Continuous Cruising Maps

[jenlyn]

In February of this year, I got information that CRT were developing "place" maps as guidance for continuous cruisers. The cowley and uxbridge group were in discussions with CRT over the roving mooring permit at the time.

I started to talk to continuous cruisers in the uxbridge area (I dont need it pointed out to me about ccing in uxbridge, been there done that. A problem needed sorting) about how far is far enough. I managed to get a small group together who were willing to formulate a "how far is far enough" mutual agreement.

The end result was, that group meeting with CRT at their milton keynes office, and discussing a mutual understanding that would be acceptable on how far is far enough. The goal was to get an agreed cc plan from Rickmansworth to brentford without going onto enforcement radar, along with getting as many ccers in that particular area to agree it.

 

Can I just say at this point, we were not, and are not looking to develop place, we were merely looking for a mutual understanding that would keep everyone happy and away from enforcement.

 

Towards the end of the meeting, I suggested to CRT, that rather than promote these maps across the internet, they instead put a copy in with a pre cc1 and advise the patrol officer to refer to the map, rather than say "your not moving far enough".

 

This map is a guidance only, it's not covered by legislation or law. It is merely advice that you may or may not choose to take. I think it's a step forward and hope that most will see it for what it really is, just guidance.

 

Discuss.........

 

Why have I posted this now? I have been made aware that CRT are going to post the map on their web page.

Edited August 7, 2013 by jenlyn

[by'eck]

Isn't the very concept of this potential discussion against the heart of continuous cruising as understood by C&RT. i.e. bona fide navigation generally in one direction.

 

Brentford to Rickmansworth is less than 19 miles with 20 locks.

[jenlyn]

The argument over bona fide has been done to death. I am standing away from that in favour of mutual agreement. It's in my mind simpler.

[by'eck]

The argument over bona fide has been done to death. I am standing away from that in favour of mutual agreement. It's in my mind simpler.

 

Agreed - but isn't your post just digging it up again?

[DeanS]

If CRT say they are happy with 1.9miles and 20locks, then we should be ecstatic that some "guidance" is seemingly about to become public. We really do need this sort of guidance, because without it, too many people make too many wrong assumptions. In my mind, 2 miles is 1 hrs travel in a boat. If someone in a car was travelling an hours distance....you would say they are making a journey. A CC-er shouldnt have to travel more than 30mins every few days in my mind. WHAT'S THE RUSH when you've got solar, and want to explore the towpaths and nature as you travel. One thing I have learned......if you travel for 3weeks to get to a "destination" , CRT dont provide any moorings for you anyway...so toodling along the towpath is the only real way to enjoy your boating.

 

[by'eck]

Fair comment Dean although the OP was talking of a distance of 19 miles not two.

 

My main concern I guess is that C&RT are made to feel obliged to spend money on providing CC maps rather than the many more important demands on their resources.

[DeanS]

Fair comment Dean although the OP was talking of a distance of 19 miles not two.

 

My main concern I guess is that C&RT are made to feel obliged to spend money on providing CC maps rather than the many more important demands on their resources.

 

19miles round trip over a period of.....?

Does it mean 10miles in one direction and back again?

I'm very interested, as if CRT provide guidance in one area, I'm sure it'll be a reference all boaters can apply to all areas.

 

19miles round trip over a period of.....?

Does it mean 10miles in one direction and back again?

I'm very interested, as if CRT provide guidance in one area, I'm sure it'll be a reference all boaters can apply to all areas.

 

 

ETA - perhaps maps is the answer. If a map exists, then everyone can try and stick to them and the whole discussion about CC-ers being acused of "not travelling far enough" will finally be done away with.

[Jambo]

Fair comment Dean although the OP was talking of a distance of 19 miles not two.

 

My main concern I guess is that C&RT are made to feel obliged to spend money on providing CC maps rather than the many more important demands on their resources.

 

If they're going to be fining people and potentially removing boats from the water for supposed non compliance with their guidelines then I think providing a few maps that define what compliant behaviour looks like is the least they can do.

 

I'm very interested, as if CRT provide guidance in one area, I'm sure it'll be a reference all boaters can apply to all areas.

 

 

I don't think that a small group of boaters from one particular area should be used to define the range for all others in other areas. There really should be consultation in each area where these maps are going to be applied.

[matty40s]

Fair comment Dean although the OP was talking of a distance of 19 miles not two.

 

My main concern I guess is that C&RT are made to feel obliged to spend money on providing CC maps rather than the many more important demands on their resources.

By issuing the maps along with an early warning, they are following due diligence in their aim of getting the boat to move, or covering all bases if and when it ends up in court.

The fact that it is such a small distance to some goes in their favour as they cannot be seen as being draconian in their guidance.

[jenlyn]

Agreed - but isn't your post just digging it up again?

No, I didn't mention it.

 

 

 

I don't think that a small group of boaters from one particular area should be used to define the range for all others in other areas. There really should be consultation in each area where these maps are going to be applied.

Would you like to get involved?

[Lesd]

I know some people like the current 'greyness' of the law but I've heard many boaters saying they would welcome more clarification on the guidance so I think they would welcome this initiative. I saw a draft of the map a few months ago and if I remember correctly it shows different colored areas (places) marked on a Nicholson type map covering a much longer section of canal. Again my understanding is that it is trying to show boundaries between the various 'places' along the longer section. It should help people understand how far they have to move each time to be in another place (which is surely helpful).

I don't remember the map saying how many of these places someone had to visit before they could about turn though ? That also needs to be outlined to help people become compliant (maybe it is but I missed it ?)

