Free Loaders ?

[RLWP]

Did you mean 'non CCers', Richard?

 

Tone

 

Hang on, I'll just go and count my double negatives...

 

Richard

 

 

The ones who declare themselves as CCers then don't move. They'll be more obvious because they are always in the same place

 

MORE: Oh, I see. The good non CCers. I've invented a brand new category for me to get upset about

Edited January 17, 2011 by RLWP

[dccruiser]

Further to my previous posts i think the situation is very simple and straightforward.

 

Anyone who boats responsibly, whatever licence they have, the type of boat they use or their mooring situation are absolutely fine and deserve no beratement whatsoever ...

 

Those that dont, again whatever license, boat, etc. and actively choose to abuse the rules and regulations the rest of us adhere to and through their actions spoil boating for the rest of us, should in my opinion be challenged, reported and basically chased off the waterways.

 

As i previously said i will be cc'ing later this year, second time around and dont want the pleasure i get from boating to be marred by the selfish and thoughtless actions of a mindless individuals.

 

Rick

[Albion]

Is that true, do genuine Ccers support people who do this and if so why, the type of boater you describe is not actually Ccing so shouldn’t presumably be called a Ccer?

Are the people you describe simply ‘boaters’ abusing the system?

I would have imagined that only other lawless boaters would rally to defend such behaviour.

Which brings me back to the reason I asked the OP question in the first place.

I am concerned about embarking on a way of life that is not only perfectly legal but also, as far as I can tell, perfectly normal in that it only differs from any other boat movement in terms of its duration and yet it carries a label (Ccing) under which just about every act of poor canalmanship seems to be attached.

Would, for example, I avoid being reviled if I get myself a permanent mooring (presumably my licence would then display me as a moorer?) then just set off on a long weekend navigation that takes say 10 years to complete?

If I did that and then behaved badly would people say ‘bloody moorer!’ ?

 

Joshua

 

I don't think that you will have a problem as long as you abide by the spirit of the regulation. If you are genuinely continuously cruising (a continuous voyage with gaps between returning to the same area) then I cannot see what the problem is. The continuous moorers/bridge hoppers (claiming that they are CCing) are the ones who get on some people's nerves, especially if they just happen to be continuously occupying the time limited visitor moorings and are there EVERY time you pass, usually with a car parked up on the nearest bridge. It would be an expensive, and in my opinion, unnecessary expense to get a permanent mooring just so that you could respond to someone who asked that you had one even though you were CCing. CCing as such doesn't warrant any opprobrium; it is the ones who aren't truly CCing that might suffer that.

Roger

[dccruiser]

I don't think that you will have a problem as long as you abide by the spirit of the regulation. If you are genuinely continuously cruising (a continuous voyage with gaps between returning to the same area) then I cannot see what the problem is. The continuous moorers/bridge hoppers (claiming that they are CCing) are the ones who get on some people's nerves, especially if they just happen to be continuously occupying the time limited visitor moorings and are there EVERY time you pass, usually with a car parked up on the nearest bridge. It would be an expensive, and in my opinion, unnecessary expense to get a permanent mooring just so that you could respond to someone who asked that you had one even though you were CCing. CCing as such doesn't warrant any opprobrium; it is the ones who aren't truly CCing that might suffer that.

Roger

 

 

Couldnt agree more!

 

Rick

Edited January 17, 2011 by dccruiser

[Joshua]

Hang on..............................

 

............ Oh, I see. The good non CCers. I've invented a brand new category for me to get upset about

 

That seems to go to the heart of the matter, it seems very harsh that genuine Ccers should have to continue to bare the irritation and prejudice promoted by the ‘cheats’ habit of hiding behind their CC label.

Would there be any merit in the simple device of volunteering for the ‘cheats’ their own label so that their behaviour may be accurately attributed where appropriate ?

Say something like ‘cheats’ ?

