C & RT South East Region Visitor Moorings Review Consultation

[cotswoldsman]

I'm disappointed to see on Facebook that CRT employees have apparently been out removing signs that local boat owners have been putting up attempting to draw the South East Visitor Mooring Consultation to the attention of those not on the internet, and may currently be unaware.

 

I'm afraid it hardly points to a desire to "want to consult" does it?

 

Now of course, before anyone says it, I admit I don't know whether those removing the signs have done so because they were specifically instructed o, or, whether as a matter of course, they would remove any unauthorised notice, whatever it was about.

Alan I doubt that they are targeting notices specific to the consultation

[Rich]

It seems to me that the very reason there is not a big problem on the Shroppie or the Llangollen, is because there is a plentiful supply of 48-hour moorings, and I am personally very pleased that the SUCC keep adding more of them.

Unless, of course, they tends to be the canals you cruise most frequently and would welcome a spot where you can moor for a few days, up to seven, in the peace and quiet of the countryside.

 

If your boat is a little deeper than average, ours is 28 inches at the stern, your mooring sites can be limited and the 48 hour sites frequently are the only ones that you can use comfortably.

[alan_fincher]

Alan I doubt that they are targeting notices specific to the consultation

I can't say John, but other notices not sanctioned by CRT have not got removed with such haste in the past.

[carlt]

 

If your boat is a little deeper than average, ours is 28 inches at the stern, your mooring sites can be limited and the 48 hour sites frequently are the only ones that you can use comfortably.

Is 28 inches deeper than average?

 

My last narrow boat boat drew 3' at the stern and I actively avoided formal moorings with very little need to deploy the gangplank either, though it was available if the need arose.

[matty40s]

 

 

Also corrects a previous statement - the list price at Engineer's Wharf actually got reduced a bit, rather than increased.....

 

Engineer’s Wharf

auctions 22 !!!

total bids.. 301

number of bids over guide price 3

guide price last year £6068 per berth

revised guide price £5171 per berth

 

I have been watching these auctions at Engineers Wharf for four years now Alan since I was refused a winter mooring there. The auctions continue to attract nil bids time after time, an occasional punter comes along there is a bidding flurry,and then they carry on.

22 auctions (in one year!!)according to that report and they still can't fill the berths, that says to me that they are overpriced.The reserve only 18 months ago was well under £5k so where the speculative hike and then reduction came from is a testament to someone in an offices lack of judgement.

 

Yes, they have sold a couple at over guide price........makes you wonder who is bidding against the eventual winner doesn't it!!

 

 

 

I have just dug up a letter from 2010 which was sent to Sally , Damian etc at during the "consultations" on the L&S,

here is a nice clip that gives you an idea of the pre-ordained nature of these "proposals"...

 

In the letter we made clear that this was an alternative process to be undertaken in place of the current proposals, which we believe should be withdrawn.

On Friday 18th March representatives of the Upper Lee & Stort Association and London Boaters met with you, Gill Owen and Damian Kemp at your request. At the meeting you proposed a joint research programme to inform the development of the new local mooring strategy for the rivers Lee & Stort. However you made very clear that you would not consider withdrawing the current proposals, requesting instead that we proceed to work together ‘as if they don’t exist’. At the meeting you stated that:

• There is no definition of what ‘problems’ the current proposal is intended to address

• BW have not done any formal research in developing the proposal and can’t quantify the (undefined) problem. You described it as a ‘picture’ you built up following ‘informal approaches’

• The response of the local boating community had led you, for the first time, to realise the extent to which liveaboard continuous cruisers are un(der)represented in existing user groups

Edited February 2, 2013 by matty40s

[matty40s]

bump

[sueb]

Engineer’s Wharf

auctions 22 !!!

total bids.. 301

number of bids over guide price 3

guide price last year £6068 per berth

revised guide price £5171 per berth

 

I have been watching these auctions at Engineers Wharf for four years now Alan since I was refused a winter mooring there. The auctions continue to attract nil bids time after time, an occasional punter comes along there is a bidding flurry,and then they carry on.