I agree local boaters should be part of the definition of the maps as has happened here.

[KevMc]

Given that their guidance tries to define place by saying it is what somewhere is called (or words to that effect), surely providing a map of a contentious area interpreting that guidance in a real world situation can only be a good thing

[blodger]

Fair comment Dean although the OP was talking of a distance of 19 miles not two.

 

My main concern I guess is that C&RT are made to feel obliged to spend money on providing CC maps rather than the many more important demands on their resources.

 

Surely, the maps should be for those issued with a patrol notice for non-compliance, not everyone. I have often thought that patrol notices were pretty uninformative and not worth collecting

[Naughty Cal]

Where does this end?

 

Does CRT have to issue maps for every area where there is a CMer problem?

 

What will make people take notice of a map when they are well aware that their actions are not within the current guidelines yet choose to "play the game" anyway? Why will a map make any difference?

[jenlyn]

Where does this end?

Does CRT have to issue maps for every area where there is a CMer problem?

What will make people take notice of a map when they are well aware that their actions are not within the current guidelines yet choose to "play the game" anyway? Why will a map make any difference?

Well we won't know unless we try..... Edited August 7, 2013 by jenlyn

[mayalld]

Where does this end?

 

Does CRT have to issue maps for every area where there is a CMer problem?

 

Yes.

 

In fact, given the amount of time and energy that has been spent on this, they should bite the bullet and issue maps for the whole system .

[cotswoldsman]

Where does this end?

 

Does CRT have to issue maps for every area where there is a CMer problem?

 

What will make people take notice of a map when they are well aware that their actions are not within the current guidelines yet choose to "play the game" anyway? Why will a map make any difference?

Because some people would find it useful to know. 7,000 boats without a home mooring if only 25% find it useful and follow its guidance then that would be good.

[Naughty Cal]

Because some people would find it useful to know. 7,000 boats without a home mooring if only 25% find it useful and follow its guidance then that would be good.

So CRT publish these maps.

 

25% of boats with no home mooring find them useful the other 75% dont.

 

The minority of boats that chose to ignore the current guidance also ignore the new maps. Then what? Are CRT not back to square one with nothing achieved other than throwing a load of money and resources into making some pretty coloured maps?

 

I fail to see how a few maps is going to make any difference to the current situation.

[RLWP]

So CRT publish these maps.

 

25% of boats with no home mooring find them useful the other 75% dont.

 

The minority of boats that chose to ignore the current guidance also ignore the new maps. Then what? Are CRT not back to square one with nothing achieved other than throwing a load of money and resources into making some pretty coloured maps?

 

I fail to see how a few maps is going to make any difference to the current situation.

 

You've heard the expression 'drinking in the Last Chance Saloon'? CRT are kicking NCCC boaters in through the door and pointing forcibly at the sign of the bar.

 

These actions give people who may comply a chance to do so, and those that don't one less excuse if they end up in court

 

Richard

[churchward]

In February of this year, I got information that CRT were developing "place" maps as guidance for continuous cruisers. The cowley and uxbridge group were in discussions with CRT over the roving mooring permit at the time.

I started to talk to continuous cruisers in the uxbridge area (I dont need it pointed out to me about ccing in uxbridge, been there done that. A problem needed sorting) about how far is far enough. I managed to get a small group together who were willing to formulate a "how far is far enough" mutual agreement.

The end result was, that group meeting with CRT at their milton keynes office, and discussing a mutual understanding that would be acceptable on how far is far enough. The goal was to get an agreed cc plan from Rickmansworth to brentford without going onto enforcement radar, along with getting as many ccers in that particular area to agree it.

 

Can I just say at this point, we were not, and are not looking to develop place, we were merely looking for a mutual understanding that would keep everyone happy and away from enforcement.

 

Towards the end of the meeting, I suggested to CRT, that rather than promote these maps across the internet, they instead put a copy in with a pre cc1 and advise the patrol officer to refer to the map, rather than say "your not moving far enough".

 

This map is a guidance only, it's not covered by legislation or law. It is merely advice that you may or may not choose to take. I think it's a step forward and hope that most will see it for what it really is, just guidance.

 

Discuss.........

 

Why have I posted this now? I have been made aware that CRT are going to post the map on their web page.

Is this to go with the RMP or for all CCers even without the proposed RMP?

[mayalld]

The minority of boats that chose to ignore the current guidance also ignore the new maps. Then what? Are CRT not back to square one with nothing achieved other than throwing a load of money and resources into making some pretty coloured maps?

 

I fail to see how a few maps is going to make any difference to the current situation.

 

They remove ambiguity. If somethng comes to court, then nobody can rely on an excuse of a lack of clarity.

 

Equally, they will go some way towards preventing those who currently dole out crap advice on how to get round the law fro doing so.

[jenlyn]

Is this to go with the RMP or for all CCers even without the proposed RMP?

I suspect it will cover any ccer who comes under enforcement radar.

[Naughty Cal]

I suspect it will cover any ccer who comes under enforcement radar.

Why not all ccers rather than just those already bending the rules?

[jenlyn]

Why not all ccers rather than just those already bending the rules?

Not all ccers bend the rules, why would they need guidance if they are not on radar?

[DeanS]

Not all ccers bend the rules, why would they need guidance if they are not on radar?

 

Some folk would prefer to CC (within the guidelines) , rather than moor in a marina. If those guidelines say 2 miles, or 20miles or 200miles, it gives people a proper choice..whether they can or cant achieve what the guidelines expect.

 

At this moment in time, people cant actually make that decision, because there's no clarity.

 

 

 

eta there not their

Edited August 7, 2013 by DeanS