 

I have noted a parallel complaint in this debate based on a suggestion that Ccers do not pay enough and whilst I can understand the principle (here in France Motorways are tolled so that those who use them most, pay most) is this a widely held view?

 

On the French motorways, short journeys are very expensive compared with long ones because the casual user puts a disproportionate demand on the system ( toll gate staffing for example) and of course no one actually keeps a car parked permanently on the motorway so comparisons are limited. However, I can’t imagine a pay as you use system would be in anyone’s interest.

 

Joshua

[RLWP]

That seems to go to the heart of the matter, it seems very harsh that genuine Ccers should have to continue to bare the irritation and prejudice promoted by the ‘cheats’ habit of hiding behind their CC label.

Would there be any merit in the simple device of volunteering for the ‘cheats’ their own label so that their behaviour may be accurately attributed where appropriate ?

Say something like ‘cheats’ ?

 

I have noted a parallel complaint in this debate based on a suggestion that Ccers do not pay enough and whilst I can understand the principle (here in France Motorways are tolled so that those who use them most, pay most) is this a widely held view?

 

On the French motorways, short journeys are very expensive compared with long ones because the casual user puts a disproportionate demand on the system ( toll gate staffing for example) and of course no one actually keeps a car parked permanently on the motorway so comparisons are limited. However, I can’t imagine a pay as you use system would be in anyone’s interest.

 

Joshua

 

Joshua, you seem to be concerned that as soon as your boat touches the water you will be reviled as a "foul CCer" and pelted with abuse and rotten fruit.

 

It's not going to be like that. Honestly

 

Richard

 

It's not easy to find that much fruit...

[dccruiser]

That seems to go to the heart of the matter, it seems very harsh that genuine Ccers should have to continue to bare the irritation and prejudice promoted by the ‘cheats’ habit of hiding behind their CC label.

Would there be any merit in the simple device of volunteering for the ‘cheats’ their own label so that their behaviour may be accurately attributed where appropriate ?

Say something like ‘cheats’ ?

 

Joshua

 

Maybe you have hit on something ....

 

What if they were signed up in the same way cars are, in the case of cars "uninsured" or "unlicenced vehicle" on massive stickers and a wheel clamp added, the vehicle then being removed to be crushed or for someone to pay adequate insurance plus storage etc.

 

To transfer this to boats, a load of cheat signs or maybe being more p.c. overstayer signs and then the boat being chained by a ground anchor untill removed in the same way until a mooring is proved and all charges added are paid.... the revenue alone would more than cover the cost of a reporting hotline and the appropriate staff to impliment it! ..

Of course in the case of a genuine breakdown etc. they could use "warden aware" signs in much the same way that "police aware" signs are used on broken down cars.

 

Rick

[Albion]

snipped

 

I have noted a parallel complaint in this debate based on a suggestion that Ccers do not pay enough and whilst I can understand the principle (here in France Motorways are tolled so that those who use them most, pay most) is this a widely held view?

 

Joshua

 

I think you're confusing the bridge hopper CMers with the genuine CCers again here. What would get on someone's nerves is that, just outside their marina that they pay expensive mooring charges for, are a group of permanent moorers who have all the local facilities to hand and yet never move, block time limited moorings and, of course, do not pay for that privilege. I can see how those CMers could attract criticism from marina moorers but, again, if you are genuinely CCing then you should not have any criticism levelled at you. Don't let your concern over this matter prevent you from CCing........unless Richard manages to locate a ready and plentiful supply of rotten fruit anyway!

Roger

[blodger]

I think you're confusing the bridge hopper CMers with the genuine CCers again here. What would get on someone's nerves is that, just outside their marina that they pay expensive mooring charges for, are a group of permanent moorers who have all the local facilities to hand and yet never move, block time limited moorings and, of course, do not pay for that privilege. I can see how those CMers could attract criticism from marina moorers but, again, if you are genuinely CCing then you should not have any criticism levelled at you. Don't let your concern over this matter prevent you from CCing........unless Richard manages to locate a ready and plentiful supply of rotten fruit anyway!

