Reasons for not allowing continuous on line mooring.

[John V]

On your first two points

If you take London and one or two other hot spots out of the equation. The general theme that boat living is more expensive than house living, to a large degree probably holds true.

Obviously there are exceptions and it also depends on the size, age and type of boat.

There are certain large expenses involved in living on a boat (providing you are going to maintain the boat to a good standard) that can't be avoided and if you can live economically .....well you would also have lived economically in a house.

I am inclined to come in early with warnings about living on a boat, its more because I have seen some nice people over the years, who have started living on a boat wearing rose tinted spectacles. After a bad winter or some major breakdown they have rapidly become very disillusioned and have had difficulty extracting themselves and going back to bricks and mortar.

I hope that when it looks like they are going to be "a proper boater" (and doing it because they want to not because its just a place to live) that I am then as supportive as I am able.

 

I live on a boat because I love it I have often told people that the only way I want to leave the boat is in a wooden box.

 

I have sympathy for people who are looking to live on a boat in one of the "hot spots" for financial reasons

and are looking to move as little as possible to keep near work/schools etc

The problem is that by doing this they are putting a strain on a system that is only there at all because of the efforts of dedicated enthusiasts

My fear is that if it is allowed to become housing dominated the system will collapse as a unified item

If you live on a boat that just uses the minimum distance of canal, to water tap or to pumpout and back then moneys that should be for lock maintenance and bank stabilisation or dredging will be used to provide more water points, more rubbish facilities, more pumpout and elsan points in the busy areas

It's not exclusive as most boat owners also live in a house because they can afford both...it's just that some seem to complain about those who can only afford a boat....

 

as for this it doesn't deserve an answer but I will give it one anyway.....the ones that can afford both are contributing more to the system than those who have just the one...people who have a holiday boat generally have a mooring often in a marina they also pay a licence and they also pay rates on their house...this post is just very jealous

[mayalld]

I know. I wasn't asking expecting a straight answer because there are a lot of factors. I don't even want to know.

 

I was more wondering how it's possible to say it's both cheap housing and yet more expensive than living on land. I can't be bothered to search for quotes, but it's the same people making both these assertions.

 

Either it's not cheap housing and modern life has driven a section of the comunity onto the water, or it's cheaper to live on a boat than on land. You can't have your cake and eat it.

If you do it legitimately, it isn't cheap

 

If you just ignore the rules you don't like it may well be cheap

[boathunter]

It's not exclusive as most boat owners also live in a house because they can afford both...it's just that some seem to complain about those who can only afford a boat....

Indeed they do. Perhaps they're showing their insecurity? Perhaps they have some regret that they flogged themselves to attain house and boat and thought they'd done rather well for themselves, particularly after getting over that last heart attack. Then some Johnny-come-latelys cuts to the chase and go straight for the boat. Doh!

 

Just sayin. I have no view on the matter, but it's interesting to discuss and throw in a few possibilities. :smilie:

[Delta9]

If you do it legitimately, it isn't cheap

 

If you just ignore the rules you don't like it may well be cheap

Rubbish. I do it "legitimately" and after I have taken into account my mooring, license, maintenance, etc.. I would have to spend a further £4,500 per year on emergency repairs to make it cost the same as renting a flat in my area.

[boathunter]

If you do it legitimately, it isn't cheap

 

If you just ignore the rules you don't like it may well be cheap

So your saying that what swings it to either cheaper or more expensive is the cost of a mooring.

That sounds plausable, if you're scraping along every penny counts. A few thousand a year saved would be like like a whopping tax free pay rise for some.

The downside from a housing point of view is being expected to move every 14 days, even if it's not very far.

So to make it less attractive as a housing for it's own sake option, all CRT have to do is enforce rules in a away that costs probably quite a palty amount but tips it into being as precarious and expensive as house dwelling.

 

I've read on here that it's demonstrable that CART have the legal right to fine £100-ish here and there for causing obstruction, and no doubt for overstaying! If I was on a shoestring and got hit by a few of those, it might put me off boating.

 

That's too simple isn't it.

Just to add, personally I wouldn't want to put anyone off anything. None of my business if people want to cram themselves in that there London be it in housing or on a canal. Good luck to them. Same for Bath/Bristol.

