CCing and BW's interpretation of the law

[drunkensailor]

Furness Vale, Upper Peak Forest Canal, north of bridge 30. There is a length of mooring that will accomodate perhaps a dozen boats. It is perpetually full of the same boats that claim to be CCers.

 

So how often are you there?

[Sir Nibble]

So how often are you there?

Never, he can't moor

What other questions will be contrived in the hope of an answer that admits "Aha! they aren't bothering you as much as you say! it's just you being a grump!

 

Frankly I think the whole issue would go away and stop being such a bone of contention and we could all get along fine if all the weekender and holidayer boats that are kept permanently on visitor moorings were swept up and dealt with. Example, heading west from Hilperton, just round the bend under the first bridge is an area of towpath 14 day moorings, apart from those who clearly live there and may or may not go for a fortnightly cruise there are boats that are rarely used and not liveaboards either. Example, won't name the boat but think "He who tries to evade customs", high days and holidays use only and permanently moored on one of these visitor moorings, when the boat is cruised this is the home mooring it returns to. All that is needed is a "Gone for water" sign in the cockpit and this boat will tip me over into reporting a norty boater for the first time. Gone for water signs reservation of visitor moorings for the use of, and actually having the brass neck to paint a boat name on a visitor mooring are two things that make me wish I could torpedo the damned things on the way past. Liveaboards however, I am mellowing towards since those who really take the piss are apparently peer pressured into going for the fortnightly hop and even the 48 hour mooring to the east of BOA marina sometimes has space for visitors. That's another stretch with plenty of weekenders self awarded free permanent moorings too.

[Gibbo]

I can see the potentially 'generalisation' bit, but the offensive bit is eluding me...

 

It's offensive because he's a well known bridge hopper and doesn't like people knowing so.

[Ange]

Yes, I agree that people leaving boats there is a problem. There certainly are also some (local) boaters who do not have a permanent mooring on the Lancaster canal and are regular moorers at the popular spots, which includes Lancaster city. Some of these also leave their boats there sometimes. IMO 7 days is too generous for Lancaster and 48 hours would be more appropriate.

 

 

yes they should be 48 hours I agree

 

I totally agree. From what we've seen so far on the Lancy problems are caused more by unused boats being left on popular mooring sites, rather than liveaboards (which I assume is one of the criteria of a "CMer" or "bridge hopper"). We have chatted with a few Lancaster Canal residents and the general consensus is that there is zero enforcement on this canal, so even if it were reduced to 48 hours I suspect it wouldn't make a difference.

 

It's interesting how rarely land dwellers with no moorings who abandon their boats in popular places for weeks at a time are condemned on this forum. In our experience these are more common than fake CCers.

 

Damn - I promised myself I'd stay out of this.

[MrCJ]

ok having a thick moment whats is a CMer ???

[Ange]

ok having a thick moment whats is a CMer ???

 

continuous moorer - you'll grow familiar with the term when you've followed a few of these threads

[ditchcrawler]

Last time I passed, with the exception of those boats who displayed no licence at all, all the boats were, indeed, displaying a CC-er licence

Didn't BW remove the mooring information from the licence some years ago so now you can't tell if a boat a CCer or has a home mooring. I think my licence use to have Oxford Canal on it.

[Lady Muck]

continuous moorer - you'll grow familiar with the term when you've followed a few of these threads

 

My favourite (heard from boater at Victoria Park, in Hackney) was Conceptual Cruiser.

[Ange]

My favourite (heard from boater at Victoria Park, in Hackney) was Conceptual Cruiser.

 

Like that one

[Guest]

ok having a thick moment whats is a CMer ???

 

Acronym for a constant moorer...

 

 

 

 

Wopps edit to add I see already answered..

Edited August 17, 2010 by NB No Deadlines

[Chris Pink]

It's offensive because he's a well known bridge hopper and doesn't like people knowing so.

 

Aah, the idiot manqué comes drooling from his bowl with bullshit dripping from every orifice.

[Guest]

Aah, the idiot manqué comes drooling from his bowl with bullshit dripping from every orifice.

 

Charming..

[MrCJ]

why don't BW do something about all these boaters that seam to break the guidelines?

[Guest]

why don't BW do something about all these boaters that seam to break the guidelines?

 

It's a legit question, the answer to which I guess will be that they (claim that they) simply don't have the resources to police it....

[romarni123]

It's a legit question, the answer to which I guess will be that they (claim that they) simply don't have the resources to police it....

 

Its not the policing of it they do that a lot ,BUT the people who live on their boats have a differant process applied to them, it takes for ever to go through the process and its expensive for BW. So to make someone homeless is a differant thing to moving a boat on that does not have anyone living on it.

 

continuous moorer - you'll grow familiar with the term when you've followed a few of these threads

 

It could be continuous moaner depending on your feelings on the subject

[ymu]

why don't BW do something about all these boaters that seam to break the guidelines?

They do. Whether or not the wardens spot a problem depends on the area - popular spots tend to get policed more regularly, but there can still be ups and downs depending on staff complement. More remote spots might go largely unmonitored, apart from an occasional cycle patrol. We've met wardens just on regular duty, and ones who have been called out to deal with a problem rather than being on regular rounds.

[Gibbo]

Aah, the idiot manqué comes drooling from his bowl with bullshit dripping from every orifice.

 

Quite rich coming from a failed musician and printer.

 

Both very honourable professions...... Except when you're rubbish at them.

[mayalld]

So how often are you there?

