Article By Vaghan Welch - One Of Your Four CRT Council Boater Representatives

[Chris Pink]

 

 

(I've just allowed myself to get drawn into another non-productive conversation, haven't I? I'm not going to change your mind - you are not going to change mine - and none of us are likely to change anybody else's! Doh! )

 

Maybe but the point still stands, there is loads of room in London for visitors if it was possible to moor.

 

A bit of campaigning perhaps; a mass rally with hammer drills?

 

I have no sympathy for people who whinge about the lack of visitor moorings and do nothing about it. I fail to see why these things should be provided as some kind of 'right'.

 

I don't think you are going to persuade those who feel it is difficult to visit London, by suggesting they need to go armed with hammer drills, Hilti guns, Rawl-bolts or whatever, but of course the suggestion has been made before.

 

 

What are your feelings about the Stourbridge Rally?

[cotswoldsman]

That is for the future though surely, not as it stands right now?

 

 

 

 

No the point was that they were no more Visitor Moorings than anywhere else that you can stay 14 days so putting a sign saying Visitor Mooring was a complete waste of time and money. At the Skipton meeting it was also agreed that The Trust would look at putting more mooring rings in certain urban spots to encourage boaters to use these instead of restricted Visitor Moorings. The problem with Visitor Moorings is that a lot of marina Boaters only want to stay at moorings that have rings etc and therefor block the Visitor Moorings and overstay. If you read the summary of The Skipton Meeting another problem is boats coming out of marinas mid week hogging the Visitor Moorings to use at the weekend, this trend has also been noticed by CRT

[cheshire~rose]

As for my name and who I am, no I don't have any vested interests. I own a boat and hire like many of you. I see the problems from my perspective and I see potential solutions. As if who I am would actually make any difference to if I'm right or not? If nobody is going to debate ideas and what might happen, stuff that will effect us all, then really, what is the point being here? Is it just a mob crowd to bully people into thinking one certain point of view? Oh, and google Rusty Shackleford. Dale will give you a clue!

 

You, like everyone else on this forum, has the right to withold any personal details that may identify you but you must also realise that when someone registers with a forum and then starts writing things that that many people may find inflammatory within their first few posts then many of the regular members of the forum will wonder if they have come across a troll. It is perfectly normal for them to start to ask questions which might help them identify how qualified this newbie is to be voicing opinions that might be considered to be a bit forthright.

 

This forum has a wealth of people who are held in very high regard for all kinds of reasons. Expert engineers, experts on history, law and even very many people who are expert in making people laugh. Until you have secured your personal pigeon hole for people to slot you into then be prepared for people to ask questions.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Oh please!

 

You are advocating vigilantism because you don't trust the legal route.

 

I said that it is possible that it will happen, gee, i've pointed that out a few time now.

 

 

If, on being caught, you don't want the relevant legal channels to be followed then you are no better than the original perpetrator.

 

 

As I pointed out earlier, IF the proper channels do not solve a problem, people may result in using evidence to back up a claim. We all have video cameras in our pockets now. If people start having them on boats AND something is being seen to be illegal or a bit naughty, the person with the evidence has a choice. But I agree, purposely gathering information can be underhand and could be seen as anti social and not very positive for the boating community. But my point is, it's a tool and people will use it.

 

 

From what you suggest, and your apparent disdain for the legal process, you don't sound very law abiding to me.

 

 

As above, never said such a thing.

 

When people hide behind a pseudonym and show disdain for the laws in place and hint towards illegal naming and shaming then,in most cases, those people are law/rule breakers who believe their moral argument puts them above the law.

 

Err, most people don't use their own name on most forums. If you want to that's your choice. For any new members wishing to join...is this the rule?

 

It's people like you, who make people like myself, need medication!

 

Excuses for my poorly written words, but my point was 'what could happen', and your right, it's worrying. That's why I applaude your (was it you...sorry if I have the wrong person) efforts at the ground level. Trust me, I don't want the waterways to be like the wild west OR like the film Demolition man (swear and your fined instantly).

