Jump to content

Empty Visitor Moorings - Overstaying

DeanS

By DeanS
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

churchward Veteran II

churchward

Posted
Posted

It is not just about trampling down a piece of long grass. I cruise with another boat and last month we pulled up to moor up in a stretch of long grass (no problem) as Stan aged 78 stepped off his boat because of the long grass he was unable to see there was a big gap between the pilling and the bank, his foot went in and twisted (could have broken) he was unable to walk for nearly 7 days. No I dont care about a bit of long grass but I do care about what is hidden under that grass. Yes like you I happy to protect the Water Vole where they have been spotted but please do not use that as an excuse not to cut from Hedge to Edge. There is perceived to be an overcrowding problem at Visitor Moorings in that case they should make it easier for boaters to moor away from Visitor Moorings. I know one boater (Stan) that will no longer be mooring in areas of high grass.

We all need to take care when stepping from the boat and accidents can happen but I do not think that negates my point.

 

I for one do not need the tow path to be manicured and cut short all the time. I would rather it be a little wild in places. Providing habitats for other creatures should be considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
Posted

Yes like you I happy to protect the Water Vole where they have been spotted but please do not use that as an excuse not to cut from Hedge to Edge.

I don't believe there has ever been a policy of cutting "Hedge to Edge" away from formal moorings.

 

I was told by BW that the policy is to cut a 1m swathe leaving growth both hedgeside and bankside and I make a point of complaining if the cutting has been over enthusiastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

We all need to take care when stepping from the boat and accidents can happen but I do not think that negates my point.

 

I for one do not need the tow path to be manicured and cut short all the time. I would rather it be a little wild in places. Providing habitats for other creatures should be considered.

I do not disagree but this does not mean that they should not be kept to a certain standard
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MtB Veteran II

MtBDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted

I agree though that in the winter VM limits could be relaxed and many sights could revert to the std 14 day limit or maybe 7 days.

 

I disagree. It would be the thin end of the wedge and must be resisted, because supports the concept that there is a 'cruising season' and a cruising 'off-season'.

 

If this thinking gains currency, we will start hearing stuff like "It's not the cruising season now". Then, stuff like "It's not the cruising season now, you shouldn't be out".

 

Then before we know it, CRT will be saying things like no hurry to fix the busted lock, it's not the cruising season.

 

Eventually, in extremis, we could end up with CRT and insurance companies only permitting boating in the cruising season, and then were would we be...?

 

Ok the last bit is a bit silly... ;)

 

MtB

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
Posted

I disagree. It would be the thin end of the wedge and must be resisted, because supports the concept that there is a 'cruising season' and a cruising 'off-season'.

But for most people there is a cruising season which means that demand for VMs is less "off-season" so why not have flexible rules that accommodate those whose "season" lasts 12 months?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuscan Veteran

Tuscan

Posted
Posted

some 10,000 extra licensed boats in the last 10 years or some such number but no net increase in Visitor Moorings I believe and those that remain are now being restricted in time. What I believe is needed is for CRT to create more ability to moor whether that is formal visitor moorings or just the ability to get into the side by a bit of relevant dredging or perhaps in urban areas the ability to get a mooring pin in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
churchward Veteran II

churchward

Posted
Posted

 

I disagree. It would be the thin end of the wedge and must be resisted, because supports the concept that there is a 'cruising season' and a cruising 'off-season'.

 

If this thinking gains currency, we will start hearing stuff like "It's not the cruising season now". Then, stuff like "It's not the cruising season now, you shouldn't be out".

 

Then before we know it, CRT will be saying things like no hurry to fix the busted lock, it's not the cruising season.

 

Eventually, in extremis, we could end up with CRT and insurance companies only permitting boating in the cruising season, and then were would we be...?

 

Ok the last bit is a bit silly... wink.png

 

MtB

The reality is there is a cruising season for many.

 

I really like going out in the winter months the canal is at its most peaceful and you can get about easily no waiting for locks or problems mooring. Just don't tell anyone and if they ask say it is just aweful OK?