22 auctions (in one year!!)according to that report and they still can't fill the berths, that says to me that they are overpriced.The reserve only 18 months ago was well under £5k so where the speculative hike and then reduction came from is a testament to someone in an offices lack of judgement.

 

Yes, they have sold a couple at over guide price........makes you wonder who is bidding against the eventual winner doesn't it!!

 

 

 

I have just dug up a letter from 2010 which was sent to Sally , Damian etc at during the "consultations" on the L&S,

here is a nice clip that gives you an idea of the pre-ordained nature of these "proposals"...

 

In the letter we made clear that this was an alternative process to be undertaken in place of the current proposals, which we believe should be withdrawn.

On Friday 18th March representatives of the Upper Lee & Stort Association and London Boaters met with you, Gill Owen and Damian Kemp at your request. At the meeting you proposed a joint research programme to inform the development of the new local mooring strategy for the rivers Lee & Stort. However you made very clear that you would not consider withdrawing the current proposals, requesting instead that we proceed to work together ‘as if they don’t exist’. At the meeting you stated that:

• There is no definition of what ‘problems’ the current proposal is intended to address

• BW have not done any formal research in developing the proposal and can’t quantify the (undefined) problem. You described it as a ‘picture’ you built up following ‘informal approaches’

• The response of the local boating community had led you, for the first time, to realise the extent to which liveaboard continuous cruisers are un(der)represented in existing user groups

I don't agree with the last comment. NABO has often been accused of bring biased in favour of liveaboards. At present at least five members of council are liveaboards and three are ccers. Hardly underrepresented.

[matty40s]

I don't agree with the last comment. NABO has often been accused of bring biased in favour of liveaboards. At present at least five members of council are liveaboards and three are ccers. Hardly underrepresented.

You may not agree with it with your NABO shades on, but Sally Ash acknowledged the fact in the meeting.

[cotswoldsman]

I don't agree with the last comment. NABO has often been accused of bring biased in favour of liveaboards. At present at least five members of council are liveaboards and three are ccers. Hardly underrepresented.

But surely they have to represent the views of the members irrespective of their own circumstances at any meeting with The Trust.

[Chris Pink]

Their intention is to represent the views of all boaters as expressed by the membership. Given that the membership is a true cross section of all boating types* I find they do a pretty good job of that. Certainly better than any other group I have encountered.

 

It would be a mistake to judge NABO by the blathering of Sueb or Canaldrifter.

 

*although theoretically this would include lumpy water boaters I believe the vast majority are inland waterways boaters.

[David Schweizer]

Alan I doubt that they are targeting notices specific to the consultation

I think you are probably corerect. When we moored above Stockton, BW repeatedly removed the permitted mooring signs that we erected, despite continually failing to erect the "official" ones they repeatedly promised.

 

I don't agree with the last comment. NABO has often been accused of bring biased in favour of liveaboards. At present at least five members of council are liveaboards and three are ccers. Hardly underrepresented.

It may not be the case nowadays, but when I was last a member of NABO, there was a quite clearly visible support in favour of liveaboards, promoted by three of the excecutive member (all liveaboards) at the time. They had presumably been kept under control by Stuart Sampson, but when he resigned to move abroad they immediately sought to hijack the issue, so please don't try and pretent it wasn't happening,

[David Schweizer]

Their intention is to represent the views of all boaters as expressed by the membership. Given that the membership is a true cross section of all boating types* I find they do a pretty good job of that. Certainly better than any other group I have encountered.

 

It would be a mistake to judge NABO by the blathering of Sueb or Canaldrifter.

 

*although theoretically this would include lumpy water boaters I believe the vast majority are inland waterways boaters.

 

That may be their intention, but unfortunately, was not my experience. I was at one time the NABO contact person for the local Cruising Club, and despite his agreement to do so, the NABO Regional "Representative" consistently ignored requests to meet local boaters and routinely failed to put forward the views of local members as expressed by the group that I was representing, all of whom were NABO members.

