Why no 'in between' residential licence ?

[luctor et emergo]

It seams to me, that BW are missing a massive income opprtunity, which would at the same time make licencing much simpler. It would remove the 'need' for genuine 'liveaboarders' who can't have a 'Residential Mooring' to try and circumnavigate the rules in one way or other. It would also distinquish between the genuine 'liveaboard' who doesn't want to, or can't travel the WHOLE system, whilst still moving substantialy along a smaller section, and the 'bridgehoppers'.

 

If you want to live on your boat, you must have a Resi Mooring. Fine, but why do you need a permanent berth, if you wish to travel around? For me, I want to live in the sticks, not in a Marina. I also want to move around, to make the most of the different view that you can have. That is what is all about, right? Why don't BW create a Resident Licence that does not require a permanent Mooring?

 

I don't really see the point in either living permanently in a Marina, or indeed blocking those spaces that could be filled with recreational moorings.

 

And yes, I would expect to pay a fair price for such a licence, but without the need to secure a permanent mooring.

[Naughty Cal]

It already exists. Its called CCing. You can be a liveabaord CCer but you have to adhere to the rules.

[mayalld]

It seams to me, that BW are missing a massive income opprtunity, which would at the same time make licencing much simpler. It would remove the 'need' for genuine 'liveaboarders' who can't have a 'Residential Mooring' to try and circumnavigate the rules in one way or other. It would also distinquish between the genuine 'liveaboard' who doesn't want to, or can't travel the WHOLE system, whilst still moving substantialy along a smaller section, and the 'bridgehoppers'.

 

If you want to live on your boat, you must have a Resi Mooring. Fine, but why do you need a permanent berth, if you wish to travel around? For me, I want to live in the sticks, not in a Marina. I also want to move around, to make the most of the different view that you can have. That is what is all about, right? Why don't BW create a Resident Licence that does not require a permanent Mooring?

 

I don't really see the point in either living permanently in a Marina, or indeed blocking those spaces that could be filled with recreational moorings.

 

And yes, I would expect to pay a fair price for such a licence, but without the need to secure a permanent mooring.

 

The considered it last year.

 

It was called a "Roving Mooring Permit" many of the boating organisations and many people here opposed it.

 

I believe that a number of people who see no harm in your plan to have a mooring you don't actually use, in order to be exempt from the requirement to cruise more widely, also opposed the RMP idea.

 

Odd really, given that they are effectively the same thing.

[luctor et emergo]

It already exists. Its called CCing. You can be a liveabaord CCer but you have to adhere to the rules.

 

That is the problem, the rules require you to travel on the whole network (or at least a substantial part of it), not just a small part of it. If you travel up and down just a small part, you are breaking the rules (technicaly). I need to stay in one area for work. A fairly large area, because I will be traveling on a bike, but still, I will be restricted to the K&A between Bradford on Avon and Hugerford.

[KenK]

It seams to me, that BW are missing a massive income opprtunity, which would at the same time make licencing much simpler. It would remove the 'need' for genuine 'liveaboarders' who can't have a 'Residential Mooring' to try and circumnavigate the rules in one way or other. It would also distinquish between the genuine 'liveaboard' who doesn't want to, or can't travel the WHOLE system, whilst still moving substantialy along a smaller section, and the 'bridgehoppers'.

 

If you want to live on your boat, you must have a Resi Mooring. Fine, but why do you need a permanent berth, if you wish to travel around? For me, I want to live in the sticks, not in a Marina. I also want to move around, to make the most of the different view that you can have. That is what is all about, right? Why don't BW create a Resident Licence that does not require a permanent Mooring?

 

I don't really see the point in either living permanently in a Marina, or indeed blocking those spaces that could be filled with recreational moorings.

 

And yes, I would expect to pay a fair price for such a licence, but without the need to secure a permanent mooring.

 

According to Sally Ash (BW Head of Boating) that is exactly what they are going to trial around Bradford on Avon. Move people away from the centre around the visitor moorings, some kind of outer zone. If you want more details e mail her.

[luctor et emergo]

The considered it last year.

 

It was called a "Roving Mooring Permit" many of the boating organisations and many people here opposed it.

I believe that a number of people who see no harm in your plan to have a mooring you don't actually use, in order to be exempt from the requirement to cruise more widely, also opposed the RMP idea.