 

I see no "thin end of the wedge" to relaxing in some places the VM stay limits. In some places this may not be possible. In fact in some places there are seasonal signs for stay limits. I have seen signs for limiting mooring to 48 hours March to October and reverting to 14 days November to February or something simlar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
Posted

some 10,000 extra licensed boats in the last 10 years or some such number but no net increase in Visitor Moorings

One of the problems I see is the increase in 24 and 48 hour moorings which, in my opinion, has the complete opposite effect than the desired one.

 

If a VM's 48 hour restriction is extended half a mile either way then those who would perhaps stay 14 days on the outskirts would suddenly become overstayers so they might as well overstay in the centre of town as opposed to the suburbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
billS Rising Star

billS

Posted
Posted

 

So you see my point - NO other forum I've ever spoken on has seen fit to speak to other members like this. If Mr Pink is allowed to speak like this it is not a forum I want to be any part of. Thank god all the real people I've met on the canal aren't like you.

 

Cut him some slack - he's only 14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mayalld Veteran II

mayalld

Posted
Posted

Not quite sure what you mean. My way of boating has not changed over the last 8 years. In fact last summer (before I ever became involved in any process) I had a dispute with CRT over the same thing. I was moored in Ripon on the 48 hour moorings. There were only 2 boats Myself and the other boat I cruise with. After 48 hours the enforcement officer arrived and told us to move as we had done our 48 hours. I pointed out that there were no other boats and if I moved the moorings would be completely empty(there was room for at least a further 3 boats). I told her politely that I was not going to move but would be happy to do so if there was a sudden influx of boats. I left 3 days later in that time no other boats had arrived and when I left the moorings were empty. I have discussed many times with CRT that enforcement officers need to be more flexible on Visitor Moorings especially during the winter months.

 

 

John,

 

I wouldn't dispute that strict enforcement of VM time limits can lead to apparently ludicrous situations, and neither would I dispute that there may be ways of improving that. However, let me play devil's advocate for a moment (I know, not what I normally do).

 

Let us consider a hypothetical 48 hour visitor mooring that can accomodate 10 boats. The canal is not too busy, and on average, every day two leisure boats arrive to stay just for one night moving on in the morning, and two boaters on an extended cruise (maybe CCers, maybe not) arrive and stay for the maximum time that they are allowed (2 nights).

 

On any given night, there will be 6 boats moored (two staying for the night, two on the first night of a 2 night stay and two on the second night). The mooring is never actually "full", and there is always room for somebody else to moor.

 

Because the mooring is not full, somebody arrives and decides that they will stay longer (say 4 nights), and as a result, the occupancy of the moorings actually climbs to 8 boats at one point, but the mooring is STILL never full.

 

You may ask the question "what is the problem?" Nobody was prevented from mooring.

 

To my mind, the problem is that the only reason that the mooring didn't fill up is that all the other boaters stuck to the 48 hour limit. Had they decided that if you were going to do it, so were they, the mooring WOULD have filled to capacity.

 

So, the ability for some people to push beyond what is allowed relies upon everybody else NOT taking the same attitude.

 

If a mooring is never full, CRT should change the limits (in our hypothetical example they might increase to 3 days), so as to set a level playing field as to what is allowed, rather than some people obeying the rules and others taking advantage.

 

I wouldn't object to a formalisation of the "stay on if not busy" concept, creating moorings that were 48 hour by default, with mooring wardens able to give permission for an extended stay if asked, rather than a free for all where those who choose to flout the rules are better off.

 

Equally, I see no issue with flexible limits based on time of year. (48 hours Easter to October, 5 days otherwise)

  • Greenie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
churchward Veteran II

churchward

Posted
Posted

 

John,

 

I wouldn't dispute that strict enforcement of VM time limits can lead to apparently ludicrous situations, and neither would I dispute that there may be ways of improving that. However, let me play devil's advocate for a moment (I know, not what I normally do).

 

Let us consider a hypothetical 48 hour visitor mooring that can accomodate 10 boats. The canal is not too busy, and on average, every day two leisure boats arrive to stay just for one night moving on in the morning, and two boaters on an extended cruise (maybe CCers, maybe not) arrive and stay for the maximum time that they are allowed (2 nights).

