Visitor Mooring Survey

[cotswoldsman]

Oh dear are we all so serious and earnest today?

 

Although if you want to be more serious about it given that we were told that CRT do not wish to communicate with you guys and how sad and awful it was with 25 plus pages of teeth grinding and support it is not unreasonable to ask if it is all better now or something if has happened to change the outlook. It may seem to some the previous communication had an element of tantrum or "crying wolf" to it otherwise.

It was that they wanted to communicate in another way than via meetings organised by boaters. All that does not mean that we will stop ensuring boaters views are known to CRT and that they do not need to join an organisation to have a voice. When people find another way then we shall move on but until then we will do what we can.

[jenlyn]

Oh dear are we all so serious and earnest today?

 

Although if you want to be more serious about it given that we were told that CRT do not wish to communicate with you guys and how sad and awful it was with 25 plus pages of teeth grinding and support it is not unreasonable to ask if it is all better now or something if has happened to change the outlook. It may seem to some the previous communication had an element of tantrum or "crying wolf" to it otherwise.

Lol. Sometimes we have to use what we have at our disposal. That of course means in this day and age, forums and internet. If it achieves what we set out to do, it surely has to be valid.

[Dekazer]

I've just realised that we haven't included a category for traders/working boats. If that applies to you, please just select boat owner and answer the questions from there. Please also feel free to elaborate on your own experiences in one of the comment boxes

[churchward]

It was that they wanted to communicate in another way than via meetings organised by boaters. All that does not mean that we will stop ensuring boaters views are known to CRT and that they do not need to join an organisation to have a voice. When people find another way then we shall move on but until then we will do what we can.

OK. Does that mean CRT have clarified their position then?

[jenlyn]

OK. Does that mean CRT have clarified their position then?

It means we move on, along with CRT. Sally stated clearly on here what they wanted.

[churchward]

Lol. Sometimes we have to use what we have at our disposal. That of course means in this day and age, forums and internet. If it achieves what we set out to do, it surely has to be valid.

Hmmm I have heard "the end justifies the means" argument before to try and validate some pretty awful activities and is not one I would subscribe too.

 

That sounds (although may not be your intention or meaning) like you are trying to manipulate the forum members and or CRT in a particular way with half stories. If that was the case then who is being "used an abused" now? It would be a bit rich if so given that was what wa beng expressed by you guys to say how you felt about the about turn in attitude from CRT.

Edited August 20, 2013 by churchward

[jenlyn]

Hmmm I have heard "the end justifies the means" argument before to try and validate some pretty awful activities and is not one I would subscribe too.

 

That sounds (although may not be your intention or meaning) like you are trying to manipulate the forum members and or CRT in a particular way with half stories. If that was the case then who is being "used an abused" now? It would be a bit rich if so given that was what wa beng expressed by you guys to say how you felt about the about turn in attitude from CRT.

Thats not the case at all. I will leave you to your euphemisms. :-)

[MtB]

Quick enough to complete - but when I got to the end (or what I presume was the end) I finished up on the introductory page again.

 

It wasn't the end then.

 

I had this too. On about page 5 it dumped me back to the start. On clicking through the pages it had remembered my answers up to the page I was dumped out on. Second attempt I was able to continue to the end, where it told me I was finished. This is a problem that needs fixing John, or at least mentioning on the intro page.

 

Yes seemed a very unbiased survey. Thanks John.

 

MtB

[PaulG]

All working OK now, thanks!

[cotswoldsman]

Hmmm I have heard "the end justifies the means" argument before to try and validate some pretty awful activities and is not one I would subscribe too.

 

That sounds (although may not be your intention or meaning) like you are trying to manipulate the forum members and or CRT in a particular way with half stories. If that was the case then who is being "used an abused" now? It would be a bit rich if so given that was what wa beng expressed by you guys to say how you felt about the about turn in attitude from CRT.

Can I suggest we move on and see what happens. I am personally far more interested in boaters views on Visitor Moorings and feedback on the survey.

