Moorings Management Proposals

[Lesd]

Cant wait the sooner they roll it out the better.

 

They can't enforce the present system because there is no definition of "place" so I could move 100 yards and claim to be in another place. With the new definitions that is not possible.

 

As for affecting a holiday in London it all depends on where they put the boundaries of the areas and whether they reduce the time at the present mooring sites. If they stay at 14days as they are now and the boundary is at Camden then no problems at all 14 days at Little Venice / Paddington then 14days at Islington.

 

Having looked back over the years of boating I can only see a matter of a few weeks where it might have affected me when I was shuffling between Kings Langley Aylesbury and Marsworth back in the early 90s before I got a mooring.

 

 

BTW is anyone prepared to release the result of the court case I really would like to know which way it went or do I take by the deafening silence that BW won

 

Julian,

The folks you have a problem with in the pound you moor in simply dont move at all. Having a rule where they should move a few miles wont make them move either. Enforcement of the existing rules is what needed surely. They donmt move because there is never a consequence to them staying put.

The last part of your post about your old cruising pattern before landing a nice mooring does smack a little of 'Im all right Jack''......

All the best

Les

[Allan(nb Albert)]

BTW is anyone prepared to release the result of the court case I really would like to know which way it went or do I take by the deafening silence that BW won

 

If you are referring to BW vs Davies then the outcome is, as yet, unknown.

 

For BW, it is a lose/lose situation due to cost of bringing the action.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

deleted due to double post

Edited February 27, 2011 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Sven...]

Thing is, I can't see how this is going to make the Lee any less busy than it is already? It will just make boating more expensive.

Making a boat move 7 miles will not free up any more space than making it move 1 mile. Enforcement of current rules would have solved the problem.

The proposed new huge zones are not necessary and will introduce a whole host of other problems, like

 

- more stress and less boating pleasure

- boaters moving at higher speeds than they might otherwise prefer

- more congestion at bottlenecks

- more disturbance for on-line moorers, anglers, etc

- more pollution

- more waiting at locks

- more erosion of banks

- much more water required

- much more wear and tear at locks

 

And so on and so forth... And that is only for those who follow the rules. I guess there will also always be some who ignore whatever rules there are.

s.

[DeanS]

Making a boat move 7 miles will not free up any more space than making it move 1 mile. Enforcement of current rules would have solved the problem.

The proposed new huge zones are not necessary and will introduce a whole host of other problems, like

 

- more stress and less boating pleasure

- boaters moving at higher speeds than they might otherwise prefer

- more congestion at bottlenecks

- more disturbance for on-line moorers, anglers, etc

- more pollution

- more waiting at locks

- more erosion of banks

- much more water required

- much more wear and tear at locks

 

And so on and so forth... And that is only for those who follow the rules. I guess there will also always be some who ignore whatever rules there are.

s.

 

 

So why exactly are they doing whatever they are doing, which I know nothing about:)

[Chris Pink]

So why exactly are they doing whatever they are doing, which I know nothing about:)

So there's more room for cars to park

[GUMPY]

If you are referring to BW vs Davies then the outcome is, as yet, unknown.

 

For BW, it is a lose/lose situation due to cost of bringing the action.

 

Are you sure!

I have heard from two independent sources that the case has had a decision after review.

However neither is prepared to tell me the outcome.

[DeanS]

Do your arguments not apply equally to car parking?

 

It's not fair to win a debate by simply failing to step down and keep talking about cars

To answer your question, no they dont apply equally to car parking.

[Chris Pink]

It's not fair to win a debate by simply failing to step down and keep talking about cars

To answer your question, no they dont apply equally to car parking.

 

But Dave knows more about cars than he does about boats.

 

Be thankful he hasn't used his garden gnome analogy (Yet)

[mayalld]

It's not fair to win a debate by simply failing to step down and keep talking about cars

To answer your question, no they dont apply equally to car parking.

 

Why does it not apply equally to car parking?

