NBTA Press release: Distance not important in continuous cruising

[NBDensie]

Despair, that's what I feel about my licence money being wasted on such enforcement . I'm losing any of the optimism I felt about the waterways being in the care of a charitable trust very rapidly

So you dont believe there should be enforcement?

[Gordias]

You don't seem to want to read the relevant legislation. Or educate yourself about there actions, so what's the point

Regards kris

 

I read it months ago, though it was an older version - the same text is current, though the fines are a little larger. Then there was a discussion here which established CaRT have no practical means of enforcement.

 

As a result of that discussion I view claims that CaRT have "other powers they should be using" as just another form of "argument by denial":

 

... "there's no problem ... and anyway there are no hotspots ... except for the nice ones where there's a great community ... and anyway these are unfortunates who wouldn't have anywhere to live if they weren't on a boat in a nice area of London .... and anyway it's CaRT's job to resolve the economic and demographic issues which have distorted the UK housing market ....

Edited December 13, 2014 by Gordias

[jenlyn]

I read it months ago, though it was an older version - the same text is current, though the fines are a little larger. Then there was a discussion here which established CaRT have no practical means of enforcement.

 

As a result of that discussion I view claimsthat CaRT have "other powers they should be using" as just another form of "argument by denial":

 

... "there's no problem ... and anyway there are no hotspots ... except for the nice ones where there's a great community ... and anyway these are unfortunates who wouldn't have anywhere to live if they weren't on a boat in a nice area of London .... and anyway it's CaRT's job to resolve the economic and demographic issues which have distorted the UK housing market ....

I don't think you grasp much at all really, to be fair. You can't or won't look at the real world, preferring instead to look out from your own little box.

[madcat]

I believe that enforcement should be carefully targeted. CRT seems to be employing a sledgehammer to tackle a nut.

 

I'm not much bothered if people wander about in a fairly small area , as long as the boats have a licence and insurance and their owners are not threatening or criminal.

 

I'm very unhappy about the treatment meted out to some people and the spectacular amounts of money being wasted on such actions . I'm convinced that most issues could be solved by negotiation .

[NBDensie]

I believe that enforcement should be carefully targeted. CRT seems to be employing a sledgehammer to tackle a nut.

 

I'm not much bothered if people wander about in a fairly small area , as long as the boats have a licence and insurance and their owners are not threatening or criminal.

 

I'm very unhappy about the treatment meted out to some people and the spectacular amounts of money being wasted on such actions . I'm convinced that most issues could be solved by negotiation .

 

I think you will find the vast majority are solved by negotiation, but these never get reported. In a small number of cases boaters decide not to cooperate and ultimately there must be some sanction. The only enforceable sanction open to C&RT is to withdraw the licence on the grounds that the boater concerned isnt meeting the legal requirements and then to insist that the boat be taken off C&RT waters as it isnt licenced. Perhaps it would be better if fines could be imposed and enforced, but they cant unless the law is changed. And I cant see the law being changed because of parliamentary time.

 

The only way to minimise the time effort and cost taken up with such matters is for all boaters to follow the letter and spirit of the law.

[Tony Dunkley]

Does this mean that the position has changed and they now accept that they are liable for your costs?

 

... or is it just that the costs should be agreed prior to the hearing in case it goes against them?

No, there has been no change, only indications of a willingness to talk prior to the hearing of their 'no costs' Application.

[Phil.]

No, there has been no change, only indications of a willingness to talk prior to the hearing of their 'no costs' Application.

 

Just make sure you have a means of recording what they say, and you don't have to tell them you are doing it

[Jerra]

I believe that enforcement should be carefully targeted.

Purely out of interest should the police carefully target enforcement of speed restrictions? Only fine dirty cars or maybe cars over a certain age.

 

A rule needs enforced at all stages you can't say 80mph on the motorway at midnight is acceptable but not at 4 in the morning. Which is what targeting enforcement imp[lies to me, you pick and choose who you will take action against and who you won't.

 

What a nice fair equitable system.

[Dave_P]

I don't think you grasp much at all really, to be fair. You can't or won't look at the real world, preferring instead to look out from your own little box.

It's always a shame when these discussions descend to personal attacks.

[jenlyn]

It's always a shame when these discussions descend to personal attacks.

It's always a shame when someone comes along and attempts to interpret an opinion, as a personal attack!

[Gordias]

I don't think you grasp much at all really, to be fair. You can't or won't look at the real world, preferring instead to look out from your own little box.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

 

In the real world, CaRT (or a successor organization) will always be there to administer the canal system; they'll need a reliable and predictable income to cover their costs; they'll (almost) certainly recover those costs from canal users; they'll be responsible for "reducing the temperature" of hotspots; and they'll never be responsible for solving UK housing issues.

 

Since they have plenty of time before their subsidy is withdrawn, they can (and should) take their time establishing their infrastructure (which includes their income and means to influence the behavior of canal users).

 

IMO the odds of CaRT accepting responsibility for housing issues of any kind are close to zero. They are clearly aware of the secondary issues related to housing as well (for example I doubt they'll willingly change their policy on houseboat licenses).

 

 

This other world, where some boaters believe they can permanently ignore CaRT because they have a temporary "edge" due to poorly written legislation: IMO that one is a transient illusion.

