Is C&RT's Boat/Location Logging System Fit for Purpose?

[cotswoldsman]

Parish boundaries!! You would have to buy hundreds of maps to establish them and not sure if they even exist now for places like London and Birmingham. I guess you can just sneek over the boundary. I have had one email today from a boater that has found a 48 hour mooring cut in half between 2 places also had loads of emails for places where due to lack of towpath maintenance and dredging it would be impossible to moor anyway

Edited August 16, 2014 by cotswoldsman

[Jim Riley]

Parish boundaries!! You would have to buy hundreds of maps to establish them and not sure if they even exist now for places like London and Birmingham. I guess you can just sneek over the boundary. I have had one email today from a boater that has found a 48 hour mooring cut in half between 2 places also had loads of emails for places where due to lack of towpath maintenance and dredging it would be impossible to moor anyway

The mention of Parish came from other posts as a way to define place, your example just goes to show how confusing it is and that further clarification is needed, so that we can cruise within the guidelines.

[Guest]

That actually reads as if you may be agreeing with me, and, if so, it could land you in big trouble. I have been told that C&RT read these Forums.

I don't understand, how can I possibly be in 'big trouble'.

 

I boat within what is required of me by CRT, I am happy for CRT to read the forum, why wouldn't I be?

[Tony Dunkley]

The spacings do seem very 'random'

 

If we look on the Trent - then there are four 'places' in 38km of river (Meadow Lane to Newark) , but when we get onto the canal at Meadow lane there is only 200 yards between the lock and Bridge 1a - that 200 yards is a 'place'

 

Then between bridge 13 and bridge 14 (another 3-400 yards) is another place.

 

Places are certainly NOT parish's

 

It would be very easy to CC / work / live in Nottingham shuffling around 4 or 5 places (unless there are requirements to do x number of different 'places' in a year) and not being much more than a 15 minute bus ride away from the centre.

Yes, you should be OK doing that Alan, particularly when you consider that C&RT have just invited some bloke with an unlicenced mobile houseboat to cruise around for free in that area.

Edited August 16, 2014 by tony dunkley

[Paul C]

I for one would love to see Mr Parry come on here (or by any public means) and address what does look like bullying tactics. I'd also like his view on how any sensible conclusion or evidence can be derived from poorly sampled and audited data. Maybe political suicide, maybe not.

 

It does seem that the media is being used more and more to create self policing by fear...even the BBC seem to be doing it...maybe the only way out is to switch it off and enjoy life while we can....

 

Not onto this forum but Richard Parry certainly put a lot of time into meeting boaters all over the country, by setting up a number of boaters' meetings and their format was very open. Did you attend any of them? If not, it was an opportunity passed by for you to ask some of the pertinant questions which you're interested in here, directly.

[Higgs]

Ok really nice of CRT to spend all that money and time on 15% of boaters to avoid a misunderstanding and the very small amount of boaters that get a section 8 and given plenty of warnings and time to straighten their act will take no notice of the maps and carry on as usual let's discuss the maps in a couple of years time

 

And another reality is.....there's a great many boaters who hardly ever or never use the canal, but that isn't going to be a justification for not spending money maintaining it for those that do use it frequently. The map is an aid. By and large, it has been well received.

[bassplayer]

Not onto this forum but Richard Parry certainly put a lot of time into meeting boaters all over the country, by setting up a number of boaters' meetings and their format was very open. Did you attend any of them? If not, it was an opportunity passed by for you to ask some of the pertinant questions which you're interested in here, directly.

The 'TD' and 'Place' issues have only recently come about on here so I wouldn't have been able to discuss them with him. However, you have a point.

 

I was invited to the Leicester meeting as they had obviously logged me mooring there, unfortunately I was back South by the time I received the invite. If there are any coming up in the future around Beds/Herts I will try to attend. It would be nice to meet some of you in person.

[cotswoldsman]

 

And another reality is.....there's a great many boaters who hardly ever or never use the canal, but that isn't going to be a justification for not spending money maintaining it for those that do use it frequently. The map is an aid. By and large, it has been well received.

Not sure where you are going with this now, but I have no problem with you thinking all that the time and money was spent on continuous cruisers not quite sure where that fits in CRT maintaining the canals for everyone that wishes to use it

I have said nothing against the maps as such and think they will be a useful aid for Continuous Cruisers

[Higgs]

Not sure where you are going with this now, but I have no problem with you thinking all that the time and money was spent on continuous cruisers not quite sure where that fits in CRT maintaining the canals for everyone that wishes to use it

I have said nothing against the maps as such and think they will be a useful aid for Continuous Cruisers

 

I was getting ready to go out and the point I was trying to make was a bit scatty or incoherent.

 

However, if the map is found to be a useful aid to (15%) CC'ers, the money spent will have been usefully spent.

[jenlyn]

Having received my movements log in data form from CRT, I can say quite categorically that the system is not fit for purpose.