Edited February 2, 2013 by David Schweizer

[Chris Pink]

What evidence do you have that this is still the case or even, in your example, that it wasn't simply one incompetent representative.

 

I was at the NABO AGM, I'm not a member but had an excellent reason for attending. If you had wanted to stand for council you would have been elected unopposed.

 

And then you could address these issues from the inside rather than repeatedly complain about your past experience.

[sueb]

I do think personalities are getting in the way here.

[tafelberg]

I'm so tired of all this. I love boating, I love old boats, old engines, I love banters, locks, rain, snow, wind, moorings, everything. I love festivals, boat tug of war etc etc.

 

But now...it's turned into politics. Look, C&RT can do what they want regardless of what we want. I did join the local boaters group for a while but I posted a video of my engine, lovely 1973 Lister HRW2, with original heads, rebuilt in 2009 and just fresh from another service, and someone wrote "Relevance?", that's when I knew that this was not about boating any more, it's about politics. I Left the group needless to say.

 

Whatever rules C&RT choose to have, whatever mooring structure, visitor moorings and timing, people will break those rules, C&RT can't keep up with the current situation, if they introduce more licenses and rules, how will they keep up with that? A good effort, but I'm just really tired of it all.

 

Most of the boaters I've spoken to on the moorings here are staying out of it.

 

Look, C&RT promised me a mooring ring in August last year. So far all they've managed to produce is a big X painted in white 2 days ago. The signs on my mooring are covered in graffiti, a few weeks ago I went away for a few days to have a fire fitted at the local boatyard, when I returned, there was a boat on my mooring space, I have a 70ft boat so it's not as easy to just moor somewhere else. I met the people who were using it a week later, they didn't realise they could not moor there.

 

I pay just below £2000 a year for my mooring, I'm frankly afraid to go boating because.

 

a. I don't know if there will be 70ft of space when I get there.

b. I don't know if, when I return the space I moor in will be free, and if it's not how long before it will be.

 

I was told by C&RT that I could put up signs to show my mooring (at my expense), but I don't think they own the fence. I think it belongs to the developers who built the flats over the canal.

 

I did try and trace the owner but it turned out he was abroad, C&RT tried phoning him but that was it. I think, to be honest if the people had not returned it could have been there months.

 

I'd love to move to Willow Wren Wharf but I simply can't risk £600.00 if I don't get approved and they keep it.

 

If they create the new license that's great, but will it change anything? No, I don't think so. Frankly, I'd rather talk about engines, working boats, narrow boats and anything else the have my time consumed trying to influence something. Whilst the consultation is interesting, C&RT can, in the end pretty much do what they like. I had a friend who used to call BW their Lords and Masters, that is the title I give them. They can institute whatever they like, we have to go along with it. Giving us a consultation is great but in the end, they can, and will do what they want.

 

I get on very well with my local C&RT staff, I pay my bills, I make sure I have insurance, boat safety and everything else. If they change a few visitor moorings around, that's nothing new, I used to be moored at the park in Cowley where people regularly moored, in fact one guy moored next to me for 3 months and really made jokes about how I was an idiot for paying for what he was getting free. Then it became 7 day moorings which I think it is now, but I can tell you for sure that people more there for way more than 7 days.

 

Anyway, that's my rant over, I'm going to go back to watching videos of Royalty class working boats at work.

 

It's a consultation, everyone, tell C&RT what you think, then leave it, they will decide the outcome. If you want to protest, then sure, do it, but until they actually make a decision, you're protesting against nothing.

[churchward]

I'm so tired of all this. I love boating, I love old boats, old engines, I love banters, locks, rain, snow, wind, moorings, everything. I love festivals, boat tug of war etc etc.

 

But now...it's turned into politics. Look, C&RT can do what they want regardless of what we want. I did join the local boaters group for a while but I posted a video of my engine, lovely 1973 Lister HRW2, with original heads, rebuilt in 2009 and just fresh from another service, and someone wrote "Relevance?", that's when I knew that this was not about boating any more, it's about politics. I Left the group needless to say.