 

Of course it's rational (though not always nice) for people to take advantage of the current environment, but I think it's foolish to assume it will last forever.

Equally, it's foolish to blame CaRT for acting rationally. Just like CMers and "ghosts", they do what makes sense for them.

Edited December 13, 2014 by Gordias

[mango]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

 

In the real world, CaRT (or a successor organization) will always be there to administer the canal system; they'll need a reliable and predictable income to cover their costs; they'll (almost) certainly recover those costs from canal users; they'll be responsible for "reducing the temperature" of hotspots; and they'll never be responsible for solving UK housing issues.

 

Since they have plenty of time before their subsidy is withdrawn, they can (and should) take their time establishing their infrastructure (which includes their income and means to influence the behavior of canal users).

 

IMO the odds of CaRT accepting responsibility for housing issues of any kind are close to zero. They are clearly aware of the secondary issues related to housing as well (for example I doubt they'll willingly change their policy on houseboat licenses).

 

 

This other world, where some boaters believe they can permanently ignore CaRT because they have a temporary "edge" due to poorly written legislation: IMO that one is a transient illusion.

 

Of course it's rational (though not always nice) for people to take advantage of the current environment, but I think it's foolish to assume it will last forever.

Equally, it's foolish to blame CaRT for acting rationally. Just like CMers and "ghosts", they do what makes sense for them.

Just ignore him and anyone else who posts unpleasant comments.

 

The sooner we have new legislation to help CRT deal with the current mooring problems the better, otherwise money that should be spent on maintenance will be spent on enforcement.

Edited December 13, 2014 by mango

[junior]

 

The sooner we have new legislation to help CRT deal with the current mooring problems the better

What mooring problems?

[Alf Roberts]

Just ignore her and anyone else who posts unpleasant comments.

 

The sooner we have new legislation to help CRT deal with the current mooring problems the better, otherwise money that should be spent on maintenance will be spent on enforcement.

exactly what mooring problems have you experienced?

 

( i apologise in advance if you find this unpleasant )

[b0atman]

What bit was unpleasant ?

[jenlyn]

It never ceases to amaze me at the number of "closet" anti cc posters on here.

 

[mango]

exactly what mooring problems have you experienced?

 

( i apologise in advance if you find this unpleasant )

 

exactly what mooring problems have you experienced?

 

( i apologise in advance if you find this unpleasant )

Not unpleasant at all. In recent years I've found it difficult to find an evening mooring in places on the South Oxford, Braunston, Sutton Stop, round London and the western end of the K&A, unless I moor up long before it's getting dark.

[Dave_P]

It's always a shame when someone comes along and attempts to interpret an opinion, as a personal attack!

Agreed! I'll stay vigilant, in case anyone does that.

[jenlyn]

Not unpleasant at all. In recent years I've found it difficult to find an evening mooring in places on the South Oxford, Braunston, Sutton Stop, round London and the western end of the K&A, unless I moor up long before it's getting dark.

Probably because it's "busy". Does everyone have to stay in their marinas when your out?

[Alf Roberts]

 

Not unpleasant at all. In recent years I've found it difficult to find an evening mooring in places on the South Oxford, Braunston, Sutton Stop, round London and the western end of the K&A, unless I moor up long before it's getting dark.

so, if you moored earlier you would be able to moor where you wanted to?

[mango]

Probably because it's "busy". Does everyone have to stay in their marinas when your out?

No, but I would like to see more moorings as 24 or 48 hours so that everyone has a better chance of visiting places. With scarce resources it fairer to share them. With free car parking the time permitted tends to be shorter in popular places.

so, if you moored earlier you would be able to moor where you wanted to?

Very probably.

[jenlyn]

Some should really try winter cruising. It's great, loads of empty visitor moorings, pounds full, no queue's for locks etc.....................hang on a minute, what does that say?

How come all the vm's are full in the summer months, but not winter, anyone care to hazard a guess?

[Delta9]

Some should really try winter cruising. It's great, loads of empty visitor moorings, pounds full, no queue's for locks etc.....................hang on a minute, what does that say?

How come all the vm's are full in the summer months, but not winter, anyone care to hazard a guess?

One can only conclude that CMers migrate to Africa over winter.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Some should really try winter cruising. It's great, loads of empty visitor moorings, pounds full, no queue's for locks etc.....................hang on a minute, what does that say?

How come all the vm's are full in the summer months, but not winter, anyone care to hazard a guess?

I tried winter cruising but it was no fun.

 

I much prefer to cruise in the summer holidays and always try to moor outside a pub at about 8pm. I do this so I can complain about all the liveaboards taking up the moorings.

 

Last year I tried to moor at the Greyhound at Sutton Stop but was prevented from doing so by a Continuous Moorer called Black Prince. This year he was still there.

 

How do they get away with it?

 

 

Edited December 13, 2014 by Allan(nb Albert)

[Alf Roberts]

Very probably.

ok.

 

so we know one thing; by definition your problem is not down to CM.

 

is the fact that if you arrived early you could moor at choice a sign of success? and the popularity of those places you wanted to moor.

 

where exactly is the problem?

 

eta; sorry I'll rephrase that - who is causing your problem?

Edited December 13, 2014 by Alf Roberts