Jump to content

Non Tidal Thames Threat !


Serenity Malc

Featured Posts

Most live aboards respect the environment so is it the 'live cheaply' bit you have a problem with?

 

No, not at all - it's the bit below in bold that I object to -

Using rivers and canals solely as somewhere to live cheaply with no regard or affinity for that environment is bad for all.

I would challenge the first part of your statement above.

 

It's quite understandable that with the high costs of housing people get desperate for somewhere to live and use canals and rivers to solve that issue. What sticks in my craw are those who make no effort to adapt to that style of living by dumping their rubbish on the towpath and their ordure in the cut.

 

Up in my neck of the woods there are several groups of liveaboards, tucked away quietly away from the main run. They have 'stuff' all over the place - but try to manage it. Even though it's some distance to go, they transfer their waste and get fresh water using a dinghy - about a mile or two away. Now I have respect for those, and will respond cheerily if you acknowledge their existence with a cheery wave.

Not for the others.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not at all - it's the bit below in bold that I object to -

Using rivers and canals solely as somewhere to live cheaply with no regard or affinity for that environment is bad for all.

I would challenge the first part of your statement above.

 

It's quite understandable that with the high costs of housing people get desperate for somewhere to live and use canals and rivers to solve that issue. What sticks in my craw are those who make no effort to adapt to that style of living by dumping their rubbish on the towpath and their ordure in the cut.

 

Up in my neck of the woods there are several groups of liveaboards, tucked away quietly away from the main run. They have 'stuff' all over the place - but try to manage it. Even though it's some distance to go, they transfer their waste and get fresh water using a dinghy - about a mile or two away. Now I have respect for those, and will respond cheerily if you acknowledge their existence with a cheery wave.

Not for the others.

 

If anyone thinks the majority of boaters don't respect the environment they need to travel a bit further around. I've seen very few boaters dumping rubbish and crap in the cut (although I'm sure there are the odd few).

 

The problem is that some people come on here and make wild claims about the 'majority' of boaters when most of it is their minds eye. You may well have a localised problem but the idea that every finically challenged person wants to live on a boat, and that the waterways will become a ghetto is rubbish.

 

I'm sorry to have appeared over sensitive over the last day or so but I'm really beginning too believe that there is a plan by some to force CC'ers (well everyone) to have a home mooring. My question is why? When I saw the news report last night the word 'unsightly' was used by a local councillor. Isn't this just about snobs attempting to socially cleanse the waterways? (hiding behind my question mark now!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is Richmond, I wonder what the average house price is?

Regards kris

 

Edited to add 2014 prices in lieu of 2013 prices

 

Last year most property sales in Richmond Upon Thames involved flats which sold for on average £452,472.

Terraced properties sold for an average price of £820,308,

While semi-detached properties fetched £1,047,417.

 

Richmond Upon Thames, with an overall average price of £744,291 was more expensive than nearby Kingston upon Thames (£479,746), Merton (£548,502) and Wandsworth (£677,935).

 

The priciest area within Richmond Upon Thames was Petersham (£1,759,801) and the least expensive was Hanworth (£271,514).

 

During the last year, sold prices in Richmond Upon Thames were 15% up on the previous year and 27% up on 2012 when the average house price was £586,205.

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does seem there is a concerted effort by Richmond council, EA and CRT to clear a certain kind of boater from the waterways.

 

 

I don't think so.

 

I'm sure if I pitched up in a shiny boat speaking with a posh BBC newsreader accent I'd be subjected to exactly the same enforcement.

 

Therefore it is not your 'certain kind of boater' being targeted. It's all boaters.

 

 

MtB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone thinks the majority of boaters don't respect the environment they need to travel a bit further around. I've seen very few boaters dumping rubbish and crap in the cut (although I'm sure there are the odd few).

 

The problem is that some people come on here and make wild claims about the 'majority' of boaters when most of it is their minds eye. You may well have a localised problem but the idea that every finically challenged person wants to live on a boat, and that the waterways will become a ghetto is rubbish.

 

I'm sorry to have appeared over sensitive over the last day or so but I'm really beginning too believe that there is a plan by some to force CC'ers (well everyone) to have a home mooring. My question is why? When I saw the news report last night the word 'unsightly' was used by a local councillor. Isn't this just about snobs attempting to socially cleanse the waterways? (hiding behind my question mark now!)

 

I don't know whether your comment was made directly to my post or just as a general comment - but nothing I said was about boaters in general. I'm sure or hope that liveaboards who do that because they like the lifestyle and enjoy boating, take care not to spoil the environment - though that can be very difficult if there are no 'facilities' within a practical distance. Those who just want housing may be less inclined to bother. Exactly who and how many fall into either classification is quite beyond me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic started quite reasonably - but as often is the case - it's descended into mud slinging (!) - which is a shame. Using rivers and canals solely as somewhere to live cheaply with no regard or affinity for that environment is bad for all.

It has been said in another thread that liveaboards 'openly' empty their sewage into the cut - even though there are facilities nearby.

For the "Teddington mob" there are no facilities at all - no rubbish, no water, no pumpout, no elsan on site, for their use.

 

These boats are moored upstream of Teddington Lock and therefore come under the jurisdiction of EA.

As discussed elsewhere it appears that the river bed up to Staines is not only owned by the Riparians owners but also they can control what is placed in the river bed including pilings.

 

I must be blind, but I can't see any mud in what I wrote. Perhaps you would be kind enough to point it out.

 

It IS a fact, as I stated, that such craft would not get onto the Grand Union via Brentford and Thames Lock because it is always manned.

 

It is NOT a fact, as you claimed, that ALL such craft are moored above Teddington. Slumboats have been observed at both Brentford and Isleworth during the past few months.