Edited October 4, 2014 by boathunter

[David Schweizer]

If you do it legitimately, it isn't cheap

 

If you just ignore the rules you don't like it may well be cheap

 

But to be fair Dave, that is not what he said, he actually siad " ....it's cheaper to live on a boat than on land." which is almost certainly true if do not have a home mooring, and cruise continuously. I have friends who did that for quite a few years, and the cost of continuously cruising was significamtly less than running their former house in rural Somerset. They cruised well within the rules and covered the whol;e system several timesm rarely staying in one place for more tha two or three days,

 

Admittedly my friend was a very practical person with an engineering background, so maintenance costs were minimal, and they kept their boat in beautiful condition which meant it never needed any emergency repair etc. The one drawback was that they sold their house when they moved onto the boat and house prices rose more than the interest on their investments, but when they moved off the canal the boat sold for significanltly more than they payed for it, and they were still able to buy a home in the North Midlands.

Edited October 4, 2014 by David Schweizer

[Alan de Enfield]

To fully evaluate the difference in costs you also need to incude an element for the capital invested, depreciation or appreciation.

 

A boat will have been purchased and used your capital which could have been invested elsewhere and given you a return (allbeit a small one for the last few years)

A boat will be depreciating in value - your £40,000 invested may be worth £20,000 or even £10,000 in 20 years time (£1,000 / £2000 per year depreciation)

A rented flat is money 'thrown away', you will never own it.

A house / flat purchased will probably double in value over 20 year period.

 

Costs / values are just examples not firm or guaranteed figures.

 

To be truly comparative you should also look at the opportunity costs - the hour it takes you to cruise to the water point could, on 'land' be usefully used to do an extra hours' work - earning more.

 

You cannot just take your 'running costs' and compare them - but -

 

My house council tax is £250 per month, my boat mooring costs are £233 per month

House Insurance £178, boat insurance £115

House maintenance £400 per annum (over the last 10 years) Boat maintenance (painting, blacking, engine service etc) £800 per annum.

Boat licence £800 per annum

Home cental heating & Elec £2000 per annum, Boat diesel & coal £800

 

Approximate totals :

Home £5578 pa

Boat £5315 pa

 

House 4000 sq feet

Boat 270 square feet

 

No mortgage on house and no finance on boat.

[mayalld]

 

But to be fair Dave, that is not what he said, he actually siad " ....it's cheaper to live on a boat than on land." which is almost certainly true if do not have a home mooring, and cruise continuously. I have friends who did that for quite a few years, and the cost of continuously cruising was significamtly less than running their former house in rural Somerset. They cruised well within the rules and covered the whol;e system several timesm rarely staying in one place for more tha two or three days,

 

Admittedly my friend was a very practical person with an engineering background, so maintenance costs were minimal, and they kept their boat in beautiful condition which meant it never needed any emergency repair etc. The one drawback was that they sold their house when they moved onto the boat and house prices rose more than the interest on their investments, but when they moved off the canal the boat sold for significanltly more than they payed for it, and they were still able to buy a home in the North Midlands.

Two things;

 

1) Are we comparing like with like? You need to consider not an average sized home but a home of a similar size to the boat.

2) costs have increased over recent years

[bassplayer]

...this post is just very jealous

What is it you think I'm jealous of? So do you own a house then? I think your reply shows insecurity on your part if anything...

 

I'm very happy just having my boat home thanks...

[John V]

What is it you think I'm jealous of? So do you own a house then? I think your reply shows insecurity on your part if anything...

 

I'm very happy just having my boat home thanks...

 

Now where did you get the idea I have a house as well?, You obviously don't read the posts you shout about

[bassplayer]

Now where did you get the idea I have a house as well?, You obviously don't read the posts you shout about

 

Believe it or not I don't read every post here...so do you own a house then?

[John V]

Believe it or not I don't read every post here...so do you own a house then?

 

You certainly don't read the posts to which you reply

[BlueStringPudding]

Wrong.

 

The right to have no home mooring is predicated upon bona fide navigation.

 

Now let us assume that at some point in the future we arrive at the point where we get an objective test of what is bona fide navigation and that this test involves (say) a minimum 100 miles every year.

 

Your theory is that we will still have 100 boats on the towpath, just moving further.

 

My theory is that a fair few (those who pretend to cc now) will not want to play by those rules and will either leave the canal or take a mooring.

Don't state I'm wrong. How arrogant!

 

My point, if you missed it, is that irrelevant of how frequently boats have to move they still have to moor up! The number of boats doesn't change. So it's complete and utter gonads to make out that not wanting to have to slow down for moored boats in any way justifies the length of time another boat is allowed to moor. Boats will still be moored whether they've not travelled at all or whether they travel every fourteen days or every day. And it's equally misguided to think that boaters who for some reason have chosen boating as a hobby to travel around in a hurry, will benefit in any way by not having to slow down for moored boats. Completely different argument and irrelevant to the OP.

[bassplayer]

You certainly don't read the posts to which you reply

Surely a yes or no is easier...

