What sort of future?

[nbtafelberg]

I was thinking about the future of our waterways.

 

Being out on Saturday on the Thames was amazing, as usual NOTHING was moving except one Environment Agency boat. (Good chap, did the lock for us!). Anyway...

 

Imagine if there were NO liveaboards on our waterways - just like a lot of navigations already do and others want....

 

All that was left was a tiny bit of freight traffic and a collection of hire boats...

 

Being a liveaboard means that we are here 12 months of the year, keeping the rivers and canals alive...

 

Just a thought what do others think...

[nigel carton]

paul,

 

if I could live aboard tomorrow, I would jump at the chance, but... wife, mortgage, kids etc.. but my life is on the cut/rivers, be it either boat deliveries, bsc inspections or my own boat, i do ok. Live aboards are VERY important, and we must not forget that. They are some of the nicest people iv'e met, as well as us land hoggers of coarse!

[fuzzyduck]

I'm desperately trying to think of a way to make a living on "the cut" My current job bores me rigid.

 

I've long had an affinity with the water, and still dreamed about "running away to sea" when i was in my mid 20's

 

I think the Waterways would be all the poorer without the liveabords and the waterways community they create. IMHO it's the community that creates the unique culture, and unique industry, and I think if the livabords disappeared then the hire industry would become soley reliant on smaller "disposable" GRP cruisers.

 

even when i've been walking down the towpath i've struck up conversations with people who have retired and are moving from place to place, and i'm counting the days till I can do the same.

 

my 2c

[Sue]

even when i've been walking down the towpath i've struck up conversations with people who have retired and are moving from place to place, and i'm counting the days till I can do the same

 

Keep counting, tis a lovely retired life... not as 'continuous moorer cruisers' but as 'continuous cruisers'. Keeping on the move according to the 'rules' is just great..... It is lovely not to have a mooring you know, it makes for an active retired life. I just love the 'rules', keeps us both very active

[bottle]

Hear hear

 

We are in the process of selling the house, to buy and live aboard and

 

CONTNUOUSLY cruise.

 

bottle

[John Orentas]

Paul.

 

"Imagine if there were NO liveaboards on our waterways - just like a lot of navigations already do and others want....

 

All that was left was a tiny bit of freight traffic and a collection of hire boats..."

 

You seem to have left out of your little equation the vast majority of boats that are currently on the system. We who keep our boats in marinas or other official moorings and live in boring houses during the week. It was very largely through pressure from recreational boaters and land based enthusiasts that the waterways system has been restored and improved into the condition we see it today.

 

"The liveaboards" came along latter after the bulk of the work had been done. I do not recall any great clamour from people wanting to set up home home on the derelict and de-watered ditches that where the Rochdale and Huddersfield Narrow canals, nor do I remember more than a tiny number of them being involved in the restoration movement. However the mud had barely settled out of the water before collections of "liveaboards" moved into the more attractive areas.

 

I certainly do not have an issue with people who legitamately live on their boats but don't give the impression that they are in some way the backbone and soul of the waterways.

[NB Willawaw]

Variety is the spice of life. It takes all sorts and I think the variety of rec cruisers, liveaboards, canoeists, fishermen, on the UK network is just right.

I really do believe that canals should be for everybody. The UK network is largely unique in the world and when I travel and tell friends in other countries about canals and nb's they are amazed.

It would be nice to develop the network further and I applaud the work of the various bodies that do that.

[Oliver]

Paul

 

Where in your scenario do those of us who have our own boats but don't liveaboard come? Do you class us as 'hire boats'?

 

Why would a 'liveaboard' which stays on its moorings all the time (not you I know) do more for the canal system than someone with their own boat who does not liveaboard but takes their boat out regularly.

 

What about the shared ownership boats which are cruising the canals for probably between 40 and 48 weeks of the year?

 

And what about all those hire boats either introducing people to the canals or giving people the opportunity of getting their canal fix, without having to buy a boat and move out of their house.

