£25 extended sunrise.

[MtB]

Less signs? Fewer, surely....!

 

 

MtB

[alan_fincher]

I also can't see the particular issue at this location regarding the rules. It has been 48 hours for instance from the Boat Inn to the tunnel for a long time so there is no change in the interval you can moor just a charge (the charge is a bit steep though) if you stay over that time. The only 14 days in a month total isn't much of an issue either.

Kind of irrelevant what it has been in the past, in my view, because the great effort that has been put into it now was to actually get it right for the future.

 

Very strong feedback said there was no need for a 2 day stay limit at these locations in the winter months, and CRT agreed they would make the winter stay times 14 days.

 

The 14 days was the answer they got by doing the consultation, so when they subsequently decided didn't like that answer they decided to change it for reasons we have failed to properly get to the bottom of. This has caused the confusion between winter stay times in the top pound now being 2 days for normal moorings, but attempted to be made 14 days for the disabled. Had they not changed what was agreed, none of this confusion would have occurred, and no further signs would now be required.

 

When we were at Stoke Bruerne on Christmas Eve there was one boat in the entire length from the disabled moorings to the tunnel. On that basis how can there possibly be any case to make that there is any need for overstay charges of £25 after just two days in the winter months? Allowing and enforcing 14 days there in winter should cause no issues at all that I can see, and would be fa less effort for them, if they are really serious about doing it.

 

EDIT: Because 3rd paragraph was incorrectly worded.

Edited December 29, 2013 by alan_fincher

[Tuscan]

Funny guy!

 

It doesn't work like that. You would need to read the signs that folk are moaning about to get the full idea.

 

I think it works exactly like that is meant to be a charge according to CRT not a fine or penalty, so I guess if you had the money you could stay there for 2 weeks and just pay the invoice when it arrives.

[alan_fincher]

+1

 

seems like complaining for the sake of complaining to me!

Except what is stated in the post you are endorsing is not true.

 

There were a significant number of new signs erected here, and each one uses up money CRT could spend on fixing something that is broken!

[churchward]

A significant number of new posts were installed as part of theinitiative. I was there when they were digging the holes, and barrowing them along.

 

The last reply I had from Matthew Symonds reckoned they were going to add more, by doubling up the ones between the disabled and non disabled moorings, (where currently the tiles detailing winter stay times have been levered off, because they were deemed too confusing!).

 

I sincerely hope common sense prevails, and they heed the strong feedback that they need less signs not more.

Well I pass there every few days. I saw no one adding posts but of course I take your word for it but it doesn't look over crowded. It seems the same to me. perhaps they put more signs in down below the lock after the Navigation?

I think it works exactly like that is meant to be a charge according to CRT not a fine or penalty, so I guess if you had the money you could stay there for 2 weeks and just pay the invoice when it arrives.

Not according to the signs. There is supposed to be no single stay over 7 days and even if you did 16 days stay would be 9 days over the "free" limit so woudl not cost an extra £50 but rather more!

Kind of irrelevant what it has been in the past, in my view, because the great effort that has been put into it now was to actually get it right for the future.

 

Very strong feedback said there was no need for a 2 day stay limit at these locations in the winter months, and CRT agreed they would make the winter stay times 14 days.

 

The 14 days was the answer they got by doing the consultation, so when they subsequently decided didn't like that answer they decided to change it for reasons we have failed to properly get to the bottom of. This has caused the confusion between winter stay times in the top pound now being 2 days for normal moorings, but attempted to be made 14 days for the disabled. Had they not changed what was agreed, none of this confusion would have occurred, and no further signs would now be required.

 

When we were at Stoke Bruerne on Christmas Eve there was one boat in the entire length from the disabled moorings to the tunnel. On that basis how can there possibly be any case to make that there is any need for overstay charges of £25 after just two days in the winter months? Allowing and enforcing 14 days there in winter should cause no issues at all that I can see, and would be fa less effort for them, if they are really serious about doing it.

 

EDIT: Because 3rd paragraph was incorrectly worded.

I do think it is a shame CRT have not made the VM mooring rules seasonal.

 

I agree also it is somewhat irrelevant what was there before except it was not brought up by me and I was trying to make the point that it is not that different as long as ones intent is only to stay as long as the signs allow for free.

Except what is stated in the post you are endorsing is not true.

 

There were a significant number of new signs erected here, and each one uses up money CRT could spend on fixing something that is broken!

Whilst I accept there have in fact been new posts (still doesn't look any different there to me) the post still stands true for me in that at that location at least the mooring rules isn't that big a deal. It was 2 days it still is 2 days VM stay above the lock to the Tunnel.

 

I also think if you are going to introduce new rules CRT needed to put up some explanatory signs.

 

There are plenty of people who know Stoke Bruerne who think that there were issues with the moorings there and over staying. I agree CRT already had the means to deal with it but have chosen to deal with it in this way. Time will tell if it works.

Edited December 29, 2013 by churchward

[matty40s]

Funny guy!