It does not log when you have left a mooring place and it does not list you as moving when you are sited actually moving. It does not log you as filling with water, or using facilities. It just logs you as being at that place.

 

If a programme is not loaded with relevant data, it will not give a true picture of what's happening.

The whole thing is in effect useless and unreliable in its present form.

[NigelMoore]

From Sarina Young [CaRT FoI officer] -

 

To explain, the information held within our corporate systems can be extracted and displayed in many different ways depending on the reason or purpose it is needed. Each of these different views are referred to as ‘transactions’. The transaction you have queried with Stuart displays two different sets of location information.

 

a. “FLoc. Affected” is the location the boat was sighted at. If the boat moves, these locations will vary for each sighting and, if the boat stays in one place, these will be the same.

 

b. “Functional Location” is the location of the home mooring . . . The reason it shows in this way is because the information displayed within the “Functional Location” field in this particular report is taken only from the information we hold currently. For that same reason it does not change as the sightings go back in time. It is not necessary for the boat sighting information to display all previous home mooring locations as there are other transactions we can use to view this information. I’m sorry if this has confused you.

 

. . .

 

However, this does not mean that our system is unfit for purpose or that any “secure and valid audit trail” is lacking. It is not.
The system also records and retains a full audit log of the boat record. This audit log records the details of every amendment made to the information we hold about the boat. It provides the date and time of any changes along with the employee who made that change. It also notes the previously recorded detail along with the updated recorded detail.

[jenlyn]

From Sarina Young [CaRT FoI officer] -

 

To explain, the information held within our corporate systems can be extracted and displayed in many different ways depending on the reason or purpose it is needed. Each of these different views are referred to as ‘transactions’. The transaction you have queried with Stuart displays two different sets of location information.

 

a. “FLoc. Affected” is the location the boat was sighted at. If the boat moves, these locations will vary for each sighting and, if the boat stays in one place, these will be the same.

 

b. “Functional Location” is the location of the home mooring . . . The reason it shows in this way is because the information displayed within the “Functional Location” field in this particular report is taken only from the information we hold currently. For that same reason it does not change as the sightings go back in time. It is not necessary for the boat sighting information to display all previous home mooring locations as there are other transactions we can use to view this information. I’m sorry if this has confused you.

 

. . .

 

However, this does not mean that our system is unfit for purpose or that any “secure and valid audit trail” is lacking. It is not.

The system also records and retains a full audit log of the boat record. This audit log records the details of every amendment made to the information we hold about the boat. It provides the date and time of any changes along with the employee who made that change. It also notes the previously recorded detail along with the updated recorded detail.

Several of my sightings are whilst I am under propulsion, so it is coming up as my being there. Flawed.

[Paul C]

Several of my sightings are whilst I am under propulsion, so it is coming up as my being there. Flawed.

 

Unless you use a teleporter, during travelling you'll be where they logged you for a brief point in time.

[jenlyn]

Unless you use a teleporter, during travelling you'll be where they logged you for a brief point in time.

I didn't expect you to get the point being made, so no worries. :-)

[Graham Davis]

Having received my movements log in data form from CRT, I can say quite categorically that the system is not fit for purpose.

It does not log when you have left a mooring place and it does not list you as moving when you are sited actually moving. It does not log you as filling with water, or using facilities. It just logs you as being at that place.

 

If a programme is not loaded with relevant data, it will not give a true picture of what's happening.

The whole thing is in effect useless and unreliable in its present form.

 

Several of my sightings are whilst I am under propulsion, so it is coming up as my being there. Flawed.

 

Tosh!!

The system is there to just show where your boat is, nothing more than that, therefore it does that perfectly.

The problem is that YOU are expecting it to do a lot more than it was designed for.

That has been stated here numerous times.

 

If you want to a system to record more details perhaps you will be willing to design and pay for it.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Graham Davis

[raymondh]

Why should I care what or where anyone logs my movements, in my boat, car, bike, walking etc

I know and I dont give a *(&^ who else knows

25 pages of pure tosh

Ray

[Paul C]

Why should I care what or where anyone logs my movements, in my boat, car, bike, walking etc

I know and I dont give a *(&^ who else knows

25 pages of pure tosh

Ray

 

Basically, to avoid being the next "Tony Dunkley".

[jenlyn]

Tosh!!

The system is there to just show where your boat is, nothing more than that, therefore it does that perfectly.

The problem is that YOU are expecting it to do a lot more than it was designed for.

That has been stated here numerous times.

 

If you want to a system to record more details perhaps you will be willing to design and pay for it.

You may think it's tosh, but having seen how it works, I can only be amazed at the primitive system.

I expect it to be accurate and accountable for the decisions it helps to make.

Your first sentence merely shows your total ignorance of what the system does and is expected to do.

[b0atman]

What a waste of manpower employing people just to log boats as they see them .

