IWA Calls For Action On 'Continuous Moorers'

[oarfish]

I DO have a home mooring in that area!! I have a paid for annual mooring in a marina 5 miles from where I work, as that is the nearest point of the canal to my work. I cruise outside that distance, but within the 'shire'...occassionally the next 'shire' also. I don't see your problem.

Are we only allowed to be EITHER CC'ers OR constant moorers in a marina? Surely there is room in the world for such as us!

 

We do similar, whole point of living on a boat was the ..boating otherwise it's just a small funny shaped house with noisy plumbing and neighbours 2 feet away.

Edited August 31, 2012 by oarfish

[Ally]

We do the same, whole point of living on a boat was the ..boating otherwise it's just a small funny shaped house with noisy plumbing and neighbours 2 feet away.

Thank you! (though be carefull what you admit to !!)

Edited August 31, 2012 by Ally

[Thorfast]

I DO have a home mooring in that area!! I have a paid for annual mooring in a marina 5 miles from where I work, as that is the nearest point of the canal to my work. I cruise outside that distance, but within the 'shire'...occassionally the next 'shire' also. I don't see your problem.

Are we only allowed to be EITHER CC'ers OR constant moorers in a marina? Surely there is room in the world for such as us!

 

 

Sorry....I got the idea your mooring was a long way from where you are cruising and was merely a 'paper mooring of convenience'.

[Ally]

Sorry....I got the idea your mooring was a long way from where you are cruising and was merely a 'paper mooring of convenience'.

Apology accepted.

[luctor et emergo]

Well, once all boats are safely moored up on their permanent moorings, there will be very little use for a navigable canal.

[bowten]

perhaps the RBA is a body to join and 'band together' through. Seems the most obvious way to me.

There was recent discussion in the House of Lords about distance and time for CC'ers, but they were talking about, IIRC, 30 miles in a licence period.

I feel that many CC'ers here are the retired and slightly more well off boaters, who are the ones that often will speak so harshly about so called CM'ers. It is worth remembering there is also a large group of very much less well off liveaboards, where often one person needs to be working. They perhaps can't afford a floating village marina mooring, but still need to be within striking distance of work. Or need to get children into some kind of stable schooling. Or have medical needs and require continuing care from a single team.....and so forth.

Personally I have sympathy for such people. I appreciate CM'ers can cause mooring difficulties in the higher populated areas, and I also appreciate it is 'against the rules' currently, but either way such people exist and have needs, who are we to say they may not live their lives in such a manner.

Most liveaboards love their boats...we all live under different circumstances....lets have some understanding for our fellow liveaboards, who's circumstances we rarely know fully, rather than supporting a witch hunt of CM'ers for the sake of it.

Have a greenie thingy.

Edited August 31, 2012 by bowten

[Higgs]

I think, cruising around ones home ground does not, however, give licence to claim no need to respond to the prevailing conditions of congestion. If it is that type of area.

 

The unabated influx of boaters, wishing to drop anchor, in an area of limited resources is not common sense.

[Ally]

plenty of mooring spaces in this area...and we're always happy to have someone breast up if needs be...not that it's needed...the tug deck makes it an easily crossable boat!

Bowten...thank you kind sir!

[Midnight Rider]

I rarely get involved in these debates ---- they always end in tears, but here is my take on it, for what it's worth.

 

There is no point in having laws/rules unless they can & will be enforced ---- think cyclists & driving & using mobile phones.

 

Draw up a fair & simply understood set of rules & have them backed up with the appropriate legislation that even judges can understand.

 

Advertise what is going to happen to overstaying boats. The same tactic that was used before uninsured cars were taken from the owners.

 

Pick out a handful of the worst piss takers & after giving the appropriate notice, take their boats & dispose of them.

 

Give this action as much news coverage as possible.

 

After this has happened I suspect that much of them problem will disappear.

 

I know that this post will be picked to pieces with 'what if's' --- sorry but that's my take on it --- I agree that there will be cases that are not black & white but a start must be made somewhere. Either fix the rules & back them up or forget them altogether.

[Guest]

Is this 'continuous mooring' thing a southern 'thing'?

 

We rarely see a boat moored in the same place twice....and if we did how would we know it doesn't have a home mooring?

 

Good post Tony....BTW

 

how hard can it be?

Edited August 31, 2012 by The Dog House

[Leo No2]

Tony

 

I think that's a very fair appraisal of what should happen - and does happen on the Thames (seemingly).