Roger

This discussion seems to ignore that there are lots of boats bridge hopping where they want to be that do have a mooring where they do not want to be and, it is not easy to determine which are which, etc

[Sunset Rising]

I do not understand how anyone, other than someone with a permanent mooring, would know who these CCers who stay put ( cmers ) are. Or really that they exist at all. If I am cruising round the system, never staying longer than 14 days in any one place, how would I know that others are there longer ? Even if they were there when I arrived, and there when I left, I couldn't know that it was for more than a few minutes.

[RLWP]

I do not understand how anyone, other than someone with a permanent mooring, would know who these CCers who stay put ( cmers ) are. Or really that they exist at all. If I am cruising round the system, never staying longer than 14 days in any one place, how would I know that others are there longer ? Even if they were there when I arrived, and there when I left, I couldn't know that it was for more than a few minutes.

 

Because our regular Sunday afternoon trip to charge the batteries takes us over the same piece of canal every time. It's pretty obvious when a boat has been in the same place for many months

 

Richard

 

Hang on. We have a permanent mooring. You can only be asking this question of CCers and hire boaters then

Edited January 17, 2011 by RLWP

[canaldrifter]

There is a grey area too. I personally have no objection whatsoever to a 'continuous moorer' who moors out in the sticks somewhere where the boat isn't taking up space where anyone else might want to moor, as long as the boat is licensed.

 

Tone

[Joshua]

Joshua, you seem to be concerned that as soon as your boat touches the water you will be reviled as a "foul CCer" and pelted with abuse and rotten fruit.

 

It's not going to be like that. Honestly

 

Richard

 

It's not easy to find that much fruit...

 

Fair enough.

But given that I am about to sell our lovely 18th century home in France and all our possessions to embark on what will almost certainly be an irreversible act, if you are wrong and my partner asks what the hell I’ve done, I’m going to point her in your direction.

I should point out my partner is 6ft tall and has an equally big dog !

 

Joshua

[carlt]

Because our regular Sunday afternoon trip to charge the batteries takes us over the same piece of canal every time. It's pretty obvious when a boat has been in the same place for many months

But even then, if the appropriate signage is missing, the wrong conclusions could be jumped to...

 

We are the first boat on that mooring and one end of the boat is usually next to the post with the signs on. It doesn't help that someone has taken the permitted moorers only (or whatever it said) sign off.

[mykaskin]

There is a grey area too. I personally have no objection whatsoever to a 'continuous moorer' who moors out in the sticks somewhere where the boat isn't taking up space where anyone else might want to moor, as long as the boat is licensed.

 

Tone

 

It's not about who wants to moor where. It's for how long, BW say 14 days maximum (fullstop)

 

Personally, I dislike people who moor for days on end in the middle of nowhere (if only for 14 days), and because they want their own space moor just a few boat lengths from another boat, so you are always having to slow down then speed up again every minute. It's nice on the Shroppie and other places where the bank is unsuitable for mooring, and the same in cities where it's too dangerous to moor the night.

 

I remember when it was unusual to find moored boats in the middle of nowhere, and even then they were only there for the night, moving on in the morning - that's why they call it boating (or cruising if you like), not mooring.

 

Mike

[Sunset Rising]

There is a grey area too. I personally have no objection whatsoever to a 'continuous moorer' who moors out in the sticks somewhere where the boat isn't taking up space where anyone else might want to moor, as long as the boat is licensed.

 

Tone

 

 

Ahh. So have you broken the rules if there is noone there to see you

 

Ummm, hows it go ? If a tree falls in a forest and there is noone there to hear it, did it make a noise ?

 

and no, I wouldn't have any objection either.

[Albion]

This discussion seems to ignore that there are lots of boats bridge hopping where they want to be that do have a mooring where they do not want to be and, it is not easy to determine which are which, etc

 

I'm not sure that there is evidence of lots of boats having moorings somewhere but bridge hopping elsewhere. I would be interested to learn who has done the study to confirm it.