[cheshire~rose]

My personal thoughts about the idea of encouraging individuals to spy on their neighbours is best summed up by a hypothetical situation:

 

A lovely couple who have retired, bought a boat and spent the last couple of years continuously cruising get a phone call one day with the news that a close relative has had a nasty accident. Over the next few weeks they take it in turns and get help from friends to move their boat (for boat read home) to a mooring close to the hospital where the relative is. They arrive in an area where they are unknown to any of the boaters who have moorings. They are leaving their boat each morning to travel to the rehabilitation centre where the relative is and do not get back until after dark. There is precious little opportunity to socialise with their new neighbours as they are always out or it is dark and they are tired when they return. They have spoken to CRT about their need to overstay in the area and have been told the place they are moored is not in any great demand and so they are welcome to stay while the need is there but they need to report to them on a weekly basis to keep them updated. The injured relative is discharged to go home and the couple are sole carers,

 

A neighbour decides this couple are showing all the classic signs of continuous moorers and so decides to take photographic evidence of their crime and send it to CRT. Of course because CRT are aware of the reason for the boat being there and have given permission for the overstay they do nothing. They will not divulge the reason for the overstay to the neighbour that made the complaint because that would break confidentiality rules.

 

The neighbour takes the hump and starts talking to other neighbours about this robbing couple that think they can just tie up wherever they wish for as long as they wish and pay nothing while the rest of them have to pay good money to moor in the area. Word spreads about how the couple are milking the system and should be ashamed of themselves when it is so obvious they are both leaving the boat at the same time every day to go to work ... coining in the money and yet don't pay for a mooring. He has reported them to CRT and CRT do nothing .... I mean what do we pay the licence fee for?

 

One day the lady, now exhausted from two months of caring for an extremely ill loved one takes a much needed day off to stay home and do some of the on board jobs that have been piling up. She goes to clean her windows and is met by, at best a stony silence as her neighbours glare at her from their own boats or at worst a potentially very upsetting situation as people who have spent the last 2 months getting uptight and angry about a situation they have missunderstood decide to face up to her and have their say.

 

........... All hypothetical but anyone who knows the canal community could see how easily that can happen. Instead of sneaking about taking photo's of "problem boats" what is wrong with having a friendly chat with the owners instead and in the course of conversation you may well find out why they have been where they are for as long as they have been. Maybe then you may still want to report them but it is very possible that instead you have just made a new friend who may be stretching the rules a little but for a reason that you find more acceptable that the one you, or the other neighbours on your mooring had dreamed up.

 

I will still be using my camera along the canal, I will be taking photo's of historic boats, nature, nice examples of roses and castles - I have no plans to go snitching on anyone, especially people I know nothing about

[Guest]

Good post C~R - the key bit is the hypothetical couple spoke to the Trust end of.

 

Just a sort of side issue though - surely if neighbors of folk who find themselves in such a situation are around long enough to observe somebody who they perceive are 'rule breaking' surely they aren't moving either....

[Rusty Shackleford]

You, like everyone else on this forum, has the right to withold any personal details that may identify you but you must also realise that when someone registers with a forum and then starts writing things that that many people may find inflammatory within their first few posts then many of the regular members of the forum will wonder if they have come across a troll. It is perfectly normal for them to start to ask questions which might help them identify how qualified this newbie is to be voicing opinions that might be considered to be a bit forthright.

 

This forum has a wealth of people who are held in very high regard for all kinds of reasons. Expert engineers, experts on history, law and even very many people who are expert in making people laugh. Until you have secured your personal pigeon hole for people to slot you into then be prepared for people to ask questions.

 

 

Of course I understand that, new member, questions asked. I asked them honestly. The irony is, IF you know me (you don't) you would believe me (that i'm not a troll type and an honest guy). I would rather my words (even if badly written or explained) speak for themselves with no bias. That's usually how forums work.

 

I felt my posts were quite clear in explaining a hypothetical situation. Sorry, I do that, that's my thing. Some members here had a problem with that, assuming this, and assuming that.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Rusty Shackleford

[cheshire~rose]

Good post C~R - the key bit is the hypothetical couple spoke to the Trust end of.

 

Just a sort of side issue though - surely if neighbors of folk who find themselves in such a situation are around long enough to observe somebody who they perceive are 'rule breaking' surely they aren't moving either....