 

EA have prosecuted successfully again recently and whilst I suspect there are still some licence evaders around they are very much lower than they were. I think EA said recently that if you see an unlicenced boat on the Thames they will be investigating it so there's a model for CaRT to follow. You won't find an unlicenced boat on the Wey - nor will anyone overstay their visitor licence but that's easier to enforce with only one way on and off (if you exclude the Basingstoke). I think CaRT have a much bigger issue to enforce licence evasion with their vastly longer length of waterway but they need to start somewhere - I've had the 3rd degree questioning (quite rightly) when arriving at Thames Lock (Brentford) from the Thames when I couldn't find my licence! (I don't have a BW index number).

 

By the same token the EA have been helpful with a 'Wey Transit Licence' of £10 one way between the Wey and Teddington - Shepperton acts the 'police' on this - rather than the £38:50 it used to cost me each way for a 60' boat - i.e. it is reasonable and everyone understands it is only a Wey-Teddington licence valid for 24 hours regardless of dimensions (as long as you will fit onto the Wey) and so almost without exception no-one tries to evade it.

[alan_fincher]

Is this 'continuous mooring' thing a southern 'thing'?

 

We rarely see a boat moored in the same place twice....and if we did how would we know it doesn't have a home mooring?

IMO it is VERY MUCH a Southern thing.

 

Please see posts numbers 31 and 37.

 

Having just travelled from where it does happen to Manchester and back via Birmingham, I can confirm that in my experience this is very much less prevalent once you get much above Buckinghamshire or possible the lower reaches of Northamptonshire.

 

Anybody who never travels South of (say) Braunston will have little idea as to how things have changed over the years on the areas nearer to London.

 

Tongue in cheek, maybe, but as many seem to want to move very little - indeed even move ABOUT very little - a good start would be to bother to tie up better, and there might be more tolerance between those who want to move, and those who do not!

Edited August 31, 2012 by alan_fincher

[nicknorman]

Canals were built as a transport system. I suppose there is no fundamental reason why the usage should not be changed to be solely a linear cheap housing solution with no boats moving ( and so no need to maintain locks, dredge etc) but I for one would not like to see that. So if it is to remain an historic transport system, that should be the priority. People who want to live on boats are welcome to do so off line, so they are not cluttering up the transport system.

 

I wonder how those with a land based home would like it if some other people parked their caravan in the road outside their house and lived in it for months on end, probably making a mess in the process. If that's not OK on a residential road, why should it be OK on the canals?

[Raybo]

if [the canal system] is to remain an historic transport system, that should be the priority. People who want to live on boats are welcome to do so off line, so they are not cluttering up the transport system.

 

I wonder how those with a land based home would like it if some other people parked their caravan in the road outside their house and lived in it for months on end, probably making a mess in the process. If that's not OK on a residential road, why should it be OK on the canals?

 

Surely the reason that the historic canal system has been preserved is because they have changed from a transport system to a leisure boating system. Some of this change of use includes boats being moored along the canal side. There are many legitimately moored boats who would resist the idea of being forced into caravan-park style offline marinas.

 

I think your analogy is a bit extreme. More correct would the the comparison with land-based home-dwellers attitude to other people parking their caravans on a remote country lane.

[Guest]

hi all. WOW as newbies yet to move into the canal system, we didn't realise there was so many problems. I must say our intention is to be constant cruisers & NOT to hog moorings so i can understand & agree those that do must be made to move within a reasonable time, whatever that may be. It seems you will always get those people in the comunity flouting the rules, just look at the so called 'travelers' with thier big caravans just setting up a village of theier own & up yours any local gov or anyone else who tries to move them. I don't have any answers or suggestions but will keep looking on here with interest. wishing you all well guys n gals

[Grace and Favour]

I beg to disagree. I'm not saying they shouldn't be licenced, or pay for their fuel etc. This is purely about moving distances. If someone has circumstances that call for them to be within an area for good reason, but are still moving over a perhaps shorter distance back and fore, I for one have no problem with that. I am not suggesting they moor themselves permanently somewhere for free, merely that some are realistically not able to A) afford a marina, and B ) make continuing progress through the system for a variety of reasons.

 

Ally - - I think you're right.

 

I propose that everyone that wishes too stay on the canals without having to follow or obey the irksome and sometimes expensive ritual of paying for licence / insurance / BSS / moorings / electricity (etc) should be allowed to, probably under the auspices of the European Human Rights Act (1998?).

I propose that, for the sake of simplicity of monitoring it, (and because I suspect that it will be the wish of the majority of such cm'ers) that this be confined to the Lee, Stort, Southern Oxford, the Grand Union and the K&A.

 

Then everyone will be happy

 

(apart from the IWA - but then, whom gives a flying fox about them?)

