CRT explanation of T&C's for home moorers.

[bassplayer]

What you have stated on many occasions is one thing, the view expressed above that CCers are blameless is however your dominant theme and the many occasions you speak of are I think confined to when you are challenged on that.

 

"You'd have to ask those who rattled CRT's cage in the first place.....and they weren't CC'ers! "

 

How do any of the recent changes benefit CC'ers? I think you're dominant theme is that you are jealous of CC'ers and try to fuse us together with CM'ers and bridge hoppers to make your point. I should say I've never had a problem with a CM'er or bridge hopper either but I'm sure some take the P. I guess we've made both our positions clear.

[LoneWolf]

This situation does seem rather odd to me. Are CRT trying to tempt people to give up their home mooring if they cruise a lot. OR are they trying to tempt people into getting a home mooring if they don't cruise a lot. Very confusing this cruising and home mooring business. Next they will be messing around with the winter mooring rules as well. Crazy.

 

they're not thinking of it like that.

they want everyone on a mooring except when they're wizzing round the system on their holidays of course

and if people will insist on living on their boats and making use of the loophole (sic) that allows them to potter about without a mooring then they want them to feck off somewhere else and when they get there feck off again

[bassplayer]

they're not thinking of it like that.

they want everyone on a mooring except when they're wizzing round the system on their holidays of course

and if people will insist on living on their boats and making use of the loophole (sic) that allows them to potter about without a mooring then they want them to feck off somewhere else and when they get there feck off again

 

...and might as well feck off onto VM's now they have to move!

[Sir Nibble]

How do any of the recent changes benefit CC'ers? I think you're dominant theme is that you are jealous of CC'ers and try to fuse us together with CM'ers and bridge hoppers to make your point. I should say I've never had a problem with a CM'er or bridge hopper either but I'm sure some take the P. I guess we've made both our positions clear.

You may "think" that but you'd be wrong. You would not have had problems with CMers or whatever because you aren't in one place long enough to notice them, when you see a line of moored boats you don't realise they've been there for years and the area has become exclusively theirs. You say you are sure some take the P but within a week you will be back to saying the only problem is malicious complaints. You have made your position clear but every time you are challenged you resile from it, like now. You have also taken it upon yourself to presume to make my position clear, I can do that myself thank you. My position is that CCers have as much right to enjoy their boats as anyone and the same obligation to share as everyone. For a minority the only boating they do is when they must. I have met people who have lived on the cut for years and do not own a windlass. Those aren't boaters, they're squatters. I will be at the barricades if CCing needs defending but I believe the CMer is the CCers biggest enemy not CaRT and it is their behaviour that has brought this situation about.

I have no problem with you and it's nothing personal but you need to lose the fantasy that the problems are all in the minds of some cadre of nasty spiteful people who have fabricated the whole thing. I have never seen any evidence whatever that some come out of their marinas and think they own the place, but even if they do, they're gone next week not permanently altering the whole character of the waterway, a straw man I think.

[DeanS]

surely if a marina moorer leaves their marina, and spends 14 days on a piece of unused towpath, where no other boats ever seem to moor....an open empty stretch.....and after 14days, travels to get water, empty toilets etc, and then goes back to the same piece of unused towpath, where he sits and enjoys the wonders of nature, for another 14 days, he shouldn't have to go all the way back to his marina, to sit around for a "time" so the clock can reset...so he can then go back to that lovely piece of unused empty towpath away from the crowd.

 

I fully understand why CRT have the new T&Cs....because there are hotspots that need attention....but it's just silly....and that's my last word on the matter ;-)

[bassplayer]

You may "think" that but you'd be wrong. You would not have had problems with CMers or whatever because you aren't in one place long enough to notice them, when you see a line of moored boats you don't realise they've been there for years and the area has become exclusively theirs. You say you are sure some take the P but within a week you will be back to saying the only problem is malicious complaints. You have made your position clear but every time you are challenged you resile from it, like now. You have also taken it upon yourself to presume to make my position clear, I can do that myself thank you. My position is that CCers have as much right to enjoy their boats as anyone and the same obligation to share as everyone. For a minority the only boating they do is when they must. I have met people who have lived on the cut for years and do not own a windlass. Those aren't boaters, they're squatters. I will be at the barricades if CCing needs defending but I believe the CMer is the CCers biggest enemy not CaRT and it is their behaviour that has brought this situation about.