 

 

The neighbours were on paid for moorings - that is why they hypothetically got the hump keep up at the back there

 

Of course I understand that, new member, questions asked. I asked them honestly. The irony is, IF you know me (you don't) you would believe me (that i'm not a troll type and an honest guy). I would rather my words (even if badly written or explained) speak for themselves with no bias. That's usually how forums work.

 

I felt my posts were quite clear in explaining a hypothetical situation. Sorry, I do that, that's my thing. Some members here had a problem with that, assuming this, and assuming that.

 

I do not for one moment think that I know you nor was any suggestion that I did implied.

[Guest]

The neighbours were on paid for moorings - that is why they hypothetically got the hump keep up at the back there

 

 

Sorry - I just nipped in between checking the VM next to our LTM for over stayers and still can't find any.....

[cheshire~rose]

Sorry - I just nipped in between checking the VM next to our LTM for over stayers and still can't find any.....

 

They have a clever camouflage paintwork - you are not looking hard enough

[DeanS]

Sorry - I just nipped in between checking the VM next to our LTM for over stayers and still can't find any.....

 

Its a Southern problem.

Being confined to the north in my widebeam, I've decided to rather concentrate my efforts on something more worthwhile....like emptying my elsan.

[Guest]

Its a Southern problem.

Being confined to the north in my widebeam, I've decided to rather concentrate my efforts on something more worthwhile....like emptying my elsan.

 

I was being a bit mischievousness (we are not even on our boat at the mo)

 

I can't agree though - it might be a more prevalent problem for those on parts of the system other than were we boat but abuse of the rules potentially affects the whole boating community.

[DeanS]

I was being a bit mischievousness (we are not even on our boat at the mo)

 

I can't agree though - it might be a more prevalent problem for those on parts of the system other than were we boat but abuse of the rules potentially affects the whole boating community.

 

Potentially, but I'm now QUITE HAPPY that CRT have policies in place and are doing their best to sort it out. I cant really see anything else I can personally do...it's now in the hands of CRT. Life is too short

 

 

 

ETA....actually, it's been a few minutes and I've reconsidered. If there are people like Vaughn spouting rubbish, then I think there is a need for boaters...all of us, me included, who will get involved, like we did at Skipton, and put the record straight. I'm back in the game. Sorry for my momentary loss of courage.

Edited January 17, 2013 by DeanS

[Little Else]

My personal thoughts about the idea of encouraging individuals to spy on their neighbours is best summed up by a hypothetical situation:

 

A lovely couple who have retired, bought a boat and spent the last couple of years continuously cruising get a phone call one day with the news that a close relative has had a nasty accident. Over the next few weeks they take it in turns and get help from friends to move their boat (for boat read home) to a mooring close to the hospital where the relative is. They arrive in an area where they are unknown to any of the boaters who have moorings. They are leaving their boat each morning to travel to the rehabilitation centre where the relative is and do not get back until after dark. There is precious little opportunity to socialise with their new neighbours as they are always out or it is dark and they are tired when they return. They have spoken to CRT about their need to overstay in the area and have been told the place they are moored is not in any great demand and so they are welcome to stay while the need is there but they need to report to them on a weekly basis to keep them updated. The injured relative is discharged to go home and the couple are sole carers,

 

A neighbour decides this couple are showing all the classic signs of continuous moorers and so decides to take photographic evidence of their crime and send it to CRT. Of course because CRT are aware of the reason for the boat being there and have given permission for the overstay they do nothing. They will not divulge the reason for the overstay to the neighbour that made the complaint because that would break confidentiality rules.

 

The neighbour takes the hump and starts talking to other neighbours about this robbing couple that think they can just tie up wherever they wish for as long as they wish and pay nothing while the rest of them have to pay good money to moor in the area. Word spreads about how the couple are milking the system and should be ashamed of themselves when it is so obvious they are both leaving the boat at the same time every day to go to work ... coining in the money and yet don't pay for a mooring. He has reported them to CRT and CRT do nothing .... I mean what do we pay the licence fee for?

 

One day the lady, now exhausted from two months of caring for an extremely ill loved one takes a much needed day off to stay home and do some of the on board jobs that have been piling up. She goes to clean her windows and is met by, at best a stony silence as her neighbours glare at her from their own boats or at worst a potentially very upsetting situation as people who have spent the last 2 months getting uptight and angry about a situation they have missunderstood decide to face up to her and have their say.