Now call them lengthsmen with responsibility for vegetation and maintenance of their stretch and all will be well with the world.

Why not build them houses near to locks and they can be classed as management and not need so many admin people in offices.

[Graham Davis]

You may think it's tosh, but having seen how it works, I can only be amazed at the primitive system.

I expect it to be accurate and accountable for the decisions it helps to make.

Your first sentence merely shows your total ignorance of what the system does and is expected to do.

 

I fully understand what the system is designed to do: to show where your boat is at the time it is recorded. Nothing more than that, and it seems to be doing that perfectly, even if it is primitive.

You are expecting (nee demanding) that it should do something different, and to do something that it is not designed to do.

As said, if you want a system to do something different then design and pay for it.

[Alan Saunders]

Parish boundaries!! You would have to buy hundreds of maps to establish them and not sure if they even exist now for places like London and Birmingham. I guess you can just sneek over the boundary. I have had one email today from a boater that has found a 48 hour mooring cut in half between 2 places also had loads of emails for places where due to lack of towpath maintenance and dredging it would be impossible to moor anyway

There is some confusion between 'church' (eclesiastical) and 'civil' parish boundaries. The Ordnance Survey maintain a digital map of civil parish boundaries but they are not named. These boundary maps are available from a few sites for no charge e.g. sketchmap.

 

As Flocal suggests, the 'places' on the long pound, 15m of the K&A, are reduced to much less than the eleven civil parishes defined by the OS map. e.g. their Woodborough includes Wilcot, arguably a senior parish. Within these Civil Parishes there are additional 'places'; hamlets, large farms etc. East of Crofton top lock CRT suggest a very long day to their next defined 'place'.

 

In the Greater London area I believe there are no longer any civil parish boundaries, only very large Boroughs. Within those Boroughs a mile or less will see you in a new clearly identiified 'place'.

 

Alan

[jenlyn]

I fully understand what the system is designed to do: to show where your boat is at the time it is recorded. Nothing more than that, and it seems to be doing that perfectly, even if it is primitive.

You are expecting (nee demanding) that it should do something different, and to do something that it is not designed to do.

As said, if you want a system to do something different then design and pay for it.

Have you actually seen one of these boat sighting documents?

 

An example, if I was logged as seen at Braunston on the 3rd of August, then no more sightings until I was logged again at Braunston on the 29th August, what would that suggest to you or a third party?

[Graham Davis]

As a third party it suggests that you were at Braunston on the 3rd and 29th of August.

That is obviously what CRT want it to record, and it does.

Therefore it meets the requirements of their system.

 

You seem to be demanding that there is a system in place that records your position every 24 hours, so how do you propose to write, set up and pay for such a system?

Perhaps you would like every boat to be chipped and to have chip readers on nearly every bridge, lock or water point, since that would obviously meet your requirement?

Or perhaps there should be lots more Boat Recording people employed to do this?

And who will pay the vastly increased licence fees that would incur?

[Tuscan]

As a third party it suggests that you were at Braunston on the 3rd and 29th of August.

That is obviously what CRT want it to record, and it does.

Therefore it meets the requirements of their system.

 

You seem to be demanding that there is a system in place that records your position every 24 hours, so how do you propose to write, set up and pay for such a system?

Perhaps you would like every boat to be chipped and to have chip readers on nearly every bridge, lock or water point, since that would obviously meet your requirement?

Or perhaps there should be lots more Boat Recording people employed to do this?

And who will pay the vastly increased licence fees that would incur?

How then do you enforce 48 hr moorings for example?

[Alan Saunders]

Tosh!!

The system is there to just show where your boat is, nothing more than that, therefore it does that perfectly.

The problem is that YOU are expecting it to do a lot more than it was designed for.

That has been stated here numerous times.

 

If you want to a system to record more details perhaps you will be willing to design and pay for it.

 

 

You may think it's tosh, but having seen how it works, I can only be amazed at the primitive system.

I expect it to be accurate and accountable for the decisions it helps to make.

Your first sentence merely shows your total ignorance of what the system does and is expected to do.

Anyone with an 'O' level in Physics can calculate the minimum sample rate and error.

Anyone involved in law enforcement knows that the 'law' must be written such that it is enforceable by clear evidence.

 

CRT do not need to strictly measure and enforce the 14 day rule. Like minor offences such as posession of drugs for own use and minor traffic offences, overstaying could be dealt with by a verbal/written warning or a fixed penalty; e.g. £25/day for overstaying on a VM?

 

OTOH, I do not see that forcing a boat moored in the middle of nowhere to 'move on', possibly to a popular mooring, will benefit anyone. As I understand it parking your vehicle on the road is 'obstruction of the public highwway' but we all seem to think that is OK.

 

This case (Dunkley) appears to be about CRT obtaining a legal decision for boats that do not regularly return to their home mooring. Without adequate legal representation the Judge in Tony's case may make a decision that many boaters find unnaceptable.

 

Alan