Continual cruising

[LoneWolf]

 

So you are moored at point A, you move 2 weeks later 18 miles and arrive at point B, 2 weeks later you move 18 miles back to point A, 2 weeks later you move 18 miles to point B ...............ad-infinitum.

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT and you will have 'enforcement' applied.

 

now where does the OP say that this is their cruising pattern?

 

oh they dont do they - you just made it up

[John V]

 

now where does the OP say that this is their cruising pattern?

 

oh they dont do they - you just made it up

 

 

Sorry but reading all of the OP's posts that is what it sounded like to me too and what's more Alan's post was phrased as a question.

[Alan de Enfield]

LoneWolf, on 02 Oct 2014 - 10:16 AM, said:

 

now where does the OP say that this is their cruising pattern?

 

oh they dont do they - you just made it up

 

Did you read the last line of my post ?

(probably not, so to help you - here it is again)

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT ....................

 

However the OP does not give any indication what his true movements are, except that he does do at least 18 miles before he turns around and goes back to his original 'area'.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Alan de Enfield

[cotswoldsman]

 

So you are moored at point A, you move 2 weeks later 18 miles and arrive at point B, 2 weeks later you move 18 miles back to point A, 2 weeks later you move 18 miles to point B ...............ad-infinitum.

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT and you will have 'enforcement' applied.

36 miles a month about 400 mikes a year sounds like a lot of cruising to me

 

Did you read the last line of my post ?

(probably not, so to help you - here it is again)

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT ....................

 

However the OP does not give any indication what his true movements are, except that he does do at least 18 miles before he turns around and goes back to his original 'area'.

Ummmm which is his/her original area if they are moving every 14 days

[John V]

36 miles a month about 400 mikes a year sounds like a lot of cruising to me

 

Maybe....but not if it includes only two or three mooring spots and no home mooring

[MtB]

 

Did you read the last line of my post ?

(probably not, so to help you - here it is again)

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT ....................

 

However the OP does not give any indication what his true movements are, except that he does do at least 18 miles before he turns around and goes back to his original 'area'.

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

MtB

[Hawkmoth]

After receiving a second inappropriate patrol notice I found out that this was due to the warden's patrol range being limited and in order to stop being harassed by Canal & River Trust I had to take a photo of every place I moored to prove I was moving the required distance. Surely this isn't right?

You really should post on here your true cruising pattern if you think that it is within CRT guide lines. It will help those on here who believe you are trying to stay legal. Of course it may give ammunition to those on here who are less than supportive of the CC community.

Bob

[Boston]

Anyway getting back to ME. I am moving the appropriate distance, but 18 miles isn't a long distance and only being able to moor for 14 days per place its inevitable the warden will see me at the same places at least 3 times per yr, they really need to put a new system in place because this is harassment

[cotswoldsman]

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

MtB

Is this your concept of CCing? I know plenty of ccers that only cruise one area a lot of widebeams are restricted to just one area

[LoneWolf]

 

Did you read the last line of my post ?

(probably not, so to help you - here it is again)

 

If this is your range of movements then it is unacceptable to C&RT ....................

 

However the OP does not give any indication what his true movements are, except that he does do at least 18 miles before he turns around and goes back to his original 'area'.

 

Of course i did - why not just ask the question instead of making up a ridiculous scenario & phrasing it 'so you are at point A...'

 

And please engage your brain - what made you think that CRT would say the OP had to move 18miles every 2 weeks?

 

 

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

MtB

 

i disagree.

 

it might contradict your idea of CCing but that does not mean it is not withing the law

[phill]

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

MtB

 

No, sorry, it might contradict your idea of 'CCing' but that's not what the law says.

[Alan de Enfield]

lyraboat, on 02 Oct 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

You really should post on here your true cruising pattern if you think that it is within CRT guide lines. It will help those on here who believe you are trying to stay legal. Of course it may give ammunition to those on here who are less than supportive of the CC community.

Bob

 

 

Boston, on 02 Oct 2014 - 10:31 AM, said:

Anyway getting back to ME. I am moving the appropriate distance, but 18 miles isn't a long distance and only being able to moor for 14 days per place its inevitable the warden will see me at the same places at least 3 times per yr, they really need to put a new system in place because this is harassment

 

I believe that if the Patrol Officer only logged you at the same place 3 times per year, you would not be having this problem.

 

The assumption is that you are a boater without a home mooring (ie CCer)

 

If you are moving the "appropriate distance", and staying the "appropriate times" you will get much support here, however - to support you we would need to know what your cruising pattern is :-

 

For example do you stay somewhere for a couple of days and then move a mile, stay a couple of days, move a couple of miles and after a few months start on the return trip, or, do you move the appropriate distance, moor for 14 days, move onto the next 'parish' and moor for a couple of weeks, move on again, or start the return journey. Once you get back to where you started do you carry on past, or does your cruise start again by turning around.

 

If you simply cruise A to B to A to B to A etc then you are not meeting C&RT's 'rules'.

 

It is your choice as to whether you provide the information or not, but without it the forum can only speculate on the rights and wrongs of C&RT or yourself

Edited October 2, 2014 by Alan de Enfield

[phill]

You really should post on here your true cruising pattern if you think that it is within CRT guide lines. It will help those on here who believe you are trying to stay legal. Of course it may give ammunition to those on here who are less than supportive of the CC community.