 

It doesn't work like that. You would need to read the signs that folk are moaning about to get the full idea.

 

Why is he a funny guy?

If I wanted to stay somewhere, I would book in advance. If I wanted to pay by credit card or debit card, I should have a number to ring.

Why does the museum not have an extended stay payment facility?

Why can you not call CRT and say "I wish to stop for 5 additional days after my allowed stay, can I pay now please?".......you can't, therefore it is a threat of an overstay penalty.

National Trust would not be allowed to stick signage everywhere in a significant site, why are CRT allowed.

This is Whyatts personal crusade, backed by the hire companies and the IWA members who wish to moor somewhere in August at 5pm because they don't have pins in their boats inventory.

[churchward]

Why is he a funny guy?

If I wanted to stay somewhere, I would book in advance. If I wanted to pay by credit card or debit card, I should have a number to ring.

Why does the museum not have an extended stay payment facility?

Why can you not call CRT and say "I wish to stop for 5 additional days after my allowed stay, can I pay now please?".......you can't, therefore it is a threat of an overstay penalty.

National Trust would not be allowed to stick signage everywhere in a significant site, why are CRT allowed.

This is Whyatts personal crusade, backed by the hire companies and the IWA members who wish to moor somewhere in August at 5pm because they don't have pins in their boats inventory.

Read the signs or phone CRT. Perhaps they will do as you suggest in the future.

 

As for the rest, Yada Yada Yada!

[alan_fincher]

Well I pass there every few days. I saw no one adding posts but of course I take your word for it but it doesn't look over crowded. It seems the same to me. perhaps they put more signs in down below the lock after the Navigation?

Before this initiative there were actually no signs on the moorings above the lock other than at the Southern end near the disabled moorings. None in the midde of the moorings. None at the tunnel end, (unless you count ones marking the winding hole).

 

Approaching from the tunnel end there used to be no signs stating that it was 2 days, so in fact I always reckoned it was fairly unenforcible, because unless you were going North you saw no signs until you were tied up there.

 

Just sticking to the bit above the locks, in addition to at least new poles at the North end, and in the middle, there area also new poles for the "Tunnel Waiting Area", and of course the two massive welcome boards at the tunnel and near the museum. It is proposed to install double posts between the disabled and non disabled moorings, but by Christmas Eve they still had not done this.

 

And yes, you are correct, there are several new ones in the "long pound". Also further new ones below the bottom locks.

 

Without actually counting, my estimate is the actual number of signs has easily doubled.

 

(I do have photos of what was there before, and much of what is there now, but as they have continued to tinker with them right up until recently, I couldn't claim to have a definitive set of everything that has ever been there throughout the entire process - many were still missing at "live date", and added later).

 

Although you have clearly got a lot of support for your post here, had you been at the review meeting CRT held on this, your views would not have been supported by the majority who attended and contributed. It was widely felt that the signage, the laeftlets and the web-site maps had all become far too complex, and that any future implimenation should avoid this level of complexity.

 

My challenge is that most of it was simply never needed in the first place, and I would say far more boaters agree with that statement than disagree, (in my experience).

Edited December 29, 2013 by alan_fincher

[Paul C]

If its Whyatt's personal crusade, does that mean there's no realistic chance of it spreading outside the SE region? Thus, a lot of the complaints about it and signatures on the petition etc which were based on this possibly being a pilot for a more widespread scheme now hold less validity. And if it did spread, then it would need similar crusades by regional waterways managers in other regions, thus forming a group crusade (or sorts) and not then being a personal one.

[Richard10002]

Except what is stated in the post you are endorsing is not true.

 

There were a significant number of new signs erected here, and each one uses up money CRT could spend on fixing something that is broken!

Your criticism is correct

 

Now Edited to endorse the bit I meant to endorse.

[jenlyn]

Yada Yada Yada!

IWA speak for "I can't argue with the truth"

[alan_fincher]

If its Whyatt's personal crusade, does that mean there's no realistic chance of it spreading outside the SE region? Thus, a lot of the complaints about it and signatures on the petition etc which were based on this possibly being a pilot for a more widespread scheme now hold less validity. And if it did spread, then it would need similar crusades by regional waterways managers in other regions, thus forming a group crusade (or sorts) and not then being a personal one.

My understanding from a conversation with the chair of the relevant part of the Navigation Advisory Group is that they are about to come out with a proposal that says actually CRT are attempting to control far too many visitor moorings as "short stay", and that many of those that currently are should simply revert to being 14 day stay times. (More to it than that, but that is the most relevant change proposed).

 

Interestingly this seems to be the complete opposite of what it was originally claimed is urgently needed in the South East Region, (or at least it does to me!).

 

In the meantime I am on the recently formed Boating Sub Group of the South East Partnership, and one of the main things that the SE Partnership wants to be determined by that sub-group is the VM policy for the South East.

 

I tried to ask at the inaugural meeting to what extent it is expected that "boating" policies will be set nationally and which will be allowed to vary regionally, and frankly didn't get a clear answer on the topic.