Irrespective of whether they have have moorings elsewhere or have no moorings, bridge hopping is still not complying with the spirit of the regs and may be reducing the available visitor spaces for genuine cruising boats.

Roger

[blodger]

I'm not sure that there is evidence of lots of boats having moorings somewhere but bridge hopping elsewhere. I would be interested to learn who has done the study to confirm it.

Irrespective of whether they have have moorings elsewhere or have no moorings, bridge hopping is still not complying with the spirit of the regs and may be reducing the available visitor spaces for genuine cruising boats.

Roger

I agree with your latter but bridge hopping and hogging visitor moorings is not something only in the domain of CCers who are not but to whom it is always attributed

[Albion]

I agree with your latter but bridge hopping and hogging visitor moorings is not something only in the domain of CCers who are not but to whom it is always attributed

To some extent I agree that one can't generalise but there are parts of the system where it is rife, lower S. Oxford, lower GU and, I'm told, western end of the K&A.

Roger

[mayalld]

That seems to go to the heart of the matter, it seems very harsh that genuine Ccers should have to continue to bare the irritation and prejudice promoted by the 'cheats' habit of hiding behind their CC label.

Would there be any merit in the simple device of volunteering for the 'cheats' their own label so that their behaviour may be accurately attributed where appropriate ?

Say something like 'cheats' ?

 

We already have such a label "Continuous Moorer".

 

Unfortunately some people like to muddy the water by using the term to mean something different to make it difficult to discuss the issue. One can only assume that they wish to aid the cheats.

[canaldrifter]

Ahh. So have you broken the rules if there is noone there to see you

 

 

Not me guv....

 

Tiz wot I observe in my travels.

 

I did get a ticket on the Lower Oxford though. I was moored in the same place for 14 days. Then I left and cruised down to Oxford for about five days, and back up to the same place for another 14 days. Some voluntary warden claimed I'd been there for over a month. I got a written apology with the suggestion that maybe I should inform them of what I'm doing. Why should I? They should be more observant.

 

In fact, if we're on a canal that is a dead end (and Oxford is a dead end as far as BW waters are concerned), then we can cruise up and back as part of a continuous journey. There are boaters that do it on the Chesterfield, quite legally, for example.

 

Tone

[Sir Nibble]

So there you have it Joshua, nobody has a dislike or revulsion for CCers, but plenty get upset about those who claim to be CCing and have no intention of doing so. If you are a "continuous moorer" and wish to cover your arse then you make out that those who feel you are cheating are just nasty spiteful envious people who hate CCers and should not be listened to, you also call for solidarity to a group with whom you have no more in common with a marina moorer and whom you bring into disrepute by your behaviour.

So, the end result is that when Richard says something like

Because our regular Sunday afternoon trip to charge the batteries takes us over the same piece of canal every time. It's pretty obvious when a boat has been in the same place for many months

he is far more likely to be reviled than the continuous moorer. In fact, my impression is that the objectors use terms like "unfair" or "selfish" and the supporters of continuous mooring use terms like "spite" "vitriol" and "fascist". They are also self appointed arbiters of the law by the way and BW's legal advice is considered to have no value at all until BW's legal advisor says something they agree with in which case his word is game set and match. The whole issue is riddled with double standards on both sides of the debate. No one will ever revile you if you are genuinely cruising the system, guaranteed.

[peggy sue]

I am rather disturbed that the Residential Boat Owners Association should make such a broad sweeping statement, particularly as I do not consider it to be accurate, or apropriate.

 

I have many friends who are, or who have been, long term Contiuous Cruisers, I have not considered any of them to be free loaders, and as far as I am aware they have not felt that others considered them in that way either.

 

On our cruises we meet all sorts of people, and because we prefer to stop overnight in out of the way places, which are often also preferred by Continuous Cruisers, we have met many delightful people who were cruising around the system, none of whom anyone could consider to be freeloaders.