Bob

 

"post on here your true cruising pattern" ? Are you having a laugh?

 

Why would anyone be interested in having "those on here" "believe you are trying to stay legal" ?

 

The OP was about the behaviour of CRT, nothing to do with the judge and jury of this forum.

[MtB]

I didn't mention what the law says. I mentioned the concept of CCing. The idea of not needing a home mooring because you are engaged in continuously traveling around the system.

 

Not continually shuffling up and down an 18 mile stretch of the Southern Oxford.

 

MtB

[kris88]

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

MtB

Depends on how large an area I would have thought

Regards kris

[alan_fincher]

 

Quite. The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts the concept of CCing.

 

No....

 

"The whole concept of a CCer having 'an area' contradicts your concept of CCing."

 

which is why this debate will never be settled on here, even when we get to the one thousandth new thread started on the topic.

 

I generally no longer get involved, but would remind you yet again, that whatever you want the rules to be, the actual requirement in law is only to satisfy "bona fide for navigation" - nothing more, nothing less.

 

The issue, as ever remains as interpreting what that means, but it is hard to see OP is not satisfying it, I think - or at least based on their description of their cruising pattern.

[phill]

I didn't mention what the law says. I mentioned the concept of CCing. The idea of not needing a home mooring because you are engaged in continuously traveling around the system.

 

Not continually shuffling up and down an 18 mile stretch of the Southern Oxford.

 

MtB

 

The MTB 'concept of CCing' - why would that be the arbiter of legal behaviour.

 

It's not a particulary intelligent debating tactic though often used by those who can't put together a more cogent argument. Make a statement with a false premise.

 

When did you stop beating your wife?

[Sabcat]

I instinctively side with the ccer in these things, whatever their pattern of movement. To my mind as long as a person isn't getting in the way of others or causing problems they should be left alone to get on with their lives without harassment.

[mayalld]

 

"post on here your true cruising pattern" ? Are you having a laugh?

 

Why would anyone be interested in having "those on here" "believe you are trying to stay legal" ?

 

The OP was about the behaviour of CRT, nothing to do with the judge and jury of this forum.

 

The OP came on here seeking to criticise CRT, and sought affirmation from people that what CRT was doing "isn't right"

 

Why would anybody here affirm that it isn't right without sufficient facts.

[Phil Ambrose]

I need help here, I thought that if you CC you had to demonstrate a progress around the system and that bridge hopping, even if they are 18 miles apart, is not within the spirit of the rules.

Just to say I am genuinely curious.

Phil

[alan_fincher]

I didn't mention what the law says. I mentioned the concept of CCing. The idea of not needing a home mooring because you are engaged in continuously traveling around the system.

 

But there is no requirement to "continuously travel around the system" - it's just that you believe there should be.

 

Forget the underlying law - CRT's current "guidance to boaters without a home mooring" makes no mention of needing to "continuously travel around the system".

[MtB]

 

But there is no requirement to "continuously travel around the system" - it's just that you believe there should be.

 

Forget the underlying law - CRT's current "guidance to boaters without a home mooring" makes no mention of needing to "continuously travel around the system".

 

I agree.

 

Setting aside what the law actually states, what does the concept of CCing actually mean?

 

The OP is probably complying with the letter of the law but not with the spirit of CCing, in my personal opinion.

 

Besides, to do a cotwoldman I must have missed the bit of law that mentions the term CCing.

 

Anyway, gotta go and mend some boilers now, need pay for my home mooring somehow!

 

 

MtB

[phill]

I need help here, I thought that if you CC you had to demonstrate a progress around the system and that bridge hopping, even if they are 18 miles apart, is not within the spirit of the rules.

Just to say I am genuinely curious.

Phil

 

A reference to the law that says that please

[Alan de Enfield]

 

But there is no requirement to "continuously travel around the system" - it's just that you believe there should be.

 

Forget the underlying law - CRT's current "guidance to boaters without a home mooring" makes no mention of needing to "continuously travel around the system".

 

But a judge has decided that 'shuttling up and down' is UN-acceptable

 

British Waterways v Davies in the Bristol County Court. The

 

Judge expressly found that Mr Davies’ movement

of his vessel every 14 days (whilst remaining on the same approximate 10 mile stretch of canal between Bath

and Bradford on Avon) was not bona fide use of the vessel for navigation

[alan_fincher]

I instinctively side with the ccer in these things, whatever their pattern of movement. To my mind as long as a person isn't getting in the way of others or causing problems they should be left alone to get on with their lives without harassment.

 

Also, I'm always actually relieved that the vast majority of boat owners on the canals don't want to put in large numbers of miles traversed each year. I am very happy that many don't go far at all, whether marina based, with permanent on-line moorings, or with no home mooring.

 

I already spend far too much time following people, or queuing at locks, and the worst possible result would be to have far larger numbers of boats permanently on the move.

 

When we had major, major water shortages down here a few years ago, with many of the lock flights still on very restricted opening times, we faced the bonkers situation that on the one hand BW were locking up the canal at key points to stop those of us who wanted to go somewhere actually being able to go very far at all, but in the meantime they were still moving on boaters with no home mooring, hence using the dwindling water supplies for people who would happily have moved less.