 

........... All hypothetical but anyone who knows the canal community could see how easily that can happen. Instead of sneaking about taking photo's of "problem boats" what is wrong with having a friendly chat with the owners instead and in the course of conversation you may well find out why they have been where they are for as long as they have been. Maybe then you may still want to report them but it is very possible that instead you have just made a new friend who may be stretching the rules a little but for a reason that you find more acceptable that the one you, or the other neighbours on your mooring had dreamed up.

 

I will still be using my camera along the canal, I will be taking photo's of historic boats, nature, nice examples of roses and castles - I have no plans to go snitching on anyone, especially people I know nothing about

 

I hope that I've just given you a greenie for that. Well said that woman

[jenlyn]

My personal thoughts about the idea of encouraging individuals to spy on their neighbours is best summed up by a hypothetical situation:

 

A lovely couple who have retired, bought a boat and spent the last couple of years continuously cruising get a phone call one day with the news that a close relative has had a nasty accident. Over the next few weeks they take it in turns and get help from friends to move their boat (for boat read home) to a mooring close to the hospital where the relative is. They arrive in an area where they are unknown to any of the boaters who have moorings. They are leaving their boat each morning to travel to the rehabilitation centre where the relative is and do not get back until after dark. There is precious little opportunity to socialise with their new neighbours as they are always out or it is dark and they are tired when they return. They have spoken to CRT about their need to overstay in the area and have been told the place they are moored is not in any great demand and so they are welcome to stay while the need is there but they need to report to them on a weekly basis to keep them updated. The injured relative is discharged to go home and the couple are sole carers,

 

A neighbour decides this couple are showing all the classic signs of continuous moorers and so decides to take photographic evidence of their crime and send it to CRT. Of course because CRT are aware of the reason for the boat being there and have given permission for the overstay they do nothing. They will not divulge the reason for the overstay to the neighbour that made the complaint because that would break confidentiality rules.

 

The neighbour takes the hump and starts talking to other neighbours about this robbing couple that think they can just tie up wherever they wish for as long as they wish and pay nothing while the rest of them have to pay good money to moor in the area. Word spreads about how the couple are milking the system and should be ashamed of themselves when it is so obvious they are both leaving the boat at the same time every day to go to work ... coining in the money and yet don't pay for a mooring. He has reported them to CRT and CRT do nothing .... I mean what do we pay the licence fee for?

 

One day the lady, now exhausted from two months of caring for an extremely ill loved one takes a much needed day off to stay home and do some of the on board jobs that have been piling up. She goes to clean her windows and is met by, at best a stony silence as her neighbours glare at her from their own boats or at worst a potentially very upsetting situation as people who have spent the last 2 months getting uptight and angry about a situation they have missunderstood decide to face up to her and have their say.

 

........... All hypothetical but anyone who knows the canal community could see how easily that can happen. Instead of sneaking about taking photo's of "problem boats" what is wrong with having a friendly chat with the owners instead and in the course of conversation you may well find out why they have been where they are for as long as they have been. Maybe then you may still want to report them but it is very possible that instead you have just made a new friend who may be stretching the rules a little but for a reason that you find more acceptable that the one you, or the other neighbours on your mooring had dreamed up.

 

I will still be using my camera along the canal, I will be taking photo's of historic boats, nature, nice examples of roses and castles - I have no plans to go snitching on anyone, especially people I know nothing about

 

A really good post.

None of us are stupid enough to believe that there are not problems with a few, but for gods sake, let's keep it real. It's not a huge problem. It's a minority that in my opinion can be dealt with by CRT if they got on with it. I see solutions as I am sure others do. I think ultimately they need to be looked at in a way other than trying to squeeze a few more quid out of a group of canal users who already pay a substantial amount to the systems upkeep.

I don't buy into this "we can't get money from other canal users", because there are ways of raising money from them. Festivals, canal days, fun days etc. as a charity, the trust is on a learning curve, they need to learn how to make money. Maybe even look at how the IWA does it.

[Grace and Favour]

>>>

 

Maybe even look at how the IWA does it.