 

Odd really, given that they are effectively the same thing.

 

 

That's the sort of thing, but why do people oppose it? I understand that the Bridgehoppers are pretty much disliked (largely due to their avoidance of paying fees etc), but I'm sure that a number of them would buy a Roving Mooring Permit if it was available.

 

Or do some people just not want to see any more boats on the canal? I've seen that attitude elsewhere in live (if you haven't done this for 50+ years you're not worthy.. etc etc...)

 

According to Sally Ash (BW Head of Boating) that is exactly what they are going to trial around Bradford on Avon. Move people away from the centre around the visitor moorings, some kind of outer zone. If you want more details e mail her.

 

Thank you, I will.

 

[carlt]

It was called a "Roving Mooring Permit" many of the boating organisations and many people here opposed it.

I thought the majority of people who opposed it were those who felt it legitimised "bridge hopping"?

 

I see no harm in the scheme but it would require a change in legislation, surely.

[mayalld]

I thought the majority of people who opposed it were those who felt it legitimised "bridge hopping"?

 

I see no harm in the scheme but it would require a change in legislation, surely.

 

Not at all.

 

The legislation requires either;

• Continuous Cruising
  
• A place where the boat may lawfully be kept
  

BW can issue a mooring permit for a single location, it would require no additional legislation to enable them to issue a mooring permit covering a number of locations.

[Naughty Cal]

That is the problem, the rules require you to travel on the whole network (or at least a substantial part of it), not just a small part of it. If you travel up and down just a small part, you are breaking the rules (technicaly). I need to stay in one area for work. A fairly large area, because I will be traveling on a bike, but still, I will be restricted to the K&A between Bradford on Avon and Hugerford.

 

Then you need a mooring. If you can not abide by the CCing guidlines there is no option other than having a mooring or breaking the guidlines and risking BW throwing the book at you.

[luctor et emergo]

Then you need a mooring. If you can not abide by the CCing guidlines there is no option other than having a mooring or breaking the guidlines and risking BW throwing the book at you.

 

 

I know, I know.... but you can't get a Resi mooring (nor do I really need one), and using a Leisure Mooring doesn't technically allow you to live on the boat, unless you also have a home on the shore...

[deletedaccount]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what the OP is asking is whether a new licence type should be introduced, not if he is complying with his current one.

 

It's a reasonable question imo.

 

There are no resi moorings available anywhere west of devizes at the mo, other than (I think) Bristol which is extortionately priced.

[mayalld]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what the OP is asking is whether a new licence type should be introduced, not if he is complying with his current one.

 

It's a reasonable question imo.

 

There are no resi moorings available anywhere west of devizes at the mo, other than (I think) Bristol which is extortionately priced.

 

The alternate view is that the K&A has reached its capacity in terms of residential boaters.

[luctor et emergo]

The alternate view is that the K&A has reached its capacity in terms of residential boaters.

 

 

Bath and Bristol maybe, yes. But East of Devizes has plenty of empty space. There are a few bridges that seem busy, but other than that it's unspoilt..

 

But perhaps that's because it IS in the sticks? Not fashionable, no ready access to nightlife and no Waitrose...

 

[mayalld]

Bath and Bristol maybe, yes. But East of Devizes has plenty of empty space. There are a few bridges that seem busy, but other than that it's unspoilt..

 

But perhaps that's because it IS in the sticks? Not fashionable, no ready access to nightlife and no Waitrose...

 

 

Possibly.

 

I am some distance away, so difficult to be sure.

 

I suppose I come at it from an angle of "what is permitted", rather than "This is what I want to do, how do I fudge things so that I can do that"

[deletedaccount]

The alternate view is that the K&A has reached its capacity in terms of residential boaters.

 

perhaps the capacity should be increased.

[carlt]

perhaps the capacity should be increased.

More likely they'll shut the lot down.

[deletedaccount]

Possibly.

 

I am some distance away, so difficult to be sure.

 

I suppose I come at it from an angle of "what is permitted", rather than "This is what I want to do, how do I fudge things so that I can do that"

 

Like I said, he's not asking what is permitted right now, nor is he asking to 'fudge' anything.

[mayalld]

perhaps the capacity should be increased.