 

Whatever rules C&RT choose to have, whatever mooring structure, visitor moorings and timing, people will break those rules, C&RT can't keep up with the current situation, if they introduce more licenses and rules, how will they keep up with that? A good effort, but I'm just really tired of it all.

 

Most of the boaters I've spoken to on the moorings here are staying out of it.

 

Look, C&RT promised me a mooring ring in August last year. So far all they've managed to produce is a big X painted in white 2 days ago. The signs on my mooring are covered in graffiti, a few weeks ago I went away for a few days to have a fire fitted at the local boatyard, when I returned, there was a boat on my mooring space, I have a 70ft boat so it's not as easy to just moor somewhere else. I met the people who were using it a week later, they didn't realise they could not moor there.

 

I pay just below £2000 a year for my mooring, I'm frankly afraid to go boating because.

 

a. I don't know if there will be 70ft of space when I get there.

b. I don't know if, when I return the space I moor in will be free, and if it's not how long before it will be.

 

I was told by C&RT that I could put up signs to show my mooring (at my expense), but I don't think they own the fence. I think it belongs to the developers who built the flats over the canal.

 

I did try and trace the owner but it turned out he was abroad, C&RT tried phoning him but that was it. I think, to be honest if the people had not returned it could have been there months.

 

I'd love to move to Willow Wren Wharf but I simply can't risk £600.00 if I don't get approved and they keep it.

 

If they create the new license that's great, but will it change anything? No, I don't think so. Frankly, I'd rather talk about engines, working boats, narrow boats and anything else the have my time consumed trying to influence something. Whilst the consultation is interesting, C&RT can, in the end pretty much do what they like. I had a friend who used to call BW their Lords and Masters, that is the title I give them. They can institute whatever they like, we have to go along with it. Giving us a consultation is great but in the end, they can, and will do what they want.

 

I get on very well with my local C&RT staff, I pay my bills, I make sure I have insurance, boat safety and everything else. If they change a few visitor moorings around, that's nothing new, I used to be moored at the park in Cowley where people regularly moored, in fact one guy moored next to me for 3 months and really made jokes about how I was an idiot for paying for what he was getting free. Then it became 7 day moorings which I think it is now, but I can tell you for sure that people more there for way more than 7 days.

 

Anyway, that's my rant over, I'm going to go back to watching videos of Royalty class working boats at work.

 

It's a consultation, everyone, tell C&RT what you think, then leave it, they will decide the outcome. If you want to protest, then sure, do it, but until they actually make a decision, you're protesting against nothing.

Wow, long rant I hope you remembered to breath!

 

Joking aside you make some good points and good to hear of local experiences of mooring etc. Do hope hope though that you and others do respond to the proposals and give CRT the benefit of that experience. They might ignore it but the more voices the more likely they will have to take notice and it doesn't take much time to complete their form.

 

Have a green one.

Edited February 2, 2013 by churchward

[tafelberg]

Thanks mate :-) I have completed the form myself.

[ChimneyChain]

Well said Paul !!!!!!!!

[bassplayer]

I know some of us hate politics (including me) but it does change things (well at least for a while). It's either that or just roll over, which doesn't achieve anything...how else do you deal with it?

[Dovetail]

I'm so tired of all this. I love boating, I love old boats, old engines, I love banters, locks, rain, snow, wind, moorings, everything. I love festivals, boat tug of war etc etc.

 

But now...it's turned into politics. Look, C&RT can do what they want regardless of what we want. I did join the local boaters group for a while but I posted a video of my engine, lovely 1973 Lister HRW2, with original heads, rebuilt in 2009 and just fresh from another service, and someone wrote "Relevance?", that's when I knew that this was not about boating any more, it's about politics. I Left the group needless to say.

 

Whatever rules C&RT choose to have, whatever mooring structure, visitor moorings and timing, people will break those rules, C&RT can't keep up with the current situation, if they introduce more licenses and rules, how will they keep up with that? A good effort, but I'm just really tired of it all.

