Jump to content

Continual cruising

Boston

By Boston
in General Boating

 Share

Featured Posts

alan_fincher Veteran II

alan_fincher

Posted
Posted (edited)

It would be interesting to know the figures for new boat owners. I wonder what proportion are now taking a CC license, and how this has changed in, say, ten years

 

My impression based on my conversations with new boaters is that the CC license is now becoming very popular as young people look to the canals to solve the problems of the housing industry

 

Richard

I don't have numbers easily to hand, but recall seeing quite a few in various meetings I have attended.

 

Certainly "boats without a home mooring" is the one continual growth area, against a background overall of licence numbers having either been largely static for several years, (some have tried to say actually in significant decline, but unless the numbers in annual reports are heavily suspect, they never seem to support that claim).

 

Currently around 5,000 licensed boats without a home mooring declared, I think - it isn't many years ago it was under half that number, but I'll leave the exact numbers to those who I feel sure have them readily to hand.

 

EDIT: Found this from 2012, so not fully up to date, but gives an idea...

 

In 2007 we had approximately 3,200 boats licensed as continuous cruisers. In July 2012 the figure was 4,400, an increase of 37% This compares with a 12% increase in total licences issued over the same period.

Note: Sally Ash always managed to keep falling back to references to "continuous cruisers", though of course strictly the numbers relate to "boats without a home mooring declared".

Edited by alan_fincher
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alf Roberts Proficient

Alf Roberts

Posted
Posted

Around 18%. I think they should have a say in the way the waterways are run.

 

I don't have numbers easily to hand, but recall seeing quite a few in various meetings I have attended.

 

Certainly "boats without a home mooring" is the one continual growth area, against a background overall of licence numbers having either been largely static for several years, (some have tried to say actually in significant decline, but unless the numbers in annual reports are heavily suspect, they never seem to support that claim).

 

Currently around 5,000 licensed boats without a home mooring declared, I think - it isn't many years ago it was under half that number, but I'll leave the exact numbers to those who I feel sure have them readily to hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

No one has a say on how the waterways are run other than CRT and the Trustees some attend meetings and voice opinions others sit at the keyboard and try and say how the waterways should be run

So according to that statement those attending these meetings are wasting their time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Naughty Cal Veteran II

Naughty Cal

Posted
Posted

Not if they want there opinion heard and in my case I ensure it is heard

Voicing your opinion is not however having a say on how the waterways are run. As you stated

 

"No one has a say on how the waterways are run other than CRT and the Trustees"

 

Which would imply that spending your time voicing your opinion at meetings is a waste of time and of no more use than voicing them here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alan_fincher Veteran II

alan_fincher

Posted
Posted

Around 18%. I think they should have a say in the way the waterways are run.

Every licence holder should be able to have a say in decisions being made about how the waterways are run.

 

It is probably fair to say that many CC-ers are now vocal enough that if they represent 18% of all licence holders, they are probably now getting at least 18% of the say.

 

Either way, it is probably fair to say also that whether "CC-er" or "non CC-er" maybe 80% (or even 90%) of all licence holders probably show no great interest in getting involved, and the vast majority are probably completely oblivious to this type of debate actively going on at all.

 

Those of us that chose to post here, (whatever our boating "status"), are only a very small subset, and certainly most other people simply do not have the same level of interest in how the canals are run, (or don't believe they could make any impact even if they were interested?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

Hehe so take away the licence before it is even issued that is thinking outside the box!!! Did I miss the law that gives CRT the power to do this?

 

Actually John I think they possibly could if they insisted that more proof was provided before they would be satisfied that the vessel would be used according to their requirements, This would not be too difficult for existing (genuine) CCers to provide but would be very hard for a new applicant....they would not be "refusing a licence" only insisting on a home mooring unless there was real proof that it would not be required

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

Voicing your opinion is not however having a say on how the waterways are run. As you stated

 

"No one has a say on how the waterways are run other than CRT and the Trustees"

 

Which would imply that spending your time voicing your opinion at meetings is a waste of time and of no more use than voicing them here.

I am simply correcting your statement that we should all have a say in how the waterways are run. We can however express an opinion
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rich Rising Star

Rich

Posted
Posted

 

So there is no problem anywhere, then?

 

Change the record, Tony!

So where does the problem lie? When have you been inconvenienced by boats not moving "the required distance" whatever that may be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

 

Actually John I think they possibly could if they insisted that more proof was provided before they would be satisfied that the vessel would be used according to their requirements, This would not be too difficult for existing (genuine) CCers to provide but would be very hard for a new applicant....they would not be "refusing a licence" only insisting on a home mooring unless there was real proof that it would not be required

Bit difficult if you are applying for a new licence for boat without a home mooring. I have a friend who is retiring next and will cc how does he prove he will cc?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
John V Veteran

John V

Posted
Posted

Bit difficult if you are applying for a new licence for boat without a home mooring. I have a friend who is retiring next and will cc how does he prove he will cc?

 

You asked a question for which I supplied a possible answer.....to this question, with difficulty possibly C&RT insisting on a home mooring for the first year but accepting a log on renewal that shows a pattern of movement meeting their requirements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cotswoldsman Veteran II

cotswoldsman

Posted
Posted

 

You asked a question for which I supplied a possible answer.....to this question, with difficulty possibly C&RT insisting on a home mooring for the first year but accepting a log on renewal that shows a pattern of movement meeting their requirements?

Again we can go round in circles firstly CRT do not have the power to do this secondly sounds like a ghost mooring as the mooring will not be used and thirdly you are suggesting that a guy who will be living on a pension should spend £2000 for something he does not need just to become a CCer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paul C Veteran II

Paul C

Posted
Posted

How?

 

A good suggestion might be to grant the CC licence in their first year but also provide extra information on what's required (ie what will satisfy CRT as bona fide navigation etc...) then issue follow-up letters in a couple of months if sightings reveal that they're not really cruising in accordance with the rules. Personally for me this is okay, because I don't necessarily agree that CRT should withhold a licence from a new applicant. HOWEVER they should use their powers a little more to withhold subsequent licences if they are not satisfied with a previous period's cruising style.

 

Answering the question directly, you could make a corrolary with planning permission. If a farm wants to build a slurry lagoon close to a resedential area, it would be unfair to deny them it; and it would also not be right to simply say "yes, go ahead". A proposal which acknowledged the issues at hand and techniques/working practices to deal with or minimise those concerns would be required and can be assessed.

 

Of course for our CC licence application example, a much less onerous requirement could be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.