[novascotianboy]

Done - thanks for the survey John, Steve, and Lucy. How long will the survey run for (apologies if you've said this elsewhere!)

[dor]

 

It wasn't the end then.

 

I had this too. On about page 5 it dumped me back to the start. On clicking through the pages it had remembered my answers up to the page I was dumped out on. Second attempt I was able to continue to the end, where it told me I was finished. This is a problem that needs fixing John, or at least mentioning on the intro page.

 

Yes seemed a very unbiased survey. Thanks John.

 

MtB

Going through it again it seems it was the end! Just returned me to the start page instead of the Thank you page.

 

 

 

 

I will be tweeting about the survey, please do retweet me if you're on Twitter. I'll also share on Facebook, to try and access more people.

 

Lucy:

 

Will you also be responding via this forum? Like most people over the age of 15 (at least, the people I know), I don't do twitter and avoid Facebook as much as possible.

[cotswoldsman]

Done - thanks for the survey John, Steve, and Lucy. How long will the survey run for (apologies if you've said this elsewhere!)

I think to be meaningful during holiday time about 10 day but Lucy is the expert on that sort of stuff.

Going through it again it seems it was the end! Just returned me to the start page instead of the Thank you page.

 

 

 

Lucy:

 

Will you also be responding via this forum? Like most people over the age of 15 (at least, the people I know), I don't do twitter and avoid Facebook as much as possible.

It will be posted on here and elsewhere it is important everyone sees the results be warned it will be a long document.

[koukouvagia]

It's such a good survey I've filled it in twice - once on a laptop and once on a tablet. Don't let NBW get wind of this!

 

Seriously, shouldn't this be prevented?

[mango]

I am not sure about the lack of bias. Take for example, the question:

 

Please read the following and indicate below how you feel about it.

The Canal and River Trust could create new, basic, Visitor Moorings by providing mooring rings, ensuring depth at the bank, mowing the vegetation and erecting signage.

 

At first glance, the obvious answer is yes, but take this in the context of the fact that CRT funds are desperately needed for waterway maintenance. Having contractors do dredging and install rings is extremely expensive. A better and much cheaper alternative might be to restrict visitor moorings to 24 hours so that they can be used by more boaters.

 

I strongly suggest that if we are to have surveys they should be done by the Canal & River Trust, compiled by people who have been trained in composing unbiased questions, and done using security that prevents the results being manipulated.

[Dekazer]

It's such a good survey I've filled it in twice - once on a laptop and once on a tablet. Don't let NBW get wind of this!

 

Seriously, shouldn't this be prevented?

 

Realistically, if people really want to do it more than once, they can do. However, this is not a CRT santcioned survey, it's done purely by boaters for boaters - I hope people will recognise that and behave with integrity.

 

 

This sort of survey is not vulnerable to auto-completion like the NBW one was, but there are ways to bias the sample if you've got too much time on your hands We have asked in the intro for honesty, and I stand by that request.

 

If we wished to prevent repeat responses, we would have to send out emails to the people we wanted to respond, with a password. Even then I suspect people would find a way round it. We wanted to allow the greatest number of people to respond, so chose not to do this.

 

We have set certain limitations (e.g. people can only answer once on each machine) which might actually exclude some people from completing it (e..g couples with only one machine between them). We've had to compromise and rely on people's goodwill, so I hope you can understand the limitations of that.

 

The final report will address the limitations of the methodology.

 

I hope that helps

[cotswoldsman]

It's such a good survey I've filled it in twice - once on a laptop and once on a tablet. Don't let NBW get wind of this!

 

Seriously, shouldn't this be prevented?

Difficult to be a meaningful survey it needs to be open to everyone so for example I have completed it and using my phone for Stan who is 78 and does not do computers Edited August 20, 2013 by cotswoldsman

[Jerra]

I strongly suggest that if we are to have surveys they should be done by the Canal & River Trust, compiled by people who have been trained in composing unbiased questions, and done using security that prevents the results being manipulated.