 

How would you achieve that?

[deletedaccount]

More likely they'll shut the lot down.

 

That's a lot of boats.

 

How would you achieve that?

 

More marinas?

[jelunga]

How would you achieve that?

 

You could make it a dual carriageway and use "Operation Stack" method to use it as a linear boat park.

 

Alternatively, make the canal bi level, so the top level can be for travelling on and the lower lever for parking.

 

just a thought

[Sir Nibble]

That's the sort of thing, but why do people oppose it? I understand that the Bridgehoppers are pretty much disliked (largely due to their avoidance of paying fees etc), but I'm sure that a number of them would buy a Roving Mooring Permit if it was available.

 

Or do some people just not want to see any more boats on the canal? I've seen that attitude elsewhere in live (if you haven't done this for 50+ years you're not worthy.. etc etc...)

 

 

 

 

 

It's nothing to do with avoidance of fees. It's nothing to do with not wanting to see more boats on the canal.

Recently due to an upsurge in enforcement action it's near chaos but I have been surprised to find that absence of the miles of boats normally resident between Dundas and Bathampton halves cruising time between the two. It was actually viable to go to Bath for a weekend and have time to get off the boat. Also, Until the absence of boats made the towpath visible I was also not aware that much of this stretch is 48 hour mooring. Which brings us to another reason some of us resent the "non compliants". Just to the east of BOA marina there is a short length of 48 hr visitor mooring, residential. Just to both sides of the 24 hr moorings at BOA upper and lower wharf there are further stretches of 48 hr mooring, largely residential. From "smelly bridge" less than a mile further, to Avoncliff more 48 hr mooring, largely residential. All through the Limpley Stoke valley where mooring is problematic, clear. From Dundas to Bathampton, both 48hr and 14 day, residential.

Do you get the picture? Mostly, all these boats have scattered all over until BW give up and they can go home and the difference in available visitor moorings is astonishing.

A few people living in the sticks keeping their heads down is one thing but there are a lot of people pushing their luck more and more until visitor moorings become residential. I know I will be accused of being a foaming at the mouth fascist for voicing these views but the fact is that cruising boaters, the canal trust and hire operators are complaining loudly en mass to BW about the situation; hence the apparently bodged attempt at enforcement currently being screwed up.

[Lady Muck]

^^^^

Nail. Head. Hit. Don't assume that all users of the K & A want to live on the canal, they don't and this is where the conflict starts.

 

Theres gotta be some compromise somewhere, from user group meetings notes, I can see it's usually complaints about obstructing water points, hogging visitor moorings and creating a situation where there are so many moored boats , cruising boaters have to go everywhere on tick over.

 

We all use the canal for our different activities and unfortunately it's not a finite space, we can't have it all our own way, it's just not big (long?) enough and as it gets more popular there's gonna be even more friction.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Lady Muck

[Chertsey]

Isn't the reason people opposed the introduction of a 'roving mooring permit' at additional charge because we've all already got one (well, nearly all of us). It's called a licence.

[luctor et emergo]

Isn't the reason people opposed the introduction of a 'roving mooring permit' at additional charge because we've all already got one (well, nearly all of us). It's called a licence.

 

 

You either have a CC licence, and travel around the whole of the network, and don't need to remain in an area for work, or

 

You must have a Residential Mooring, or

 

You must have a Leisure Mooring, and don't live on your booat (unless you also have a land based dwelling/address, which is classed as your home)

 

 

From what I understand, these are the only three options available at the moment. There is no provision for people who want to live on the boat, without a permanent mooring (because they don't need one), and away from the visitor moorings which are so clogged.

At this moment BW seem to condone the habit of bridgehopping, for lack of an ability, or will, to properly enforce the CC rule. For starters, they'd have to chase the non-compliant CC boats to get hold of them, then they would have to tow them to a suitable place to remove them, and then they have to dispose of them.... Not a big problem for a few boats I imagine, but if the problem is as widespread as it is perceived, that would seem a very tall order.

[Naughty Cal]

From what I understand, these are the only three options available at the moment. There is no provision for people who want to live on the boat, without a permanent mooring (because they don't need one), and away from the visitor moorings which are so clogged.

 

Well there is. You could CC in an area that isnt so clogged.