 

We started out as hire boaters, moved on to shared ownership and now have our own boat, but we are unlikely ever to be permanent liveaboards

 

All of us, hire boats, liveaboards, shared ownership and 'own boaters' have an interest in the canals and all contribute to the variety on the cut and to keeping it alive.

[nbtafelberg]

Interesting Responses....

 

I do agree with you all... But what I'm saying is the waterways are not FAVOURABLE to liveaboard boats.

 

(perhaps I didn't express that). Its amazing the response from those of you who wanted to live aboard as well!

 

I'm not saying for a moment that liveaboards are any better than anyone else on the waterways....

 

Just trying to see how others feel (liveaboards and non) about the attitude towards us. I do know of boats where I am that never move, some of them are bought new and are imaculate! It's sad really.

Edited February 1, 2005 by clevett

[dor]

I would think that the attitude towards liveaboards from other boaters depends on attitude, just the same as any other sector in life.

 

If you live aboard, keep the area around you tidy, pay for your mooring and licence, don't hog resources, are pleasant to the people around you and generally behave in a civilised manner towards your fellow humans - then you are an asset to the canal system and society. I know several liveaboards who fall into this category.

 

Regrettably there are many liveaboards who seem content to opt out of society, but still expect society to support them. They create a filthy mess, moor up on visitor moorings for weeks on end, are abusive to anyone who makes the mistake of saying hello, don't pay their way, and often attract others of a similar ilk who then create floating shanty towns. I don't see why my money should support these, nor why I should have to put up with them in my vicinity.

 

Then there are some who fall in between the two. Anybody who cruises regularly knows all three types.

 

You may take my view as being one of a middle class tw*t - but I suspect it is the view of the majority. I would say that there are plenty of examples where the waterways ARE favourable to liveaboards.

 

Sorry If I sound off the wall, - it's been a long day.

[nbtafelberg]

Oh yeah

 

Been a long day for me to, been getting orders through our website which was exciting.

 

Anyway - I know what you mean. Mind you if you go down the River Wey Navigation you see a lot of "abandoned" boats, they look like the owners have forgotten they own them....

 

So I know what you mean...

 

Are we saying that the answer is to regulate the liveaboard community in the sense of the quality of the boats? (or anyone elses boat?)

 

Boat safety for instance?

[ChrisK]

My mooring is by a live-aboard - it gives you a kind of secure feeling.

[Big COL]

Regrettably there are many liveaboards who seem content to opt out of society, but still expect society to support them. They create a filthy mess, moor up on visitor moorings for weeks on end, are abusive to anyone who makes the mistake of saying hello, don't pay their way, and often attract others of a similar ilk who then create floating shanty towns.  I don't see why my money should support these, nor why I should have to put up with them in my vicinity.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Paul

 

Dor is referring to the boat owners that my friend calls, THE GREAT UNWASHED, I have always taken it to be applicable to both the owners, and their boats. You cannot regulate society. There will always be a small section that even if you were to give them a brand new house, or boat in twelve months it would look like a slum, unfortunately its the nature of the beast. Its something that we all have to live with.

This does not help the reputation of liveaboards, but thats only to the ill informed regular boaters understand this problem and judge accordingly, its not difficult to judge when there is scrap and rubbish piled up all around, but to the non boater it certainly gives the wrong impression. For some reason it doesn't seem to have the same effect on house dwellers or at least not to the same degree, strange that, people seem to be more tolerant when its applied to houses.

As long as these boats are legal then it has to be the case of live and let live whether we like it or not.

[nbtafelberg]

Yes I agree Colin, very true.

[gringogordo]

My boat is very tatty. I've had it a year and a half and as it was a rainy summer I started work on the inside rather than the outside (as I had intended). After getting burgled I decided that maybe it was better to have it look scruffy anyway.

 

I don't really understand all the heated feelings. Being honest being the kind of slob I am I giggle to myself at all the "boat polishers" and I imagine they laugh/turn their noses up at slobs like me. I have a safety certificate and a license though and so I really don't think its any of their business (or how much brass polishing they do is mine).