I have no problem with you and it's nothing personal but you need to lose the fantasy that the problems are all in the minds of some cadre of nasty spiteful people who have fabricated the whole thing. I have never seen any evidence whatever that some come out of their marinas and think they own the place, but even if they do, they're gone next week not permanently altering the whole character of the waterway, a straw man I think.

I do have a memory and do visit the same areas on occasions. In terms of enjoying boating, I sometimes ask myself "Will I be able to find a mooring later?" Occasionally I've had to moor a short distance from an ideal spot but that's been what I would call a minor acceptable inconvenience.

 

You appear to have an issue with squatters and unsightly boats. I can't help you with that but the result of what CRT are doing will make it harder to find a VM. Straw man indeed!

[Sir Nibble]

Why did you bring "Unsightly boats" into it? See, you are creating a nasty straw man and projecting it onto me.

This is about your refusal to accept the eyewitness accounts of several people as truthful. Either there was a real problem truthfully reported or you're right and there isn't. Unfortunately that means David and I et al are liars.

By the way, CCers using VMs is not a threat, they do, extensively, why shouldn't they?

Remember we aren't talking one boat miles from anywhere. His mate has joined him, and his, and his and before you know it there is literally miles of unmoving boats on the best moorings. The moorings where you can get within 6 feet of the bank.

I've said this before. Just because it's not your problem doesn't mean it's no problem.

These people are not your fellow travellers, they don't want to go boating, avoid it like the plague. Why else do they want CaRT to specify a minimum?

I cannot imagine wasting a boat by only moving for a couple of hours once a fortnight, but then I'm a boater, I like boating.

[bassplayer]

Why did you bring "Unsightly boats" into it? See, you are creating a nasty straw man and projecting it onto me.

This is about your refusal to accept the eyewitness accounts of several people as truthful. Either there was a real problem truthfully reported or you're right and there isn't. Unfortunately that means David and I et al are liars.

By the way, CCers using VMs is not a threat, they do, extensively, why shouldn't they?

Remember we aren't talking one boat miles from anywhere. His mate has joined him, and his, and his and before you know it there is literally miles of unmoving boats on the best moorings. The moorings where you can get within 6 feet of the bank.

I've said this before. Just because it's not your problem doesn't mean it's no problem.

These people are not your fellow travellers, they don't want to go boating, avoid it like the plague. Why else do they want CaRT to specify a minimum?

I cannot imagine wasting a boat by only moving for a couple of hours once a fortnight, but then I'm a boater, I like boating.

Your quote "...not permanently altering the whole character of the waterway" seemed an attack on the state of some boats without a home mooring.

 

Your quote on another thread "Get a mooring" in response to a boater who is moving but needs to stay in the area to help his elderly parents also speaks volumes. As is your repeated attempts to make out I'm calling you and someone else a liar.

 

What is effectively happening is that lots of CM'ers who used to moor out of the way of VM's are being converted to CC'ers, so they will now also be using VM's.

 

Enjoy your boating while you can.

[cherswud]

 

Yup, it aint Rocket science. And by Spirit of the legislation you hit the nail on the head. Greenie for you.

 

Tim

Yay, my first greenie - thanks, Tim!

 

 

 

 

It's quite simple . . . the debate goes on because C&RT aren't following either the 'spirit' , or the 'letter' of the legislation, and they have now made it clear with their new T & C's that boaters indulging in any 'spirit' or 'letter' following are going to be in big trouble.

 

So, as I am intending to follow the spirit of the legislation and abide by the mooring restrictions and be moving around a fair bit over 5 months (starting near Rugby, heading for London, then back to the environs of Oxford, and possibly to Chester, and after that, we haven't decided) I'm going to be in big trouble, Tony? Doesn't make sense to me somehow ...