[b0atman]

with a house its a big cost for holidays with a boat its up anchor and a weigh

[John V]

Surely a yes or no is easier...

 

read the posts is easier but if you are going to be pathetic......no I don't own a house, flat , shed or any other land based properties

[mayalld]

Don't state I'm wrong. How arrogant!

 

My point, if you missed it, is that irrelevant of how frequently boats have to move they still have to moor up! The number of boats doesn't change. So it's complete and utter gonads to make out that not wanting to have to slow down for moored boats in any way justifies the length of time another boat is allowed to moor. Boats will still be moored whether they've not travelled at all or whether they travel every fourteen days or every day. And it's equally misguided to think that boaters who for some reason have chosen boating as a hobby to travel around in a hurry, will benefit in any way by not having to slow down for moored boats. Completely different argument and irrelevant to the OP.

And how arrogant to reply without actually reading what I wrote!

 

If there was strict enforcement of CCing, and a zero tolerance of pretend CCers, then a proportion of those CCers would take moorings.

 

Consequently the number of boats moored along the towpath would reduce

[bassplayer]

read the posts is easier but if you are going to be pathetic......no I don't own a house, flat , shed or any other land based properties

Thanks for the straight answer. BTW, I'm not being pathetic, there are many boaters who live aboard who also own a property. Some rent them out as income.

 

So going back to my original question, what is it you think I'm jealous of?

[weeble]

Don't state I'm wrong. How arrogant!

 

My point, if you missed it, is that irrelevant of how frequently boats have to move they still have to moor up! The number of boats doesn't change. So it's complete and utter gonads to make out that not wanting to have to slow down for moored boats in any way justifies the length of time another boat is allowed to moor. Boats will still be moored whether they've not travelled at all or whether they travel every fourteen days or every day. And it's equally misguided to think that boaters who for some reason have chosen boating as a hobby to travel around in a hurry, will benefit in any way by not having to slow down for moored boats. Completely different argument and irrelevant to the OP.

But there is a flaw in the argument.

 

You only have to slow down to pass a boat when it's moored up. Taking this argument to its limit; if everybody moved at the same time every day there would be no moored boats to slow down for. So, logically, boats that don't move for days/weeks/months on end exacerbate the problem........ In'it

 

 

Standing by for someone now to point out that if nobody ever moved we'd not have to slow down either

[John V]

Alternativly, if it's cheaper to live in a boat and that is the primary cause of people wanting to live on a boat, IMO nothing will change until it becomes as expensive as living on land.

 

So, which is it? Is it cheaper to live on a boat than on land or not?

 

 

It's not exclusive as most boat owners also live in a house because they can afford both...it's just that some seem to complain about those who can only afford a boat....

 

You were quoting the top post.........the complaints about the behaviour of some liveaboards comes from all sorts of boatowners many like me are liveaboard but play by the rules....You imply that it is only those who can afford both are complaining......as I say it reeks of jealousy

[bassplayer]

But there is a flaw in the argument.

 

You only have to slow down to pass a boat when it's moored up. Taking this argument to its limit; if everybody moved at the same time every day there would be no moored boats to slow down for. So, logically, boats that don't move for days/weeks/months on end exacerbate the problem........ In'it

 

 

Standing by for someone now to point out that if nobody ever moved we'd not have to slow down either

Ahem...if everybody moved at the same time we'd be meeting a boat at every bridge and none of us would get very far...

[cotswoldsman]

If you do it legitimately, it isn't cheap

 

If you just ignore the rules you don't like it may well be cheap

I can assure you if you cruise legitimately (whatever that is) it is a lot cheaper than living in a house.

[boathunter]

I can assure you if you cruise legitimately (whatever that is) it is a lot cheaper than living in a house.

 

It could be said that the cheapest way to own a boat is to live on it then?

 

And also that living on your boat brings boating within the reach of many who could otherwise not afford one?

[bassplayer]

You were quoting the top post.........the complaints about the behaviour of some liveaboards comes from all sorts of boatowners many like me are liveaboard but play by the rules....You imply that it is only those who can afford both are complaining......as I say it reeks of jealousy

I think you're clutching at straws there...you can imply what you like...

 

So you know where I'm coming from.....I also agree with playing by the rules but I get the impression some 'better off"' boaters are condemning 'less well off' boaters without seeing the big picture...It's also quite possible that works both ways...

 

There seems a lot of angst going on this forum today...maybe we need a group hug....

[John V]

I can assure you if you cruise legitimately (whatever that is) it is a lot cheaper than living in a house.

 

I agree within limits (I'm just looking at a quote to drydock high pressure blast and fresh 2 pack.....AAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH!)