 

Most of the boaters I've spoken to on the moorings here are staying out of it.

 

Look, C&RT promised me a mooring ring in August last year. So far all they've managed to produce is a big X painted in white 2 days ago. The signs on my mooring are covered in graffiti, a few weeks ago I went away for a few days to have a fire fitted at the local boatyard, when I returned, there was a boat on my mooring space, I have a 70ft boat so it's not as easy to just moor somewhere else. I met the people who were using it a week later, they didn't realise they could not moor there.

 

I pay just below £2000 a year for my mooring, I'm frankly afraid to go boating because.

 

a. I don't know if there will be 70ft of space when I get there.

b. I don't know if, when I return the space I moor in will be free, and if it's not how long before it will be.

 

I was told by C&RT that I could put up signs to show my mooring (at my expense), but I don't think they own the fence. I think it belongs to the developers who built the flats over the canal.

 

I did try and trace the owner but it turned out he was abroad, C&RT tried phoning him but that was it. I think, to be honest if the people had not returned it could have been there months.

 

I'd love to move to Willow Wren Wharf but I simply can't risk £600.00 if I don't get approved and they keep it.

 

If they create the new license that's great, but will it change anything? No, I don't think so. Frankly, I'd rather talk about engines, working boats, narrow boats and anything else the have my time consumed trying to influence something. Whilst the consultation is interesting, C&RT can, in the end pretty much do what they like. I had a friend who used to call BW their Lords and Masters, that is the title I give them. They can institute whatever they like, we have to go along with it. Giving us a consultation is great but in the end, they can, and will do what they want.

 

I get on very well with my local C&RT staff, I pay my bills, I make sure I have insurance, boat safety and everything else. If they change a few visitor moorings around, that's nothing new, I used to be moored at the park in Cowley where people regularly moored, in fact one guy moored next to me for 3 months and really made jokes about how I was an idiot for paying for what he was getting free. Then it became 7 day moorings which I think it is now, but I can tell you for sure that people more there for way more than 7 days.

 

Anyway, that's my rant over, I'm going to go back to watching videos of Royalty class working boats at work.

 

It's a consultation, everyone, tell C&RT what you think, then leave it, they will decide the outcome. If you want to protest, then sure, do it, but until they actually make a decision, you're protesting against nothing.

 

 

I agree pretty much with the sentiment of your post and know all the places you talk about but CART know they have to work with the vast majority of all boaters and if a large percentage are not happy with the changes and make their voices heard CART will know they will have a harder job in the future working with unhappy boaters across the network and not just a few cc’s.

 

If we don’t air our disapproval of the proposed changes then this will give them a green light to do whatever as you say they can do regardless and complaining may make them think twice.

 

To me the changes are all about revenue and its only the start so I can also see your mooring charges increasing perhaps doubling over the next few years and I hope not, you already pay plenty for a mooring with no maintenance over many years as I have seen BW or even CART, no parking, inadequate signage and a towpath that’s an accident waiting to happen. A local boaters group could in time apply pressure to improve your mooring. Please don’t think the changes are not going to effect you.

[jenlyn]

I didn't see the post tafelberg made on the cub page. The group is aiming at being a social one as well as being slightly political. Though I do think political is the wrong term. There are 150 members in total, many are deeply concerned about the changes CRT are trying to implement. Hence the impression of it being political i guess.The group consists of marina based and online moorers. The minority are cc'ers. The local hiking and cycling groups are also represented.

The group representatives also met with a group from rickmansworth yesterday, and agreed to work together in looking to improve relations with CRT.

It has recently helped to put nccc'ers onto permanent moorings and also encouraged with some success, cc'ers to abide with the cc guidelines. I would hope the group at some point would also become a social one and we will have a web page up and running in the next few days that will cover the south east from Milton Keynes to Little Venice. This will hold all sorts of information that will help anyone passing through, or mooring in the area.

It's a relatively new group, still finding its way and needs some patience and most of all input from other boaters-canal users. Slagging it off for such a trivial matter is in my mind a little bizarre, but as they say, each to their own.