 

 

Maybe employ spokesmen like Vaughn Welch ? ()

[carlt]

Err, most people don't use their own name on most forums. If you want to that's your choice. For any new members wishing to join...is this the rule?

Not at all but you fail to see the irony of someone openly stating they wish to remain anonymous yet advocating invading someone's privacy by naming and shaming them on Youtube just because they assume they are breaking the law.

[LoneWolf]

A really good post.

None of us are stupid enough to believe that there are not problems with a few, but for gods sake, let's keep it real. It's not a huge problem. It's a minority that in my opinion can be dealt with by CRT if they got on with it. I see solutions as I am sure others do. I think ultimately they need to be looked at in a way other than trying to squeeze a few more quid out of a group of canal users who already pay a substantial amount to the systems upkeep.

I don't buy into this "we can't get money from other canal users", because there are ways of raising money from them. Festivals, canal days, fun days etc. as a charity, the trust is on a learning curve, they need to learn how to make money. Maybe even look at how the IWA does it.

 

well said

[Rusty Shackleford]

Not at all but you fail to see the irony of someone openly stating they wish to remain anonymous yet advocating invading someone's privacy by naming and shaming them on Youtube just because they assume they are breaking the law.

 

 

I said it was an option, not that I have done it or intend to. Like it or not it WILL be something people will do, it was a hypothetical 'solution' and alternative to manned enforcement...in a big society type way. I'm baffled why you can't grasp the hypothetical situation of what might happen if nothing is done. As for using cameras I will say this, if I saw someone doing something dangerous I would have no problem using the evidence to stop someone getting hurt. If I did nothing and someone died it would be hard to live with. This is the facebook generation now where 'racist' rants on the Tube make headline news, all filmed on a video camera. My being anonymous (like 99% of people on forums anyway) is irrelevent. I don't need to prove to you that i'm law abiding because I don't need to prove it to myself.

 

Seems after all you were not really interested in a solution to your utilty abuse/overstaying problem, which is quite ironic because what did I say would happen? discussions get diverted so people don't have deal with the situation head on. Or words to that effect anyway.

 

The best solution is convincing people to do the right thing, have some personal responsibility. Wouldn't the world be good if everybody done that huh? No enforcement, no fines, no 'snooping' or evidence collecting and certainly no GPS tracking systems. I don't want them...do you?

 

 

 

I do not for one moment think that I know you nor was any suggestion that I did implied.

 

That was in a general response to who 'Rusty Shackleford' was, as if I were a sockpuppet for CRT or any other high profile person. Not aimed directly at you.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Rusty Shackleford

[Rusty Shackleford]

I was out on Sunday with my camera gaining photographic evidence of the continuous moorers preventing legitimate boaters from mooring on the pontoons in Bancroft Basin -

 

The Spymaster speaks

 

I read that and though it was a bit hypocritical. Firstly, IF 180 out of 4500 boaters are not breaking the law....that is a real problem, not something to laugh off or use as a stick to beat someone with. Yet in the very same article condemns the chap for asking people to collect evidence (or the headline grabbing 'snoop' instead) to prove this 'estimate' to try and deal with the problem. Yet the article offers no solutions, just finger pointing.

 

I'm really not sure which side the author is defending, because GPS tracking systems solves the 'snooping' problem and would provide 100% accurate evidence to identify how many of the 4500 boats are 'illegal'. Conspiracy to fast track GPS systems or just bashing CRT again? Thank goodness i'm not answering that one.....

Edited January 18, 2013 by Rusty Shackleford

[Jim Batty]

My personal thoughts about the idea of encouraging individuals to spy on their neighbours is best summed up by a hypothetical situation:

 

A lovely couple who have retired, bought a boat and spent the last couple of years continuously cruising get a phone call one day with the news that a close relative has had a nasty accident. Over the next few weeks they take it in turns and get help from friends to move their boat (for boat read home) to a mooring close to the hospital where the relative is. They arrive in an area where they are unknown to any of the boaters who have moorings. They are leaving their boat each morning to travel to the rehabilitation centre where the relative is and do not get back until after dark. There is precious little opportunity to socialise with their new neighbours as they are always out or it is dark and they are tired when they return. They have spoken to CRT about their need to overstay in the area and have been told the place they are moored is not in any great demand and so they are welcome to stay while the need is there but they need to report to them on a weekly basis to keep them updated. The injured relative is discharged to go home and the couple are sole carers,

 

A neighbour decides this couple are showing all the classic signs of continuous moorers and so decides to take photographic evidence of their crime and send it to CRT. Of course because CRT are aware of the reason for the boat being there and have given permission for the overstay they do nothing. They will not divulge the reason for the overstay to the neighbour that made the complaint because that would break confidentiality rules.