Edited August 31, 2012 by Grace & Favour

[PBbear]

All my greenies go to Alan de Enfield. Wellsaid in all posts

[Biggles]

'Oi, Mate. You going up to the end of the cut? Take me tracker with you, would ya?'

 

Richard

 

 

I kept it simple but that could easily be fixed to avoid that scam.

[Biggles]

In pretty much any other walk of life, if you don't like the rules then you can play the game. Why should CM's be any difference. If its not policed it won#'t be long before the waterways become linear housing estates.

 

The government have finally seen sence on the squaating laws, maybe the new CaRT will get tough where BW didn't. After all CMing is bascally squatting.

 

What will happen eventually will be a precident set by the CM's so that others that pay for a marina, licience, insurance, BSS etc. will simply follow suit. The real problem is that BW never nipped it in the bud, had they then many CM's that have no interest in boats, boating, waterways or the lifestyle would not have had the oppertunity to set up home in a boat as a cheap rent free, rates free way.

 

I know of several boats on my waterway that are coming out of expensive marina berths and are going to CC? yeh right. They will simply hop between the 48hour mooring. There is a significant number already doing it and hogging visiter moorings.

[Tam & Di]

My understanding is that the arguments about "bona fide for navigation" stem from the belief that this is a separate requirement from the "14 day rule". However the dialogue quoted in this link seems quite clear that the 14 day rule is meant to specify exactly what "bona fide for navigation" means. (I don't think there's a copy of the proceedings of committees available online). It sounds as if you were there, so is this the impression you got of this?

 

Yes, we were petitioners on this at the Bill stage in the House of Lords, though not on the Clauses to do with licences, and were in the House just about every day for a year or so and have the full documentation. As it was a private Bill it could be, and was, presented in the Lords before it went to the Commons. Your link refers to debate in the Commons, after the Clause that all boat owners must have a permanent mooring had been amended.

 

In your link you have to set aside the stuff about the recent court case, which came about simply because of the poor drafting. Dodd is telling Mudie how BW propose to interpret "bona fide for navigation", a phrase which had been invented in response to the Lords' requirement for BW to amend the Bill so as to allow for those people who genuinely wished to slowly move around the system, and who therefore would not require a permanent mooring.

 

Although this topic has moved on somewhat, this is still the legal basis for rules on continuous cruising.

[onionbargee]

All the swampies who live on old lifeboats with sheds on top, and never move are paying for use of the system which they never use, they contribute zero wear and tear on the infrastructure for their licence fee, i don't like their lifestyle, but i like their money going on maintaining the locks i use.

[PiRSqwared]

Hug a swampy!!!

[Midnight Rider]

All the swampies who live on old lifeboats with sheds on top, and never move are paying for use of the system which they never use, they contribute zero wear and tear on the infrastructure for their licence fee, i don't like their lifestyle, but i like their money going on maintaining the locks i use.

Well, let's assume that Swampy is licensing, insuring etc his boat. Are you also happy that the towpath resembles a junk yard or wonder where his toilet is emptied?

 

As I said in a previous post, it's either going down this route or making sensible rules & enforcing them.

[Ally]

some are making reference to, and assuming, that all cm'ers are unlicenced, vagrants who clutter the towpaths. Not so...it may be true in some cases, I'm sure it is infact, but please don't generalise, as it simply isn't rue of all CM'ers.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Ally

[jenlyn]

Every time CM'ers are mentioned on here, it more often than not swings back to "london boaters". It then develops into posts quoting rules and regs. Nothing productive or forward looking.

Then along come the "why do they get a flake in their ice cream and i dont" whingers.

London is different to anywhere else in the country. Some people in London are working for 15 grand a year or less. You would struggle to get a bedsit in London for that money, and you will still have commute expenses on top of that. There is no social housing, ie council housing. You probably have a better chance of finding a job there, compared to the rest of the uk, but wages can be just as poor in London as outside.

Cheaper option? Possibly buy a boat and shuffle around. This is now becoming a problem. Next step, affordable moorings perhaps, just like affordable housing. Get real, the developing situation (if there really is one) needs to be addressed with thought and consideration. I see no way forward until someone somewhere admits that london needs an affordable mooring strategy for the lower paid and takes action to develop it, whether it be CRT or private enterprise. What deffinately does not help, is people 1 or 200 miles away who have done a few days at Paddington deciding they have now aquired the knowledge to cast judgement. Whats really funny, is Sally Ash has come on here and asked for any input, yet we still have some shouting about rules and regs. CRT know them! They dont need reminding, they need ideas.