[David Schweizer]

What evidence do you have that this is still the case or even, in your example, that it wasn't simply one incompetent representative.

 

I was at the NABO AGM, I'm not a member but had an excellent reason for attending. If you had wanted to stand for council you would have been elected unopposed.

 

And then you could address these issues from the inside rather than repeatedly complain about your past experience.

As I have not been a member for a number of years I do not know whether it is still the same, but I have good reason do suspect that nothing much has changed with respect to the specific concern referred to in my earlier post.

 

As for addressing issues from inside, I did that when I was an active member without any effect whatsoever. You know me Chris, you know that I am not a shrinking violet, and am quite capable of marshalling a reasoned arguement, but it was a waste of time. Emails and letters were ignored, and phone calls were never returned. I came to the conclusion that the officers responsible at the time were either incapable of accepting, any sort of challenging discussion, or simply thought I was a trouble maker, although it didn't stop them asking me to staff the NABO stand at Crick show.

 

I know that I have excercised my grievences about NABO on more than one occassion, and that some supporters will have found that tedious, if not irritating, but there were several other factors, which I cannot air because it would be too easy to identify individuals. Those factor coupled with those which I have aired evebntually led me to decide that NABO was not for me, and did not represent my interests.

 

I still believe that my concerns are relevant, particularly the one about a lack of an adequate democratic proceedure for the election of "Representstives", but as it clearly annoys you to hear me "repeatedly complain about my past experiences", I will try to refrain in the future. I would however, be interested to learn why you are such and ardent supporter of NABO, but not sufficiently so to be a member.

Edited February 3, 2013 by David Schweizer

[Chris Pink]

Mainly because I don't, in general, join things. You are of course free to complain. I'm just pointing out that you could have become a council member in November ( without going more than 4 miles from your armchair) and then you could address all your concerns and put your intentions into practice.

 

I think NABO needs more members. It's deeply flawed for that reason. But if one is looking for national representation of boaters then something like it is needed and in the very thin pack of boaters groups it is the next in line after IWA

 

You could, of course, start a new group with that aim but given that it would have to be; national, an association, and comprised of boaters, the best name seems to have been taken.

Edited February 3, 2013 by Chris Pink

[alan_fincher]

I find myself in an usual situation a lot of the time.

 

Unlike "Tafelberg" I'm not particularly local to the Cowley/Uxbridge area, but I have been asked to attend the meetings, and have felt privileged to get the invite, and to see the group come together. I have learnt a huge amount about local issues by being there, and felt genuinely welcomed, (even as a mere "leisure boater"!)

 

Sadly I didn't make it to the Rickmansworth one yesterday, but initial feedback from that seems equally positive.

 

I'm actually staggered at the amount of goodwill that seems to exist across a very varied selection of boaters to try and broker some sensible solutions to difficult problems. I'm seeing a huge response from people keen to try and move things forward. Undoubtedly they also have a number of non cooperative boaters locally that have failed to buy into this initiative, and may continue to "take the piss", but the group do actually know that, and I'm convinced want to dissociate themselves from a small number that are not helping anybody's situation

 

However CRT need to urgently seize the goodwill, and need to start coming back with more than just promises to look at certain things - they need to put suggestions on the table that make it clear both sides are equally keen to find solutions. Whatever CRT may like to think, many do see this Visitor Moorings consultation as unhelpful at this time, and I do think if it is not possible for CRT to convince local boaters of the necessity of what are some fairly draconian changes at some locations, and for which no real evidence has been produced, then it may seriously damage the improved relationship that CRT claim they wish to have with boaters generally.

 

Yes, there is "politics" involved in some of this, and yes, I feel it is a shame it is a necessary consequence of actually caring about what happens to our canals. When I retired from the day job, I had rather thought I was walking away from such "politics" for ever, and often I wonder why I get involved in this stuff at all.