 

The neighbour takes the hump and starts talking to other neighbours about this robbing couple that think they can just tie up wherever they wish for as long as they wish and pay nothing while the rest of them have to pay good money to moor in the area. Word spreads about how the couple are milking the system and should be ashamed of themselves when it is so obvious they are both leaving the boat at the same time every day to go to work ... coining in the money and yet don't pay for a mooring. He has reported them to CRT and CRT do nothing .... I mean what do we pay the licence fee for?

 

One day the lady, now exhausted from two months of caring for an extremely ill loved one takes a much needed day off to stay home and do some of the on board jobs that have been piling up. She goes to clean her windows and is met by, at best a stony silence as her neighbours glare at her from their own boats or at worst a potentially very upsetting situation as people who have spent the last 2 months getting uptight and angry about a situation they have missunderstood decide to face up to her and have their say.

 

........... All hypothetical but anyone who knows the canal community could see how easily that can happen. Instead of sneaking about taking photo's of "problem boats" what is wrong with having a friendly chat with the owners instead and in the course of conversation you may well find out why they have been where they are for as long as they have been. Maybe then you may still want to report them but it is very possible that instead you have just made a new friend who may be stretching the rules a little but for a reason that you find more acceptable that the one you, or the other neighbours on your mooring had dreamed up.

 

I will still be using my camera along the canal, I will be taking photo's of historic boats, nature, nice examples of roses and castles - I have no plans to go snitching on anyone, especially people I know nothing about

 

One experience: We were awoken one morning on the K&A by a guy hopping about outside noisely (?) taking photos of our boat. We'd tied the stern of the boat to the last bollard on the upper lay-by, with about two feet of overlap on the final angled bit. I cheerfully asked him if he liked our boat and he immediately went into a tirade to the effect, 'You lazy slobs who moor up at locks for weeks on end ...' and told us that he was going to send them to BW and report us ... blah blah blah.

 

He and his friend had had no problem pulling their 70-foot narrowboat into the layby ahead of us. He was just pedantically furious about finding a boat touching a layby.

 

Anyway, he cooled down considerably when I explained that we'd never been in the district before, had planned to stop in Hungerford the previous afternoon but found all the visitor moorings and moor-able 14-day stretches filled, and pushed on to find a place to stop. Having arrived in the near dark in this place, walked about a quarter of a mile further on with pole in hand sounding for a place to pull the bow in for the night, to no avail, this seemed the best place to stop. By way of apology he made a show of deleting the photos he'd taken. I just thought he was a jerk.

 

Next day, about five locks up, we came across a pair of boats breasted up ON the layby with nobody around. This is what had probably fired this guy's rage.

 

 

Other experiences: Twice now on the lower GUC near London we have met continual cruisers who had made arrangements with the local warden to stay longer than usual as they were waiting for fairly serious hospital operations. You'd have to have chatted with them to know this.

 

 

It sometimes seems that those quickest to 'spy on', 'report', or 'sneakily photograph' other boaters are those trying to unnaturally rush their own boating.

 

 

Final note: Those frustrated guys with the camera and 70-foot boat outside Hungerford set off leaving both bottom gates wide open. Nice one.

[cotswoldsman]

I read that and though it was a bit hypocritical. Firstly, IF 180 out of 4500 boaters are not breaking the law....that is a real problem, not something to laugh off or use as a stick to beat someone with. Yet in the very same article condemns the chap for asking people to collect evidence (or the headline grabbing 'snoop' instead) to prove this 'estimate' to try and deal with the problem. Yet the article offers no solutions, just finger pointing.

