CCing and BW's interpretation of the law

[mayalld]

This;

 

"The problem is that bridge hoppers tend to congregate in honeypot locations, to the extent that the use of their favoured locations becomes all but impossible for leisure users."

 

is not a reasoned argument, it is simply an unsubstantiated and incorrect assertion complete with offensive generalisation.

 

It is an argument based upon my own observations.

[Chris Pink]

It is an argument based upon my own observations.

 

If you would like it to be considered as argument rather than just another of your arrogant statements of a marginal position, I suggest you provide some evidence.

 

Otherwise my counter argument is simply "no it doesn't" and carries equal weight.

 

 

 

The problem is that bridge hoppers tend to congregate in honeypot locations, to the extent that the use of their favoured locations becomes all but impossible for leisure users.

 

I wonder if you would mind pointing out the "all but impossible" part of mooring in this "honeypot" visitor mooring in Bath, photographed on a Saturday in the peak of the holiday season.

 

 

Unlike your hyperbole, I can produce evidence in support of my arguments.

.

[mayalld]

If you would like it to be considered as argument rather than just another of your arrogant statements of a marginal position, I suggest you provide some evidence.

 

Otherwise my counter argument is simply "no it doesn't" and carries equal weight.

 

Indeed it does.

 

I will take some pictures over the coming months, and present them as evidence later in the year.

 

 

I wonder if you would mind pointing out the "all but impossible" part of mooring in this "honeypot" visitor mooring in Bath, photographed on a Saturday in the peak of the holiday season.

 

As I don't know the site, I can't really comment as to whether it is a honeypot site, or whether there is some special reason why it is empty.

 

Is it a location where BW regularly patrol?

[tomsk]

"Satisfy the board" that they are complying with the terms of the act,

 

From BW guidelines:

 

 

 

The law does not require this at all. "A "cruise" is a journey or series of journeys". It may well be but where does the Act mention "cruise"? It says, quite clearly that:

 

 

 

BW themselves say that, "'Navigation' in this context means travelling on water i.e. making a journey". If I set off on a boat from Braunston and boated to Birmingham and turned around and went back, and repeated this 'journey' for the duration of my license without stopping in one place more than 14 days, I would be complying with the the terms of the Act, but not with BW's continuous cruising guidelines. That is why those guidelines do not accord with the legal requirement.

 

There is no requirement within the act to be engaged in a progressive journey around the system and, consequently, there can be no requirement within the act to satisfy the board that you are doing so.

 

Iv'e only just seen this gem of a thread.

 

Natalie, what a splendid post, succinct and to the point.

 

Dave will thrash about for a couple of pages trying to rubbish both you personally and your excellent reasoning, doubtless working himself into a self-satisfied lather of masturbatory psudo-legalese. I dont really think he will achieve anything but raising huge guffaws of laughter in boats and living rooms around the country as he slips up on yet another of his lime green boa.... sorry self-discarded boaty banana skins.... Well done Natalie.

 

 

Why?? (apart from the fact he's correct)

 

Oh No He Isn't...

[mayalld]

Iv'e only just seen this gem of a thread.

 

Natalie, what a splendid post, succinct and to the point.

 

Dave will thrash about for a couple of pages trying to rubbish both you personally and your excellent reasoning, doubtless working himself into a self-satisfied lather of masturbatory psudo-legalese. I dont really think he will achieve anything but raising huge guffaws of laughter in boats and living rooms around the country as he slips up on yet another of his lime green boa.... sorry self-discarded boaty banana skins.... Well done Natalie.

 

Yes, Natalie argues her side of the argument well.

 

I believe that she is wrong, and doubtless she believes that I am wrong.

 

We have, however, both put forward our arguments relating to the matter at hand, and done so WITHOUT descending to personal attacks.

 

Of course, it all falls apart once the forum bully-boy arrives, and decides to weigh in with a dollop of personal abuse.

[tomsk]

Yes, Natalie argues her side of the argument well.

 

I believe that she is wrong, and doubtless she believes that I am wrong.

 

We have, however, both put forward our arguments relating to the matter at hand, and done so WITHOUT descending to personal attacks.