[magpie patrick]

Making a boat move 7 miles will not free up any more space than making it move 1 mile. Enforcement of current rules would have solved the problem.

The proposed new huge zones are not necessary and will introduce a whole host of other problems, like

 

- more stress and less boating pleasure

- boaters moving at higher speeds than they might otherwise prefer

- more congestion at bottlenecks

- more disturbance for on-line moorers, anglers, etc

- more pollution

- more waiting at locks

- more erosion of banks

- much more water required

- much more wear and tear at locks

 

And so on and so forth... And that is only for those who follow the rules. I guess there will also always be some who ignore whatever rules there are.

s.

 

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the way BW is acting (and personally, whatever the rules are, in my opinion the rules should be that either you pay for a mooring or genuinely move, I don't expect Lancaster to London but I do expect you to at least move from parish to parish) to argue against long term moorings where it isn't permitted on the basis it will result in more traffic is not on. Therein lies a slippery slope whereby evasion is justified on the basis of causing less harm than compliance. Can't afford insurance? Well we wouldn't want to deprive you of your car on the grounds you need it to get to work, so just drive it untaxed? Your business is only viable if you don't pay tax? That's fine, carry on.

 

Shall I put your argument another way. I'm struggling to afford marina fees for Ripple, so perhaps I should just moor her anywhere on the Gloucester and Sharpness and leave her there, and when BW demand I move her from time to time, point out that if I do their staff have to stop drinking tea and open the bridges for me, and if I go through that big lock in Gloucester they'll need to pump about a million gallons of water back into the canal, so it would be better for them if I didn't...

[carlt]

 

Shall I put your argument another way. I'm struggling to afford marina fees for Ripple, so perhaps I should just moor her anywhere on the Gloucester and Sharpness and leave her there, and when BW demand I move her from time to time, point out that if I do their staff have to stop drinking tea and open the bridges for me, and if I go through that big lock in Gloucester they'll need to pump about a million gallons of water back into the canal, so it would be better for them if I didn't...

No, because you would not be acting within the law.

 

If you navigated your boat, from one place to another, every 14 days, regardless of who that inconvenienced or what waterways structures had to be operated, then you would be acting within the law.

 

BW could enforce the law, as it stands, or lobby for the law to be changed, to suit their idea of what the law should be.

 

What they can't do is change the law in order to raise revenue.

[Chris Pink]

Why does it not apply equally to car parking?

 

• Roads are not full of water
  
• Roads are governed by different laws than canals
  
• It's illegal to park a narrow boat on a road
  
• It's illegal to moor a car in a canal
  

 

(I know how much you like a good list, Dave.)

 

No gnomes were harmed in the production of this post.

Edited February 28, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Neil TNC]

Here is another analogy with cars for you to all mull over...the Govt/Local Govt "understands" cars.

Scenario..the London Borough of Hillingdon....

The residents get peed of with all the comuters (continous parkers) parking outside their houses, some park, blocking entraces to private drives. The comuters don't park in the station car park, because they think it is too expensive. London Underground and it's car park operators don't lower the carpark charges, as the car parks are still mostly full. The local residents get peed off and demand resident parking all along the streets near the stations. The outcome is that the comuters move to the edge of the resident parking zones. The council retaliates by extending the residents parking zones, into many different and separate neighbourhoods. Soon the whole bloody borough is a mass of residents parking zones! Some of the local residents then mourn the loss of free parking near the shops and other facilities. The streets are now devoid of colourful cars that brighten up the neighbourhood.

[magpie patrick]

• Roads are not full of water
  
• Roads are governed by different laws than canals
  
• It's illegal to park a narrow boat on a road
  
• It's illegal to moor a car in a canal
  

 

(I know how much you like a good list, Dave.)

 

No gnomes were harmed in the production of this post.

:lol:

[DeanS]

Would cars = dutch barges and

would motorbikes = narrowboats?

[Chris Pink]

Here is another analogy with cars for you to all mull over...the Govt/Local Govt "understands" cars.