[NigelMoore]

....but it's just silly....

 

Now that is the most penetrating observation on the topic to date, although my own use of language might have favoured more strident tones.

[bassplayer]

Ok, I've been giving more thought to this. I accept I might be drawing incorrect conclusions and I'm willing to learn So, some questions for everyone. Who, what and why?

 

Who do you think has caused CRT to change the T&C's resulting in more controls on everyone's movements?

 

What is it these people are trying to achieve?

 

Why are they doing it?

[Tony Dunkley]

 

So, as I am intending to follow the spirit of the legislation and abide by the mooring restrictions and be moving around a fair bit over 5 months (starting near Rugby, heading for London, then back to the environs of Oxford, and possibly to Chester, and after that, we haven't decided) I'm going to be in big trouble, Tony? Doesn't make sense to me somehow ...

 

If you were better to acquaint yourself with what C&RT are doing, and think more carefully about what, in fact, I have said, then it will make sense.

[DeanS]

Ok, I've been giving more thought to this. I accept I might be drawing incorrect conclusions and I'm willing to learn So, some questions for everyone. Who, what and why?

 

Who do you think has caused CRT to change the T&C's resulting in more controls on everyone's movements?

 

What is it these people are trying to achieve?

 

Why are they doing it?

 

1. A few loudmouths who have been bleating on about CMers hogging waterpoints in certain hotspot areas.

2. They want the CMers to move on from their area.

3. Because they think the "problem" is everywhere when it's not, so are using an atom bomb approach instead of a precision targeted approach.

[mark99]

Ok, I've been giving more thought to this. I accept I might be drawing incorrect conclusions and I'm willing to learn So, some questions for everyone. Who, what and why?

 

Who do you think has caused CRT to change the T&C's resulting in more controls on everyone's movements?

 

What is it these people are trying to achieve?

 

Why are they doing it?

 

 

To actively take control of the agenda** and send out a message/affect a culture change for the benefit of all boaters and to ensure / reinstate the canal as a primary transit asset and not decline into linear housing estate.

 

**Some may see this however as a conspiracy thinking up ever more convoluted reasons or theoretical scenario's as to why "we're doomed" <Private Frazer style>

 

**Some may say "overall it will benefit".

 

Perhaps we need a sticky with a list starting today of people who are being unreasonably chased by CaRT to judge whether this is hot air or real.

Edited March 31, 2015 by mark99

[cherswud]

 

If you were better to acquaint yourself with what C&RT are doing, and think more carefully about what, in fact, I have said, then it will make sense.

Tony, I read the OP with the statement from CRT. We comply with that already and will continue to do so. In the context of those things, your statement didn't make sense to me.

 

My stating that is no reason to for you to be patronising or impolite in your response, thanks.

[Alan de Enfield]

I have read a number of the threads on this and similar topics and I am still at a loss to understand why it raises such ire towards and condemnation of CRT. It seems to me that CRT cannot win - if they respond to requests to provide more detail or to clarify, they get criticised, and if they don't they also get criticised.

 

 

 

Let me try a simple analogy :

 

The Police are there to ensure that the law is abided by, and to enforce it when it is broken. Their role is not to interpret the law (that is for the court and judges) or 'invent' new laws.

 

C&RTs role is as the navigation authority, who, like the Police ensure that the law is abided by, and to enforce it when it is broken. Their role is not to interpret the law (that is for the court and judges) or 'invent' new laws.

 

Lets now say that the Police decide that at weekends you cannot use your car and anyone found doing so will have the car impounded and crushed. There is no law to support this so the application of the new rule is illegal.

Lets now say that the Police decide that, even tho' there is a 60 mph speed limit, they will prosecute anyone exceeding 50 mph. There is no law to support this so the application of the new rule is illegal.

 

C&RT have decided that for boats with a home mooring must now cruise, and be in a different place every 14 days, if you do not comply your boat can be seized and sold or crushed. The to requirement to cruise/new place is not in the 1995 Act and is therefore the introduction of this new rule is illegal.