 

On any given night, there will be 6 boats moored (two staying for the night, two on the first night of a 2 night stay and two on the second night). The mooring is never actually "full", and there is always room for somebody else to moor.

 

Because the mooring is not full, somebody arrives and decides that they will stay longer (say 4 nights), and as a result, the occupancy of the moorings actually climbs to 8 boats at one point, but the mooring is STILL never full.

 

You may ask the question "what is the problem?" Nobody was prevented from mooring.

 

To my mind, the problem is that the only reason that the mooring didn't fill up is that all the other boaters stuck to the 48 hour limit. Had they decided that if you were going to do it, so were they, the mooring WOULD have filled to capacity.

 

So, the ability for some people to push beyond what is allowed relies upon everybody else NOT taking the same attitude.

 

If a mooring is never full, CRT should change the limits (in our hypothetical example they might increase to 3 days), so as to set a level playing field as to what is allowed, rather than some people obeying the rules and others taking advantage.

 

I wouldn't object to a formalisation of the "stay on if not busy" concept, creating moorings that were 48 hour by default, with mooring wardens able to give permission for an extended stay if asked, rather than a free for all where those who choose to flout the rules are better off.

 

Equally, I see no issue with flexible limits based on time of year. (48 hours Easter to October, 5 days otherwise)

I can't fault your logic there.

 

I do think there must be someway to reach a simple (ie no complicated enforcement needed) way to relax the stay times at least in the winter when the numbers are not swelled by hire boats and other "good weather" boaters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tacet Rising Star

Tacet

Posted
Posted

....

 

On any given night, there will be 6 boats moored (two staying for the night, two on the first night of a 2 night stay and two on the second night). The mooring is never actually "full", and there is always room for somebody else to moor.

 

Because the mooring is not full, somebody arrives and decides that they will stay longer (say 4 nights), and as a result, the occupancy of the moorings actually climbs to 8 boats at one point, but the mooring is STILL never full.

 

 

 

Could you please explain that bit again.. There were six boats, somebody arrives which makes eight boats; was that someone Alan (Two Boats) Fincher?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mick and Maggie Rising Star

Mick and Maggie

Posted
Posted

I woke up this morning on a VM, which was empty except for me. I phoned CRT and asked if I could stay put, as there is plenty of space at the moment. I was told the reason I cant stay on the VM (even though it's currently empty), is because YOU LOT WILL COMPLAIN I'VE EXCEEDED THE 48HRS.

Dean.... Don't be in a rush... Micklethwait swing bridge is out of commission and the engineers will be still working on it tomorrow. There is no movement on the LL above Bingley 5 rise. One hire boater is already two days late returning the boat!

 

As for no over staying on the VM at Clarence dock, what's the problem?. Yet the river mooring pontoon outside CaRT's Fearns Wharf office had three fishermen sat like gnomes. So that the pontoon would not be available for boats anyway.

 

See you when you catch us up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

Dean.... Don't be in a rush... Micklethwait swing bridge is out of commission and the engineers will be still working on it tomorrow. There is no movement on the LL above Bingley 5 rise. One hire boater is already two days late returning the boat!

 

As for no over staying on the VM at Clarence dock, what's the problem?. Yet the river mooring pontoon outside CaRT's Fearns Wharf office had three fishermen sat like gnomes. So that the pontoon would not be available for boats anyway.

 

See you when you catch us up...

Boats seeking to moor have the right to use moorings even when fishermen have taken residence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeanS Veteran II

DeanS

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I went for a lovely cruise up the river this afternoon...winded the boat at the GW lock entrance, and then literally let the river gently drift the boat all the way back to CD. Was lovely. I'm still moored on the river section, (have to stay in Leeds till Aug 12), so will be on the river a lot...with intermittent 24hr stints to the VM every 3 days or so. Might try and find some space at GW, but it's really tricky to turn a widebeam up there, so it's more than likely the river for me. I'm not complaining...the river bit is amazingly relaxing....the VMs are less relaxing in many ways. My ropes are loose, and we'll keep an eye on river levels and weather forecasts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.