 

But, factual inaccuracies aside, I am in general agreement with your views.

 

So I am not quite sure what your point is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that pilings in the river is a somewhat overstatement of the feeble attempts of the Teddington liveaboards to try to circumnavigate the 'attached to land' definition of being moored.

As previously mentioned, it would only take one of the many Party boats on the Thames or a few days of rain to shift any temporary scaffold pole arrangements. They are only a foot or so from the bank.

I walked down the towpath from West Molesey to Hampton Court today and watched 8 or 10 hi-vis wearing officials, of which many appeared from a police people carrier, apply tickets to the half dozen of so sheds at Garrick's Lawn at Hampton. So they really are going for it.

 

Serenity Malc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that pilings in the river is a somewhat overstatement of the feeble attempts of the Teddington liveaboards to try to circumnavigate the 'attached to land' definition of being moored.

As previously mentioned, it would only take one of the many Party boats on the Thames or a few days of rain to shift any temporary scaffold pole arrangements. They are only a foot or so from the bank.

I walked down the towpath from West Molesey to Hampton Court today and watched 8 or 10 hi-vis wearing officials, of which many appeared from a police people carrier, apply tickets to the half dozen of so sheds at Garrick's Lawn at Hampton. So they really are going for it.

 

Serenity Malc.

I have a couple of questions concerning what is happening in LBR, one of which I asked earlier but didn't get a reply to, you referred on post 32 to ''illegal boaters and boats'. Are these 'illegal' because of the new bylaw or are they illegal in some other way? Assuming that these boats have been permanently moored in the area what did they do on the occasions when the Thames goes into flood? They've had a lucky year this year but last year I wouldn't have wanted to be on the river Jan - Mar time, how did they secure their boats then and why do they now think a couple of scaffold poles is going to be any use?

Finally, given the overall cut in funding I cannot see how the local Police would have any interest in enforcing this new bylaw. From recent comments by Hogan-Howe I would imagine that they would bat any enforcement to Richmond Borough itself. I may believe that local Police may have accompanied the Council enforcement officer (the hi-vis wearing officials) to prevent any Breach of Peace as they serve notices but I would need to be convinced that the local Police have any interest in the matter whatsoever other than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is disgusting behaviour on the part of LBR.

 

Here we have a bunch of peaceful folk who have sacrificed all the comforts of home in order to live in traditional river-based dwellings which clearly have an amenity value for tourists and land-based residents of Richmond who can observe their quaint appearance and the medieval lifestyles of the floating shack, for example using the energy-saving natural flush of the current to wash away their detritus in the same way that happens in wonderful societies like those living on/near the Ganges in India. Moreover these pleasant and simple folk forgo the formalities and benefits of having planning permission and paying council tax, and contribute to the community at large by sharing their roads, policing and local public services.

 

Why move them on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To comment on WV's questions .... I meant by 'illegal' boats that there are many unlicenced sheds there. Illegal boaters because they each presumably have owners / masters who are now breaking the new LBR bylaw. However, from living here for a number of years I happen to be aware of some of their habits of collecting other peoples possessions, use and sale of illegal substances and that's before any thought is given to their UK status.

I absolutely no idea how they all got on in last years floods ....... I was plenty busy keeping my own craft off the bank and accessible. I used 5 metre and 2 metre scaffold poles with scaffold clips to survive ...... but then I was out of the main stream.

Loddon has kindly posted a link to prove my comments on the police involvement in this action ........ since you seem to doubt my word !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To comment on WV's questions .... I meant by 'illegal' boats that there are many unlicenced sheds there. Illegal boaters because they each presumably have owners / masters who are now breaking the new LBR bylaw. However, from living here for a number of years I happen to be aware of some of their habits of collecting other peoples possessions, use and sale of illegal substances and that's before any thought is given to their UK status.

I absolutely no idea how they all got on in last years floods ....... I was plenty busy keeping my own craft off the bank and accessible. I used 5 metre and 2 metre scaffold poles with scaffold clips to survive ...... but then I was out of the main stream.

Loddon has kindly posted a link to prove my comments on the police involvement in this action ........ since you seem to doubt my word !

From your description of of the illegal status of some those that LBR are moving I can understand why they may wish to do so.

 

Unfortunately Loddon's link has no value whatsoever to me as I am on neither Twittter nor Facebook so I haven't a clue what it says!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not on Twitter either ..... but the link still works for me.

 

You'll just have to take my word for it that the police are very much involved with the application of the new LBR bylaw ...... having seen them in action at the other end of the borough to Teddington yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To comment on MTB's words earlier in this thread ...... you're correct Mike in that ANY class / type / colour of craft will no doubt be treated in exactly the same way ..... BUT ....... the areas very specifically designated and mapped out in the new bylaw are only inhabited by the presumably less affluent boaters of the borough ...... or those who care not to spend their money on rediculous marina fees ...... or wish to opt out of the more regular social model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is disgusting behaviour on the part of LBR.

 

Here we have a bunch of peaceful folk who have sacrificed all the comforts of home in order to live in traditional river-based dwellings which clearly have an amenity value for tourists and land-based residents of Richmond who can observe their quaint appearance and the medieval lifestyles of the floating shack, for example using the energy-saving natural flush of the current to wash away their detritus in the same way that happens in wonderful societies like those living on/near the Ganges in India. Moreover these pleasant and simple folk forgo the formalities and benefits of having planning permission and paying council tax, and contribute to the community at large by sharing their roads, policing and local public services.

 

Why move them on?

 

Is this a joke? I'm speechless!

 

Edit: It is a joke isn't it? You got me! laugh.png You've obviously been to the Ganges, or you know about the state of the river and how horribly polluted it is. http://www.all-about-india.com/Ganges-River-Pollution.html

Edited by blackrose
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
  • 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.