Didn't the thank you page say that one of them was trained in such matters?

 

What makes you think CRT would draw up unbiased surveys?

[Dekazer]

I am not sure about the lack of bias. Take for example, the question:

 

Please read the following and indicate below how you feel about it.

 

The Canal and River Trust could create new, basic, Visitor Moorings by providing mooring rings, ensuring depth at the bank, mowing the vegetation and erecting signage.

 

At first glance, the obvious answer is yes, but take this in the context of the fact that CRT funds are desperately needed for waterway maintenance. Having contractors do dredging and install rings is extremely expensive. A better and much cheaper alternative might be to restrict visitor moorings to 24 hours so that they can be used by more boaters.

 

I strongly suggest that if we are to have surveys they should be done by the Canal & River Trust, compiled by people who have been trained in composing unbiased questions, and done using security that prevents the results being manipulated.

 

I hope you put your comments into the survey so they're included in the findings!

 

I would hope that CRT will make the most of online survey software to gather feedback from boaters - it's a good way to access a large number of people for relatively little cost.

 

You will see my comments about manipulationa above.

[jenlyn]

I am not sure about the lack of bias. Take for example, the question:

 

Please read the following and indicate below how you feel about it.[/size]The Canal and River Trust could create new, basic, Visitor Moorings by providing mooring rings, ensuring depth at the bank, mowing the vegetation and erecting signage.[/size]

 

At first glance, the obvious answer is yes, but take this in the context of the fact that CRT funds are desperately needed for waterway maintenance. Having contractors do dredging and install rings is extremely expensive. A better and much cheaper alternative might be to restrict visitor moorings to 24 hours so that they can be used by more boaters.

 

I strongly suggest that if we are to have surveys they should be done by the Canal & River Trust, compiled by people who have been trained in composing unbiased questions, and done using security that prevents the results being manipulated.

We have been looking at bringing in local councils to provide mooring rings, rubbish bins etc on areas they would like to regenerate. We have also spoken to some at the trust about it. We are working on it.

[Dekazer]

Didn't the thank you page say that one of them was trained in such matters?

 

What makes you think CRT would draw up unbiased surveys?

 

I have had training in research methods, yes. This was a bit of a rush job, I admit, as it was done in my spare time. I hope we've found a good balance though. I hope people also appreciate the value of 'qualitative' answers too - they will all be analysed and included in the final report

[steven wilkinson]

this is a survey that quite clearly says it is done by boaters, for boaters! I stand to be corrected, but should CRT create an unbiased, secure questionnaire, and offered it to boaters, boaters would have jumped at the chance - but they haven't. (Or if they have, I haven't seen it!)

 

That question was one that required a bit of thought for me - along with the £25 charge one - but I made use of the 'comments box on both occasions.

[Dekazer]

My final comment while I'm on my lunch break

 

So far, we have mainly received answers from owners/part owners.

 

Does anyone have any good ideas for reaching out to hirers as well? We have posted the link on many Facebook canal pages, and I've tweeted it. Would any of you be able to encourage hirers you know to take part?

 

Thanks all, keep the feedback coming!

 

Lucy

[cotswoldsman]

My final comment while I'm on my lunch break

 

So far, we have mainly received answers from owners/part owners.

 

Does anyone have any good ideas for reaching out to hirers as well? We have posted the link on many Facebook canal pages, and I've tweeted it. Would any of you be able to encourage hirers you know to take part?

 

Thanks all, keep the feedback coming!

 

Lucy

Lucy I will contact a couple of hire boat operators that I have contact with and ask them for suggestions but will have to wait until I am back on boat.

[mango]

 

I hope you put your comments into the survey so they're included in the findings!

 

I would hope that CRT will make the most of online survey software to gather feedback from boaters - it's a good way to access a large number of people for relatively little cost.

 

You will see my comments about manipulationa above.

The survey reset, so I don't know if any of my comments were recorded.