 

To me it seems that if you are going to have both national and regional groups advising on the way forward, the actual policy should first be set nationally, and only then should regional groups consider how it gets implemented on a local basis, (which could still reflect that "honey-pot" sites in certain regions are subject to particularly high demand for boats visiting versus mooring space available).

 

But what will actually happen, I am currently far from clear about. Hopefully it will eventually resolve itself into something sensible, because I can't see why boaters should suddenly see things handled in a different way simply because they have boated 10 miles down the cut, and ended up on waterways that fall under a different region or Partnership.

Edited December 29, 2013 by alan_fincher

[Leo No2]

Snip

 

To me it seems that if you are going to have both national and regional groups advising on the way forward, the actual policy should first be set nationally, and only then should regional groups consider how it gets implemented on a local basis, (which could still reflect that "honey-pot" sites in certain regions are subject to particularly high demand for boats visiting versus mooring space available).

 

Any policy should be set nationally (in any organisation for any policy) and local variations justified on empirical evidence that the national policy doesn't/won't work at particular places and that variation should be approved by the original policy makers so that a standard can be maintained. It seems to me that at the moment the tail may be wagging the dog.

[Tuscan]

We pay one license and IMO should be entitled to expect consistency in CRTs application of all aspects of mooring policy, charges,enforcement etc etc. At the moment it is unclear how policy is being driven, consultations, then sub groups of partnerships, then sub groups of CRT like NAG , then the latest questionnaire , next the first forum meeting next month. In the meantime their are press releases and meetings a plenty.

 

Meanwhile as one boater recently said there as many water taps in Foxton or Stoke Breune as there are in central London. Lets knock some heads together get a sensible policy around mooring that actual meets the needs of all boaters, accepting that at peak times some honey spots will be busy , get more dredged cut banks where boats can moor , create more "honey spots" with partnership support Leicester for example. And for Gods sake stop selling the existing VM's.

 

Then hopefully CRT can focus on the maintenance of the infrastructure, dredging, etc etc.

 

Right that's my New Year wish list sorted.

[Catrin]

Without getting further embroiled....

 

I like your pictures Matty. Sorry you couldn't make the traditional CWDF 'last weekend of the year' celebrations in Luffbra.

[churchward]

IWA speak for "I can't argue with the truth"

No not really just exasperation at those that won't hear it and just spout old bigotry.

Before this initiative there were actually no signs on the moorings above the lock other than at the Southern end near the disabled moorings. None in the midde of the moorings. None at the tunnel end, (unless you count ones marking the winding hole).

 

Approaching from the tunnel end there used to be no signs stating that it was 2 days, so in fact I always reckoned it was fairly unenforcible, because unless you were going North you saw no signs until you were tied up there.

 

Just sticking to the bit above the locks, in addition to at least new poles at the North end, and in the middle, there area also new poles for the "Tunnel Waiting Area", and of course the two massive welcome boards at the tunnel and near the museum. It is proposed to install double posts between the disabled and non disabled moorings, but by Christmas Eve they still had not done this.

 

And yes, you are correct, there are several new ones in the "long pound". Also further new ones below the bottom locks.

 

Without actually counting, my estimate is the actual number of signs has easily doubled.

 

(I do have photos of what was there before, and much of what is there now, but as they have continued to tinker with them right up until recently, I couldn't claim to have a definitive set of everything that has ever been there throughout the entire process - many were still missing at "live date", and added later).

 

Although you have clearly got a lot of support for your post here, had you been at the review meeting CRT held on this, your views would not have been supported by the majority who attended and contributed. It was widely felt that the signage, the laeftlets and the web-site maps had all become far too complex, and that any future implimenation should avoid this level of complexity.

 

My challenge is that most of it was simply never needed in the first place, and I would say far more boaters agree with that statement than disagree, (in my experience).

My puzzle is that given it was 48 hours before and it is now above the navigation I can't see what is different. If it was unclear before and I agree it was muddled it is now abundantly clear.

 

We can all enjoy at 48 hour visit there as we did before and if you want to stay longer there are the 7 day moorings below the Navigation.

 

The 14 days in any one month of course is different but I can't see that inconveniencing anyone or the 7 day in any one stay an issue.

 

I think it would be sensible to relax rules in the quiet months although it still should be monitored so that it is not abused in my view.

 

So in a nutshell who is hurt or inconvenienced by this initiative at Stoke Bruerne ? Who is being wronged and how?

 

Like you say what was there before is irrelevant I think given that we have the new rules whether it was needed or not in any ones opinion is also irrelevant. It is here and I think needs to be given time to settle and see if it is worthwhile.

 

I think there are many who do not think as those you mention at your meeting I think the survey that was published recently gave some indication of that. I agree though that there will be many people on both sides of the debate and many in the middle who don't really care.

Edited December 29, 2013 by churchward

[DustyDave]

When we were at Stoke Bruerne on Christmas Eve there was one boat in the entire length from the disabled moorings to the tunnel.

 

That's a bloody long boat. Where did you moor?

 

Dave