 

Of course, it all falls apart once the forum bully-boy arrives, and decides to weigh in with a dollop of personal abuse.

 

Oh Dave.... will you marry me .... xx

[Chris Pink]

As I don't know the site, I can't really comment as to whether it is a honeypot site, or whether there is some special reason why it is empty.

 

Is it a location where BW regularly patrol?

 

As the one of the nearest access points to Bath then yes it could be classed as honeypot site (if there is such a thing). No special reason that I know of (and I would). And BW patrols are noticeable by their absence in this area - I can point you at many people moaning about this (including myself).

 

So I can take it that my case is made in the absence of contrary evidence from yourself?

[Naughty Cal]

As the one of the nearest access points to Bath then yes it could be classed as honeypot site (if there is such a thing). No special reason that I know of (and I would). And BW patrols are noticeable by their absence in this area - I can point you at many people moaning about this (including myself).

 

So I can take it that my case is made in the absence of contrary evidence from yourself?

 

Could the empty mooring be anything to do with the time of the week or even the fact it is raining heavily thus all boat owners will be speeding past moored boats instead?

[ymu]

Could the empty mooring be anything to do with the time of the week or even the fact it is raining heavily thus all boat owners will be speeding past moored boats instead?

Not when the complaint is that visitor moorings are always full up with continuous moorers, no ...

[Chris Pink]

Not when the complaint is that visitor moorings are always full up with continuous moorers, no ...

 

She's not very bright, bless.

[Naughty Cal]

Not when the complaint is that visitor moorings are always full up with continuous moorers, no ...

 

Maybe the CMers are CCing. Stranger things have happened

[mayalld]

As the one of the nearest access points to Bath then yes it could be classed as honeypot site (if there is such a thing). No special reason that I know of (and I would). And BW patrols are noticeable by their absence in this area - I can point you at many people moaning about this (including myself).

 

So I can take it that my case is made in the absence of contrary evidence from yourself?

 

No, you could try reading my responses.

 

As you have called for evidence that shows that some boaters who claim to be CCers clog up certain sites for a prolonged period, it will clearly be necessary to gather that evidence over a period of time.

 

I trust that weekly pictures showing the same boats week on week will suffice?

[romarni123]

Maybe the CMers are CCing. Stranger things have happened

 

Perhaps they have gone on holiday

[Chris Pink]

I trust that weekly pictures showing the same boats week on week will suffice?

 

That would do it...

 

..provided you also show that it is "all but impossible" for anyone else to use those visitor moorings

[mayalld]

That would do it...

 

..provided you also show that it is "all but impossible" for anyone else to use those visitor moorings

 

Would it suffice to show that 90%+ of that length is taken up by CC-ing boats?

[cotswoldsman]

Maybe the CMers are CCing. Stranger things have happened

 

In that case they are CCers and not Cmers. It is my experience that it is mainly people that pay mooring fees or marina fees tend to class anyone who moores anywhere for more than a few days a CMer

 

 

As the one of the nearest access points to Bath then yes it could be classed as honeypot site (if there is such a thing). No special reason that I know of (and I would). And BW patrols are noticeable by their absence in this area - I can point you at many people moaning about this (including myself).

 

So I can take it that my case is made in the absence of contrary evidence from yourself?

 

i am planning on spending the winter in Bath Area so hope those moorings stay the same but then I am sure if I moor there in January when the system is quite and frozen I will be accused of hogging a honey pot site

[deletedaccount]

i am planning on spending the winter in Bath Area so hope those moorings stay the same but then I am sure if I moor there in January when the system is quite and frozen I will be accused of hogging a honey pot site

 

Most of those are turned over to winter moorings when the time comes.

[DHutch]

While im more than happy for this topic to be aired it is somewhat frustrating that most times it comes up it descends into argument between members. Everyone is entitled to there own views and opinions, and while its perfectly acceptable to disagree, to state that you disagree, and to reason your thoughts, its is more than possible to do this without descending to personal attacks.

 

Im not going to close this thread, but if there are further reports of valid personal attacks, the members responsible will be dealt with as i feel fit.

 

Please continue.

 

 

 

Daniel

[Chris Pink]

..