(You do need to have an understanding of the Act and the understanding of C&RTs interpretation of 'Place' to see the importance of the change)

 

The vast majority of 'boats with a home mooring' will not be affected as they tend to be 'weekend / holiday' boats and the owners will want to get out and cruise around (otherwise they may as well have a cottage in the country). The problem is that once C&RT have seen they can make and enforce new 'laws' they will be for ever introducing new ones - the thin end of the wedge - that is the 'big issue'.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[Naughty Cal]

Questions we will all need to know:

 

1. What range must you cover if you are away from your marina for 1 week ?

2. What range must you cover if you are away from your marina for 2 weeks ?

3. What range must you cover if you are away from your marina for 1 month ?

4. What range must you cover if you are away from your marina for 3 months ?

5. How long must you return to your marina for, in order for the clock to be reset ?

6. What is the best way to prove you have returned to your marina, if the data logger isn't visiting that week ?

Sorry but I don't "need to know" any of that.

[cotswoldsman]

Sorry but I don't "need to know" any of that.

I missed the bit where Dean was asking on your behalf

[bassplayer]

 

Perhaps we need a sticky with a list starting today of people who are being unreasonably chased by CaRT to judge whether this is hot air or real.

This is a good idea and will help those being chased contact each other.

[Alan de Enfield]

I missed the bit where Dean was asking on your behalf

 

It may have been this bit :-

 

Questions we will all need to know:

 

Deans situation is fairly unique, in that he has a marina mooring he doesn't want to be in, therefore he needs to know 'what he can get away with' clearly stating.

I believe that very few of us actually need to have answers to those questions.

[Arthur Marshall]

 

The simple answer to that is . . . . you wouldn't be using your mooring when you're using your boat, and if you happen to make a lot of use of your boat in a small area for more than " several weekends throughout the year.", whatever that means, then you're licence is going to be revoked and C&RT are going to serve a Section 8 Notice on you for having an unlicensed boat.

I think that's a bit unlikely though, to be honest. If you use your boat just at weekends you are always going to be boating in a small area and I'm not sure that CRT have the facility to take thousands of leisure-user's boats off the water every year. I may of course be wrong, in which case I suspect CRT have been taken over by a conspiracy of fishermen who want the system for themselves.

[Tony Dunkley]

Tony, I read the OP with the statement from CRT. We comply with that already and will continue to do so. In the context of those things, your statement didn't make sense to me.

 

My stating that is no reason to for you to be patronising or impolite in your response, thanks.

 

The fact that you may boat around in a manner that happens to suit C&RT at the moment, isn't, and won't be, of much interest or comfort to to all those who pay for a mooring and restrict their boating to frequent short runs in the same area as the mooring. They are complying with both the letter and the spirit of the law, but by means of the new T & C's, C&RT have declared their intention to persecute them for doing so.

[adam1uk]

 

The fact that you may boat around in a manner that happens to suit C&RT at the moment, isn't, and won't be, of much interest or comfort to to all those who pay for a mooring and restrict their boating to frequent short runs in the same area as the mooring. They are complying with both the letter and the spirit of the law, but by means of the new T & C's, C&RT have declared their intention to persecute them for doing so.

 

I see nothing in the new T&Cs that restricts this pattern of boating. Perhaps you could quote the bit that does?

 

What I see is a wish to stop people having a mooring in one area, and shuffling backwards and forwards in another. The two patterns are very different.

[Tony Dunkley]

I think that's a bit unlikely though, to be honest. If you use your boat just at weekends you are always going to be boating in a small area and I'm not sure that CRT have the facility to take thousands of leisure-user's boats off the water every year. I may of course be wrong, in which case I suspect CRT have been taken over by a conspiracy of fishermen who want the system for themselves.

 

You could be on to something there, the uses of rivers and canals for anything other than boating are towards the top on C&RT's list of priorities.

[Arthur Marshall]

 

You could be on to something there, the uses of rivers and canals for anything other than boating are towards the top on C&RT's list of priorities.

I do thnk that's one of the problems. At least BW had boating and navigation aas it's main priority. We're a minor part of CRt's.