 

The reality, of course, is that some of the boaters working hardest on a whole raft of issues are those who need to do so least for any personal reasons. I am aware that at times this appears close to a full time job for both "Jenlyn" and "Cotswoldman", yet neither, I suspect comes very high up a list of benefiting from most of the things they are fighting to improve. They are in my view doing what they are doing because they think what they are doing is right and necessary, and fear how much worse things could be if someone was not putting in that level of commitment. Both, I suspect, are actually dipping quite deeply into their own pockets to meet the costs they incur.

 

The easy course for me personally would be to say that compared to many, I am highly privileged. I'm lucky enough to be able to afford to keep not one, but two boats, and have managed to get both on a permanent mooring, (albeit that the bank is falling in at one of those, and apparently costs may force CRT to close the moorings, rather than repair them, and continue to honour my contract!). I hardly ever stop anywhere for more than about a day, (other than things like historic boat events, where normal moorings restrictions are generally suspended anyway), so might even benefit from a hefty spread visitor moorings where only one and two day stays are permitted.

 

However, at the moment, I am persuaded that it is not just about "yourself", it is about what is right overall, and trying to ensure that everybody gets treated fairly, and that policy is not just driven by those who have traditionally shouted the loudest, or otherwise had the most influence.

 

So, I would say that while you may not wish to be part of any "politics", Paul, you should certainly not be dismissive of those who are trying to improve things. Who knows, you might just even see some benefits start to appear, without actually having to do anything yourself.

 

As a tongue in cheek comment by the way, a fair amount of weight is being put by CRT behind the last Boaters Survey, and pepole's distaste foe "congestion" and inability to slip quietly through an area without hold ups. I could suggest that the Ricky tug of war, and (even more so) the traditional Ricky "blockade" may well be exactly the sort of thing that pisses non like minded boaters off - and yes, I'm guilty of the same, each time we add "Sickle" to the congestion caused by the Braunston show!

[Keeping Up]

I'm taking my time, avidly reading everything that has been posted here, with the hope of being able to make a more informed and balanced response on the feedback form. I admit that my views have altered slightly while following this debate - but ony by a little. I very strongly support the declared priority of "improving the chances of boaters finding space when they arrive at designated visited moorings" provided that they have been designated at appropriate places and I freely admit that this is a totally self-serving interest.

 

As someone who moors in the south-east, who is familiar with all the sites in question but travels a lot all over the country, one of the problems that I have to face in the peak of the summer is that of finding an overnight mooring at my intended destination. On one occasion many years ago, I had to travel for an additional 3 hours into the evening and in the rain before I could find any sort of mooring - but that was before VM's were commonplace. Since then I have always (except on the K&A) found it possible to moor somewhere near where I wanted to, and I think this is largely because of the existence of VM's; indeed the easiest place to find moorings seem to be the Shroppie and the Llangollen where the preponderance of SUCC moorings - and the lack of overstayers on them - seems to be highly effective.

 

In the south-east, I still sometimes find it diificult to moor exactly where I want to - last summer one night I couldn't stop anywhere at Braunston for example, simply because all the VMs were full of genuine visitors (a problem which no amount of wardens and scales of overstaying charges could address), a couple of days later I had to moor about 350 yards from the pub at Bugbrooke, and a few years ago I had to moor almost at Leighton Lock to visit the Globe - but these have been isolated incidents, none were exactly major problems (a 350 yard walk back from the pub is probably a positive benefit to health) and certainly nothing to justify any draconian measures. At other times when I want to moor somewhere peaceful and away from it all, I hope that the VM's will help concentrate the other moorers so that my favourite countryside spot will be vacant - but this is becoming less possible because in most places especially in the south-east all my favourite, isolated mooring spots now have somebody living there on a permanent basis.

 

The difficult debate that I am now having with myself is that, given my preference for an adequate range of VMs, what should C&RT do that is different from today and/or different from the proposals in the paper. I don't know the answer to that one; so I'd like to pose the question to other posters here, what would be your answer to that question? Do you think that the situation today is perfect and will always be so, or do would you like to see changes? And if you'd like to see changes, what would YOU like to see instead of these proposals?