Edited August 16, 2010 by Chris Pink

[Naughty Cal]

i am planning on spending the winter in Bath Area so hope those moorings stay the same but then I am sure if I moor there in January when the system is quite and frozen I will be accused of hogging a honey pot site

 

The system being quiet doesnt give you the right to break the rules that you have agreed to folLow by agreeing to CC. Regardless of the time of year the rules are the same, unless of course you pay for a winter mooring.

[Chris Pink]

Would it suffice to show that 90%+ of that length is taken up by CC-ing boats?

 

Much as I'd like to cut you some slack Dave, your assertion (or argument) was quite clear on "all but impossible" to find a mooring so I would have to say that mostly you would have to show 100% full at teatime (with the vast majority of the boats having been there more than 2 weeks) although I would allow the occasional (say 1 in 4) 90% occupation.

 

Anything else rather dilutes your argument.

 

It would be also useful if you could establish that the boats you show staying there over 2 weeks were not boats with home moorings whose owners simply found it convenient to leave their boats on a visitor mooring until they wanted to use it again. I perceive this as a major problem affecting visitor moorings in our area.

 

I will accept that my picture, whilst by no means a unique occurrence, doesn't show the normal state of affairs but i can't remember many occasions when a visiting leisure boat would have found it "all but impossible" to moor.

 

I have somewhere (if you would like me to post it) a picture of May bank holiday at the same site showing exactly the same.

 

I would also point out that this is part of a canal whose inhabitants are frequently vilified for making it difficult to find a place to moor.

Edited August 16, 2010 by Chris Pink

[cotswoldsman]

The system being quiet doesnt give you the right to break the rules that you have agreed to folLow by agreeing to CC. Regardless of the time of year the rules are the same, unless of course you pay for a winter mooring.

 

Don't remember saying I was going to stay more than 14 days..... again you jump in with complete tripe. just as a side if the canal is frozen again as it was last year then BW cancel the 14 day rule. Sounds like another marina dweller who does not like the idea of someone who does not pay for a marina

[Naughty Cal]

Don't remember saying I was going to stay more than 14 days..... again you jump in with complete tripe. just as a side if the canal is frozen again as it was last year then BW cancel the 14 day rule. Sounds like another marina dweller who does not like the idea of someone who does not pay for a marina

 

I am perfectly happy to pay my mooring fees, we get some fantastic facilities in return.

 

What i dont like are so called CCers who inhabit the same spot month in month out and blame the weather for their lack of motivation to play by the rules. Yes there were times that the system froze over last winter but there were also times when the CCing community were using that as an excuse to get away with staying put for a couple of months.

 

It isnt the marina "dwellers" who resent CCers. You may want to look closer to home. How do you think the genuine CCers feel, who play by the rules and pay for a winter mooring, only to be joined by one of the so called CC community who dont pay their way and overstay.

[ymu]

The system being quiet doesnt give you the right to break the rules that you have agreed to folLow by agreeing to CC. Regardless of the time of year the rules are the same, unless of course you pay for a winter mooring.

Well, yes. But the question is, how many private boaters on holiday are actually around long enough to know who is CCCing according to the rules? I'm sure everyone knows of the odd boat that has had "engine trouble" for years, and there are certainly a few continuous moorers out in the middle of nowhere where noone cares about them, but it seems to me that those with moorings take the term "continuous cruising" rather too literally. A legitimate CCer may only move 15 times during the whole 7 month season, and in areas with lots of CCers they will generally all move on a Saturday morning - tying up long before most holiday-makers are finished on their day's cruising. This may create the illusion of continuous moorers all over the place, but that doesn't make it so.

[cotswoldsman]

I am perfectly happy to pay my mooring fees, we get some fantastic facilities in return.

 

What i dont like are so called CCers who inhabit the same spot month in month out and blame the weather for their lack of motivation to play by the rules. Yes there were times that the system froze over last winter but there were also times when the CCing community were using that as an excuse to get away with staying put for a couple of months.

 

It isnt the marina "dwellers" who resent CCers. You may want to look closer to home. How do you think the genuine CCers feel, who play by the rules and pay for a winter mooring, only to be joined by one of the so called CC community who dont pay their way and overstay.

 

All the CCers I know only stay 14 days i don't know any of these over stayers.