 

I'm really not sure which side the author is defending, because GPS tracking systems solves the 'snooping' problem and would provide 100% accurate evidence to identify how many of the 4500 boats are 'illegal'. Conspiracy to fast track GPS systems or just bashing CRT again? Thank goodness i'm not answering that one.....

 

Are you sure you are not Vaughn Welch? I am what he calls a "Free loader" not sure if I am one of the 180.

How does knowing the exact numbers deal with the problem?

Could you please define "illegal"?

I do not think Allan Richards (the author) was bashing CRT (for once) but was pointing out what views Vaughan Welch holds. Not quite sure what evidence Vaughan Welch has to substantiate his figures.

[Rusty Shackleford]

Are you sure you are not Vaughn Welch? I am what he calls a "Free loader" not sure if I am one of the 180.

How does knowing the exact numbers deal with the problem?

Could you please define "illegal"?

I do not think Allan Richards (the author) was bashing CRT (for once) but was pointing out what views Vaughan Welch holds. Not quite sure what evidence Vaughan Welch has to substantiate his figures.

 

 

I think i've answered the question that i'm not a sockpuppet.

 

The article, in the very first two paragraphs mentions 'breaking the law' and 'legal requirements'. I just thought it was an odd piece of writing, it's didn't do anybody any favours. Even ironically posting a picture 'to prove' a point of view challenges people to provide alternative evidence to prove otherwise (the author can hardy complain of snooping then can he!). The article intent seems to be swayed in proving VW of making stuff up 'because there is no evidence' yet the author does not want evidence gathering to be used to support the claim.

Trust me, i'm not defending either person, but at some point in the future 'sledgehammer' type solutions will be presented because nobody...not even those who care about the waterways....didn't promote us all to have responsibility for our own actions. Personally I think it's more proactive for those with loud voices to encourage solutions to problems rather than let the things they despise happen through the back door. Too much of this and there will be genuine reasons further up the road to remove the option to continuously cruise altogether. I don't want that.

[Tuscan]

As they say lies , lies and damn statistics. Both sides can prove their argument if they need to. What's needed are some firm ideas as to address boaters concerns to be more widely discussed , by all , including the IWA, NABO, HNBC as well as regional boaters meets, cruising clubs etc. This would mean CRT taking responsibility and consulting more widely. For my part I would be tempted to abolish the 14 day rule during the stoppage period and only charge for winter moorings if on visitor moorings close to facilities. However the flip side for me is the enforcement of the 14 day rule outside this period. If CRT an want to exclude certain stretches due to existing problems or ongoing negotiations surely this can be done.

[cotswoldsman]

I think i've answered the question that i'm not a sockpuppet.

 

The article, in the very first two paragraphs mentions 'breaking the law' and 'legal requirements'. I just thought it was an odd piece of writing, it's didn't do anybody any favours. Even ironically posting a picture 'to prove' a point of view challenges people to provide alternative evidence to prove otherwise (the author can hardy complain of snooping then can he!). The article intent seems to be swayed in proving VW of making stuff up 'because there is no evidence' yet the author does not want evidence gathering to be used to support the claim.

Trust me, i'm not defending either person, but at some point in the future 'sledgehammer' type solutions will be presented because nobody...not even those who care about the waterways....didn't promote us all to have responsibility for our own actions. Personally I think it's more proactive for those with loud voices to encourage solutions to problems rather than let the things they despise happen through the back door. Too much of this and there will be genuine reasons further up the road to remove the option to continuously cruise altogether. I don't want that.

 

I really think you need to get up to date. The Trust have already produced figures of what they consider to be Non Compliant Boaters. The picture used does not identify any boater and simply goes prove the statement " that all the moorings in Stratford are occupied by Non Compliant Boaters" as completely wrong. If as he says there are only 180 boats complying with the rules covering Continuous Cruising then why do CRT say that there are over 2,000 according to a survey they did last year? Oh and just out of interest where are they going to put 4,400 boats if they did away with Continuous Cruiser Licences? Could fill up the courts for years to come!!!

 

As they say lies , lies and damn statistics. Both sides can prove their argument if they need to.

 

Love to see Vaughan Welsh prove his figure especially as they are based on completely the wrong interpretation of the rules covering Continuous Cruising