 

I am a liveaboard (and don't have a mooring although having moved out west I would like to get one now) but I agree that people who don't move their boats regularly for more than 2 or 3 weeks at a time just aren't playing the game (unless they are lucky enough to have found a reasonably piced mooring near where they want to be). Other than that I can't see why it matters to anybody other than the individual boat owner whether someone is living on the boat or just visiting ? I understand why so many little factions evolve, it seems natural really, but I really don't understand why it all gets so heated between them. As for other people paying for liveaboards I've read this a couple of times now and don't understand. If BW/EA enforce licence fees (which seem to be getting quite hefty now) then who is getting away with what. I haven't payed poll tax for the year I have lived aboard (I paid before) but that is because I can't get a residential mooring and there is no room in the system for unusual cases (boo hoo). If your upset about that complain to the council be be more open minded in the way they operate (and provide similar refuse services etc!) I work and pay income tax and I don't see which other people are supporting me.

 

Ben.

[John Orentas]

Ben.

 

I don't quite know what has happened here, the original topic was telling us what a splendid bunch of people they who live on their boats are, how they are the salvation of the waterways. I don't think there was any differentiation between the 'brass polishers' and the 'slobs' to use your words, or even between the official and unofficial. Certainly my response was aimed at liveaboards generally.

[gringogordo]

Although I deviated from the topic as I started writing. My main point was that it seems irrelavant to me whether people are living on board or not (which I guess probably means I'm in some agreement with your original point). There are a variety of types of people who have boats in either case. I don't really understand why this is such a division. And I don't really see the cleanliness or neatness of a boat as a

helpful factor in making judgements about the person or boat in question. Although I didn't express that so well ... (!)

 

But as I have (at least) read twice now that liveaboards are being subsidised by 'others' whether its other boaters or society (or space monkeys !) I was just stating that I can't understand how this is the case. I don't look at licenses so I don't know if there is a problem but I would think its probably harder to get away without having a license if your always on the towpath and inviting the attention of BA ... But no one has explicitly stated that they are talking about licenses so I don't know if this is the point at all ...

 

Cheers,

 

Ben.

[Khayamanzi]

Personally I enjoy seeing the occasional cluttered boat dotted around the system. Some of the quirky boats people obviously live on add spice and variety to the cruise. There is something nice about turning a corner in a remote place and finding someone living there who obviously enjoys the peach and tranquility of the place.

 

Although I am somewhat 'boat proud' and like to keep a tidy boat I agree that it shouldn't matter if people liveaboard or not.

 

As a point of interest I used to display an RBOA sticker on the boat but took it off as I found some people, (other boaters,) were not so friendly when meeting them at locks with this on - I felt there was a snobbish attitude by some towards me so removed the sticker - Sad really!!

[Richard Lacy]

Reading a topic the other day as to why people liked canals - I seem to remember one of the threads was FREEDOM . To me that means to do whatever you like with your lifestyle , boat , appearance etc as long as it does not impinge on anyone elses Freedom. However although most people pay lip service to this thought , there is a very strong jealousy" element around in the boating fraternity usually led by "you are getting something , I cant get " and you couple this with the class system that exists in boating , unfortunately it means that the minority group are the ones that get the brunt of the hassle . In this case is liveaboards , numerically the smallest group and less likely to be able to stand up for themselves .

 

As far as I am concerned I dont care if anyones a scruffy liveaboard or a multi millionaire with a £200000 new boat - to me they are all just BOATERS - tolerance in all things - lifes too short for anything else.

 

Richard

 

Liveaboard and proud of it !