 

I can only assume that the RBOA are referring to the attitude of (some) "other waterways users" towards those who declare themselves as Continuous Cruisers, but do not comply with the requirements of continuous cruising, by staying in one place for months on end. That is an entirely different issue, and if it concerns them, is one which the RBOA should address with their membership, rather than simply try to load the blame onto others.

 

 

Here Here , I agree with you last comment,BW and RBOA need to crack down on those who abuse the system not tar us all with the same brush. We are not all "bridge hoppers" nor do we take all the prime moorings. We have CC for 10 months now, completely adhering to the mooring times allowed and we prefer to be in "the middle of nowhere" not on water points or best moorings.We bought a winter mooring when the weather started to get bad and we knew we would not be able to move around.We object to being called free loaders we pay our way!

[Joshua]

Here Here , I agree with you last comment,BW and RBOA need to crack down on those who abuse the system not tar us all with the same brush. We are not all "bridge hoppers" nor do we take all the prime moorings. We have CC for 10 months now, completely adhering to the mooring times allowed and we prefer to be in "the middle of nowhere" not on water points or best moorings.We bought a winter mooring when the weather started to get bad and we knew we would not be able to move around.We object to being called free loaders we pay our way!

 

Hi Peggy Sue,

 

Since writing the OP my view on this issue has been completely changed, so although I am reluctant to risk igniting this subject again, I feel I have to defend the RBOA.

 

When I first read the RBOA article, I knew nothing about the attitude of boaters in general so took the reference to being ‘reviled as free loaders’ at face value.

 

Then I joined this forum to find out what it was all about.

 

Firstly, I think that some of the comments I have read here, entirely justify what the RBOA article says.

 

Secondly, it has become very clear, that it is not the behaviour of Ccers that attract the ‘freeloader’ accusation but people who ‘pretend’ to be Ccers and who do so as a convenient ploy to avoid having to pay for a mooring. If they could have got away with it, they would no doubt have called themselves ‘residential moorers’, then everyone would have been calling residential moorers ‘freeloaders’.

In this case it would do no good whatsoever for the RBOA to tick its members off, because they are not doing anything wrong (generalising anyway).

 

Finally, having read a recent thread on the general forum about residential moorings, I was flabbergasted to read just how flippant the general attitude is to ignoring entirely the need for a ‘residential mooring’ and the advice just to get any old mooring, preferably the cheapest, then live on it like apparently “1000’s of others” !

 

I don’t make any comment about the rights and wrongs here, I know too little, but my concerns about legally Ccing, pale into insignificance by comparison.

 

Joshua

[cotswoldsman]

That seems to go to the heart of the matter, it seems very harsh that genuine Ccers should have to continue to bare the irritation and prejudice promoted by the 'cheats' habit of hiding behind their CC label.

Would there be any merit in the simple device of volunteering for the 'cheats' their own label so that their behaviour may be accurately attributed where appropriate ?

Say something like 'cheats' ?

 

 

I am trying to decide if you are trying to provoke and keep the debate going or you are genuinely concerned that the world will hate you.

Me I could not care less if you decide to be a genuine CCer or an non genuine CCer. I f you want a label then just stick something in the window to the effect of "No one likes me!!" I have never had anyone on the canal ask me if I am a genuine CCer or a non genuine CCer. Just get on with it and stop dithering.

 

Here Here , I agree with you last comment,BW and RBOA need to crack down on those who abuse the system not tar us all with the same brush. We are not all "bridge hoppers" nor do we take all the prime moorings. We have CC for 10 months now, completely adhering to the mooring times allowed and we prefer to be in "the middle of nowhere" not on water points or best moorings.We bought a winter mooring when the weather started to get bad and we knew we would not be able to move around.We object to being called free loaders we pay our way!

 

Does it really bother you what pother people think? That is their problem!!