Scenario..the London Borough of Hillingdon....

The residents get peed of with all the comuters (continous parkers) parking outside their houses, some park, blocking entraces to private drives. The comuters don't park in the station car park, because they think it is too expensive. London Underground and it's car park operators don't lower the carpark charges, as the car parks are still mostly full. The local residents get peed off and demand resident parking all along the streets near the stations. The outcome is that the comuters move to the edge of the resident parking zones. The council retaliates by extending the residents parking zones, into many different and separate neighbourhoods. Soon the whole bloody borough is a mass of residents parking zones! Some of the local residents then mourn the loss of free parking near the shops and other facilities. The streets are now devoid of colourful cars that brighten up the neighbourhood.

 

The government also ignores the results of consultations for residents parking. One road where some friends of mine live responded unanimously in the consultation that they didn't want residents parking - most of the houses are shared so with two cars you're talking £220 a year to park outside your own house, not to mention the expensive hassle of getting visitors permits.

 

Maybe BW are just copying these corrupt practices to make more money - money means more bureaucracy needs more money...

 

I note that even BW are not claiming the money will go to sorely needed maintenance but solely to maintaining the enforcement bureaucracy.

 

Would cars = dutch barges and

would motorbikes = narrowboats?

 

cars = continuous moorers with paid for moorings

motorbikes = continuous cruisers without paid for moorings.

 

Apart from sailing past gridlock, parking a motorbike for free is a wonderful feeling.

Edited February 28, 2011 by Chris Pink

[Neil TNC]

Would cars = dutch barges and

would motorbikes = narrowboats?

 

I think the "Dutch" barge owners and narrowboat owners would have to be lumped together....ah!...is'nt that nice!

...On reflection, I suppose barges would be akin to delivery lorries, seeing as they can't get up all the little back road, that have been maintained to poor standards, or have "width restrictions" (shit getting on dodgy ground now"!).

Motorbikes would be more akin to speed boats, and pushbikes to canoes

 

Going a stage further...Wilderness boats would be like those fold up motorbike thingies, that you can bung in the boot of your car and a blow-up, or folding canoe would be like a fold up pushbike

Edited February 28, 2011 by Neil Arlidge

[Neil TNC]

The government also ignores the results of consultations for residents parking. One road where some friends of mine live responded unanimously in the consultation that they didn't want residents parking - most of the houses are shared so with two cars you're talking £220 a year to park outside your own house, not to mention the expensive hassle of getting visitors permits.

 

Maybe BW are just copying these corrupt practices to make more money - money means more bureaucracy needs more money...

 

I note that even BW are not claiming the money will go to sorely needed maintenance but solely to maintaining the enforcement bureaucracy.

 

 

 

cars = continuous moorers with paid for moorings

motorbikes = continuous cruisers without paid for moorings.

 

Apart from sailing past gridlock, parking a motorbike for free is a wonderful feeling.

 

My son lives in a LB Hillingdon residents parking zone. He gets one free permit and a book of 10 day tickets for visitors (after that a sheet of 10 is £5). A second car permit is £60.

We sucessfully resisted Residents Parking Zone in out road. Probably because we are about equidistant from two Tube stations, we do not (yet) suffer from comuter parking.

It would not affect us anyway, as we live in a private close of 4, where the road is private. This fits in nicely with the BW analogy of mooring in a "non connected" bit of water.

, which is was a truely a "wonderful feeling", until BW upped the cost of short term licences.

 

As for your analogy of likening cars to "continuous moorers" and motor bikes to "contiunous cruisers", we have now moved on from that, onto the aftermath and what will Shirley follow, owing to the few boaters, who have plonked themselves against the same towpath spot for years.