[roger]

gringogordo, I have read that several times too. I do not think there is an actual sense of trying to understand the situations on this forum. Liveaboards are slated for a varitey of reasons, one of these being that they supposedly dont contribute because they dont have moorings etc etc. They do contribute, because they do help amongst many other things, to provide a presence of security and if one does go and talk to those on scruffy boats you wil often find they are friendly too, they are just in situations that have not been amenable to their circumstances. I do not see how marinas contribute to security except they are there to show the vandals and hooligans that boaters are keeping their posessions behind high wire fences, and that eventually tips the balances because some see these marinas (in the same way as some these new fangled posh classy housing estates behind security gates and entryphones) as evidence that boaters are class toffs (which I am afraid is something that is becoming more and more in evidence on the waterways) and it will increase the vandal element disproportionately. I have witnessed events that have occured that do show that this has happened and we cant turn a blind eye to it. I realy dont care what people say about my thoughts I have gone past caring about the snide comments have been directed at my posts, but I do know that the equations are not being looked at fairly and are not being analysed properly because people want to present an image of canals that is clinical. It is important that other boaters are present on the canals at all times, I always feel a sense of security when I see boaters and if there are no liveaboards etc then the future is not so bright for the canals.

[Alastair]

It isn't livaboards that are the percieved problem, it is people who don't genuinely cruise continually, and don't pay for a mooring. There is a shortage of moorings in many places. Imagine, you are a continuous cruiser, you arrive at a popular place and find all temp moorings taken by people who don't cruise, have been there for months. You'd feel a bit annoyed - the temp moorings are set aside for people who are moving through, or pulling up for a night.

[dor]

Seems to me there is a confusion here between liveaboards and continuous cruisers. Liveaboards ,whether staying on one mooring or moving around, have every right to do so, providing they pay the appropriate fees. No problem with that.

 

It is the squatters, those who hog visitor moorings that are the problem, whether liveaboards or others, who upset people, especially when they are not licenced. And why shouldn't those people get upset - what are the visitor moorings for?

 

Don't have any problem with liveaboards - would rather like the opportunity ot do it myself.

[roger]

The forum clearly mentioned liveaboards - not CC's. People are using the two terms as if they were not synonymous. They are but each one is being used in a different context as if they were completely separate and nothing to do with the other.

 

The term 'continuous cruiser' is a misnomer for a start and the avoidance of paying for moorings as some CC's/liveaboards are said to be doing, is a rather unfair slant especially in view of the rules for living on the waterways - eg living on boats is not encouraged but it has always been the done thing - for various factors that have got lost in the mists of time. Do we want boats or do we want vandalism?

 

Vandalism - I noticed that in one location at least there are several boats that can be seen with 'tags' - or remains of the tags graffiti artists have applied on their sides - its not just the 'scruffy' boats that have been hit but the more posher ones too) hence the security factor is essential, I can never understand why people slate CC's/liveaboards when the ironic converse is that there is an important security factor to be considered. As for moorings I have been through this before so I wont bother to elaborate.

[gringogordo]

I wouldn't disagree with that. I don't stick to the (new?) 24/48 hour rule on visitor moorings but I have never stayed over a week personally (stay longer on the towpath). But I would like to make a slightly weak point about perceptions ...

 

I came up to Bradford on Avon a couple of weeks ago and after having seen very little traffic for the previous few weekends assumed that the full visitor mooring (East side of the lock) was full of LA/CC hibernating for the winter. I cruised on grumbling to myself (and this is from someone who wanted to stay on a 24 hour mooring for a week!). But fair enough when I looked on the following Monday it was almost clear. I have only seen the Thames and the K&A and don't claim much experience but I do think there's an extent to which once some people have convinced themselves that there is a problem they will see the problem all around them. (Although I freely admit that this is a small piece of anecdotal nonsense, and that lots of you will have seen the same boat on the same spot for months on end ...!)

 

Cheers,

 

Ben.

[David Schweizer]

The Visitor Moorings either side of Bradford on Avon Lock are well supervised by all sorts of people and, as a consequence, overstaying is a very rare occurence. Ironicly the worst offenders for overstaying on visitor Moorings in the Bradford on Avon area are BW themselves, last year they had a widebeam workboat tied up on the Avoncliffe 48 hour moorings (immediately opposite the notice detailing the overstay charges!) for more than five weeks, and only moved it after formal complaints were made. It then sat on the 14 day section for another month!