 

We pass it regularly.

 

So seldom is there room to moor that we never plan on mooring there.

 

 

Didn't BW remove the mooring information from the licence some years ago so now you can't tell if a boat a CCer or has a home mooring. I think my licence use to have Oxford Canal on it.

 

No, they removed the plain text version from the licence, and reverted to using the location code (just as used to be displayed on the old circular discs).

 

The location code on a licence indicates the home mooring, and starts with two letters indicating the canal. So, for example, mine starts "PF" (Peak Forest).

 

Codes starting BW indicate that a boat has no home mooring.

[alan_fincher]

why don't BW do something about all these boaters that seam to break the guidelines?

 

It's a legit question, the answer to which I guess will be that they (claim that they) simply don't have the resources to police it....

 

In my experience BW regularly use their limited resources to visit local private marinas, adn do a walk around recording all the boats present there.

 

As they do have limited resources, I have often wondered why they do not ask the marina operator for a list of boats that pay to moor there, which they could presumably then check against their licensing records just from an office, without needing to make regular repeat visits to said marina.

 

Yes, they do go after tow-path moorers too, but if they are serious about chasing evasion of licences, or people claiming CC status when they think the rules are being broken, it often seems to me it is easier for them to go licence checking off-line, than it really is to get deeply involved in policing boats on the tow-path.

 

As someone has said, bringing any enforcement against boats that are somebody's main residence is a fairly protracted process - presumably why they generally do little more than to hassle people to move around a bit, rather than to go for more aggressive enforcement ?

[Naughty Cal]

It's interesting how rarely land dwellers with no moorings who abandon their boats in popular places for weeks at a time are condemned on this forum. In our experience these are more common than fake CCers.

 

As far as i am aware there is no rule against weekending your boat around the system. There are many people who take this route to boat ownership. The same rules apply to those weekending as to thise liveaboard CCers/CMers.

[mayalld]

As far as i am aware there is no rule against weekending your boat around the system. There are many people who take this route to boat ownership. The same rules apply to those weekending as to thise liveaboard CCers/CMers.

 

Ange was talking about people who leave boats for several weeks, not genuine weekenders.

[Chris Pink]

Ange was talking about people who leave boats for several weeks, not genuine weekenders.

 

What's all this "genuine" this, "false" that, we are talking about people here, Dave, not computer code. People don't fit your cosy little simplistic labels. For every single boater on the canal network there is a different pattern of use. There is a straightforward law that governs mooring and licensing, within those strictures lie an infinite pattern of use. This discussion is about whether BW's interpretations are valid, not whether you can divide boaters into meaningless subcultures.

 

 

 

Quite rich coming from a failed musician and printer.

 

Both very honourable professions...... Except when you're rubbish at them.

 

Bless. Did I touch a nerve, pompous little man?

[Chertsey]

Can someone please explain.

 

I come up to somewhere I'd like to stop but I can't because it's full of boats. How annoying for me. But what the hell difference does it make to me whether they've travelled twenty miles or 200 yards in the last day/week/month? Whether they're 'genuine' continuous cruisers or fake bridgehoppers? Who or whatever they are, they'll be taking up a space somewhere; if they're here then they're not somewhere else. Each one of them only takes up a finite amount of space.

[Guest User]

Can someone please explain.

 

I come up to somewhere I'd like to stop but I can't because it's full of boats. How annoying for me. But what the hell difference does it make to me whether they've travelled twenty miles or 200 yards in the last day/week/month? Whether they're 'genuine' continuous cruisers or fake bridgehoppers? Who or whatever they are, they'll be taking up a space somewhere; if they're here then they're not somewhere else. Each one of them only takes up a finite amount of space.

 

But isn't that what rubs for many people ?... that they can't stop where they want to when they want to ? For many, the idyll is a near-deserted system with only a handful of boats and a vacant mooring outside a friendly pub as the sun is reaching the horizon ...... but .... reality is not like that, what with the synchronicity of when boats come out to play being dictated by our weather and public/school holidays .... and the wishful rose-tinted thinking turns to resentment .... and then some start to examine the small-print of the rules and try to work out whether all these other boats that they perceive to be clogging up the system are in fact justified in doing so, but in essence isn't it just sheer weight of numbers at a given time and place ?

[magpie patrick]

Can someone please explain.

 

I come up to somewhere I'd like to stop but I can't because it's full of boats. How annoying for me. But what the hell difference does it make to me whether they've travelled twenty miles or 200 yards in the last day/week/month? Whether they're 'genuine' continuous cruisers or fake bridgehoppers? Who or whatever they are, they'll be taking up a space somewhere; if they're here then they're not somewhere else. Each one of them only takes up a finite amount of space.

 

I think the difference is simple (and I'm sure you know this and are just winding Dave up)

 

If I get somewhere at six, and the moorings were full by 4, then I had a fighting chance and it's my fault for being late, note to self to get there earlier next time

 

If I get there at, 6 in on a July evening, and the moorings have been full since April, then the mooring location is effectively closed to vistors

 

On the Upper Peak Forest and much of the Macclesfield (these used to be our home waters) there are many locations where mooring is not practical because the towpath is unreachable, unsuitable, or the canal is too narrow (and on the UPF, lots of tight narrow bends), the situation at Furness is tantamount to meaning you cen never visit Furness, not just you can't do it this time.

 

It is much less severe on the K and A as it is usually possible to find a mooring in the Limpley Stoke Valley and at Bath, although having a 23 footer helps