[Sir Nibble]

Resistance is futile

[ymu]

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the way BW is acting (and personally, whatever the rules are, in my opinion the rules should be that either you pay for a mooring or genuinely move, I don't expect Lancaster to London but I do expect you to at least move from parish to parish) to argue against long term moorings where it isn't permitted on the basis it will result in more traffic is not on. Therein lies a slippery slope whereby evasion is justified on the basis of causing less harm than compliance. Can't afford insurance? Well we wouldn't want to deprive you of your car on the grounds you need it to get to work, so just drive it untaxed? Your business is only viable if you don't pay tax? That's fine, carry on.

 

Shall I put your argument another way. I'm struggling to afford marina fees for Ripple, so perhaps I should just moor her anywhere on the Gloucester and Sharpness and leave her there, and when BW demand I move her from time to time, point out that if I do their staff have to stop drinking tea and open the bridges for me, and if I go through that big lock in Gloucester they'll need to pump about a million gallons of water back into the canal, so it would be better for them if I didn't...

He's not saying that CCers on the L&S shouldn't have to move, he's saying they shouldn't have to do the entire length of the L&S every 12 weeks when it would be entirely possible to legitimately CC and do it once in a year.

 

The large neighbourhoods defined for the L&S contain many 'places' as defined in the CC guidance. There's no need for this. They could require people to cruise the entire length, spending no more than 8-10 weeks in any one neighbourhood over the course of a year, and achieve the same result with considerably less toing-and-froing, ie less traffic.

[matty40s]

I'm unable to make the Wednesday meeting now due to work commitments, so, does anyone know where in Stanstead Abbotts the Village Hall is, I only know the Curry House ???

[marmaduke]

Anyone wanting to attend the meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday this week might like the actual addresses of the venues, which are as follows:

 

Stanstead Abbotts Village Hall, Roydon Road, SG12 8EZ (1 March)

 

Leaside Canoe Centre, Spring Lane, E5 9HQ (2 March)

 

Edited to add:

 

Any inner Londoners wanting to attend, there is a train from Liverpool Street at 1715 arriving in St Margaret's (nearest station) at 1757, calling at the following stops on the way:

 

Hackney Downs [HAC] 17:21

Tottenham Hale [TOM] 17:27

Ponders End [PON] 17:32

Brimsdown [bMD] 17:35

Enfield Lock [ENL] 17:37

Waltham Cross [WLC] 17:40

Cheshunt [CHN] 17:42

Broxbourne [bXB] 17:47

Rye House [RYH] 17:54

 

It's a 10 minute walk from the station, see map here. The meeting starts at 1830

Edited February 28, 2011 by marmaduke

[sheriff]

He's not saying that CCers on the L&S shouldn't have to move, he's saying they shouldn't have to do the entire length of the L&S every 12 weeks when it would be entirely possible to legitimately CC and do it once in a year.

 

The large neighbourhoods defined for the L&S contain many 'places' as defined in the CC guidance. There's no need for this. They could require people to cruise the entire length, spending no more than 8-10 weeks in any one neighbourhood over the course of a year, and achieve the same result with considerably less toing-and-froing, ie less traffic.

I moor and move along the lee and stort for about 4 months over the winter,then cruise all over the network....there are some selfish boaters on the river who have contributed to bringing this whole issue to book..........being a bit more selfless in future would help,

 

I feel the next step now is to gather together and constuctively find a way working with bw to manage this issuse in future to prevent it going beyond what it will do this year.....for all of us and new boaters to be.......unite together peacefully..selflessly.sheriff

[Sir Nibble]

I moor and move along the lee and stort for about 4 months over the winter,then cruise all over the network....there are some selfish boaters on the river who have contributed to bringing this whole issue to book Contributed? or wholly caused? ..........being a bit more selfless in future would help, Too late

 

I feel the next step now is to gather together and constuctively find a way working with bw to manage this issuse in future to prevent it going beyond what it will do this year.....for all of us and new boaters to be.......unite together peacefully..selflessly.sheriff Too late, the big stick is out. If you are really upset by the proposals, go see the immobile cruisers say "Cheers mate" and punch their lights out, (metaphorically of course).