subject on the necessity for a new (or renewal of the old) approach to social housing in the capital.

 

Interesting that on Willawaw's picture of near Braunston, one of the busiest parts of the canal system in the height of summer, no moored boats can be seen indicating to me that it is honeypot sites at peak times that cause people to moan and that no-one much moans about boats hanging around Islington in February or even the more remote spots in summer.

 

I don't think there's much likelihood of my statement scaring off Ms Figgy and I welcome her comments, this is a 'forum' after all. But it should be clear that such an intimidatory post should be seen as what it is; a statement of intent by one of BW's enforcers who are using scarce resources in an inappropriate fashion.

 

I would like BW to be staffed by those who love boaters of all kinds and not those that fit a narrow spectrum put forward by lobbyists with vested interest.

 

Luckily, as Ms Figgy states, it is not up to BW who is made homeless and my impression is that the courts do not have much sympathy for ill-prepared cases by ex-policemen trying to evict people from their boat homes (no matter what Waterscape would have us believe)

 

I'll get down from the soapbox now. As the OP says, this thread was not really intended for this side of the discussion.

 

 

We certainly don't need enforcement officers publicly badmouthing us enmasse.

 

hear hear

Edited July 15, 2009 by Chris Pink

[fender]

The number of wide beam craft now coming in London is also increasing the visitor mooring space shortage as they take up twice the amount of room and you can't breast up a narrowboat to a wide beam without restricting the navigation and breaking site rules.

 

If you want to be a genuine continuous cruiser then you should be doing at least Milton Keynes to Bishops Stortford on a regular basis. Even Uxbridge to Waltham Town would be ok. But if you only intend to do Little Venice to Victoria Park, or the East London Ring, or shuffle between Harefield to Cowley, forget it.

 

Hope that helps,

D

 

I see there are at least FOUR widebeams at Delamere Terrace at the moment. Thats eight narrowboat moorings!

 

I also see the boat (with the dinghy) thats moored by the Harrow Road bridge STILL moored there after many weeks (and its virtually right in view of your Sheldon Square offices you only have to look through the arches of the M40 Westway!) Many people have just hopped over to Paddington, Kensal Green, Islington.

 

Despite my genuine attempts at CC'ing and travelling through an area wider than the London ring not once but several times a year (and off the BW system at least twice a year) I know there are just a few of us who do this and I see that this is just a small core of boaters - most of the others are just hogging central sites all the time.

 

BW tried to make an example of my boat, yet I see practices that I would not condone being conducted on a regular basis and sometimes it seems BW could be practising favourtism.

Edited July 15, 2009 by fender

[Lady Muck]

If I ever cc, I don't think I'd hang around in London, so much better outside.So much quieter as we've found. Loving it up here on the L and L.

I can share the frustration about boaters who don't know anything about boating.

My boat was made aground twice last year (in the middle of the night),by boaters who ran aground in the pound below ours and opened the paddles on the lock, expecting to be floated off, not knowing anything about weirs, the water just ran straight through.

How hard is it to read just one book? Not expecting anyone to be a master helmsman from the word go, but to be a little bit more responsible. Read a book or two and perhaps get a tiny little bit of experience on a boat before you collect the behemoth widebeam you just bought.

Being considerate enough to move rahter than taking advantage of the lack of enforcement and seeing how much overstaying you can get away with.

Then we don't get threads like this and us boaters (including those of us who work for BW) might all get on a little bit better.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Lady Muck

[Neal Smith]

Hi all

 

Well, the debate was as lively as i expected!

 

I hope i dn't put my foot in it, but speaking as a newbie who is trying to learn everything that they can for at least a year before committing to the boat itself, it is hard. if you live around London and have ties, and want to live on a boat, then residential moorings are like golddust and expensive but you run into this political minefield if you try to genuiinely cc around to be comply with the rukes........and that is before practical possibiliies! I was reassured by teh poster who said they woudl haev been too scared had they get involved in all this before they took the plunge!!

 

It's all very well for someone who has a job in London - I could do my job elsewhere if I wanted to live on a boat and had no choice then maybe I could move, but I have a 9yo son from a previous relationship and need to be around for him as well....

 

There was a point to this post when I started it but I have lost it! LOL

 

Thanks for the debate though guys!

[Chris Pink]

It's all very well for someone who has a job in London - I could do my job elsewhere if I wanted to live on a boat and had no choice then maybe I could move, but I have a 9yo son from a previous relationship and need to be around for him as well....

 

As a matter of interest, what is it that appeals about living on a boat in London?

[Chris J W]

It's all very well for someone who has a job in London - I could do my job elsewhere if I wanted to live on a boat and had no choice then maybe I could move, but I have a 9yo son from a previous relationship and need to be around for him as well....

 

I suppose it's a matter of what you define as 'need to be around for him' - do you mean Time or Distance? Even up as far as, say, Tring you're only 45mins away on the train.

[Lady Muck]

I suppose it's a matter of what you define as 'need to be around for him' - do you mean Time or Distance? Even up as far as, say, Tring you're only 45mins away on the train.

Or as I've found, by booking online and travelling off-peak. Return to Warwick for a tenner.