How wide is a General Area?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

I've just received this nugget from CRT:

 

"Weve been looking at our sighting records and they suggest that your boat XXXXXX has been moored in the same general area for more than 14 days."

 

For context, imagine a journey of ABCD (actually much longer). Having travelled to D, the boat turns round and returns to somewhere fairly near C, but definitively not C. Lets call it C2.

 

I'm assuming that the spotters have missed the trip to D (definitely far enough), and I'd have accepted the warning if I'd overstayed at C (which the message suggests they accept I haven't done), so this must mean that they think C and C2 are too near each other.

 

How big is a "general area". Is it bigger than a neighbourhood or a place? Is there a map? If its okay to warn boaters who moor too near previously visited spots, how exactly should one make a return journey these days?

'General area' is 1km under CaRT's new enforcement regime.

 

This is because potential overstays are flagged for any boat on the same km more than 14 days ago (unless, of course, recorded elsewhere between the two 'same km' sightings!).

 

[StarUKKiwi]

Perhaps CRT's system is not really up to the job. Not "fit for purpose" as they say. Maybe, they should ping an email to boaters every time they are clocked. Maybe, every boater should request sightings data from CRT regularly, once a fortnight perhaps. This could help form a "boaters' database" independent of CRT's records, which could be very helpful for anyone unfairly flagged up on CRT's radar.

Some were doing this, but now you have to provide to all intents & purposes a Subject Access Request with appropriate proof of identity and they will respond within 40 days

[Galeomma]

CRT were planning a whole mapping system with zones and all you had to do was move out of each zone every 14 days. It wasn't far and as far as I was concerned, a brilliant idea. But guess what, the CC (moorers) society whined like little girls about that and it got dropped. That was the best idea going unless you are someone who isn't going to move whatever.

 

CRT have every right as far as I am concerned to enforce the moving edict and good on them. Oh and I am CC.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Lady Muck
To remove swearing

[Murflynn]

CRT were planning a whole mapping system with zones and all you had to do was move out of each zone every 14 days. It wasn't far and as far as I was concerned, a ********* brilliant idea. But guess what, the CC (moorers) society whined like little girls about that and it got dropped. That was the best idea going unless you are someone who isn't going to move whatever.

 

CRT have every right as far as I am concerned to enforce the moving edict and good on them. Oh and I am CC.

is that really necessary?

[Higgs]

 

This will only work if the Trust accept your records, as being better than theirs!

 

Bod

 

 

The Warwickshire ring can be done comfortably within a fortnight, ending with the boat on the same spot it started from, facing the same direction. Spottings ought to be carried out at reasonably close intervals to be worth very much as evidence. The Trust, if they don't already, should inform boaters of what they accept as a log; that has to be established.

[StarUKKiwi]

CRT were planning a whole mapping system with zones and all you had to do was move out of each zone every 14 days. It wasn't far and as far as I was concerned, a brilliant idea. But guess what, the CC (moorers) society whined like little girls about that and it got dropped. That was the best idea going unless you are someone who isn't going to move whatever.

 

CRT have every right as far as I am concerned to enforce the moving edict and good on them. Oh and I am CC.

It was a good idea; however making two water points 1.5 miles apart one place and 2 miles either side of a junction one place was a bit daft.

[Jess--]

Does anyone know who to contact at the trust to discuss what would / wouldn't be acceptable to them as a log, a few people on here will already know why I am asking this.

[Tony Dunkley]

Does anyone know who to contact at the trust to discuss what would / wouldn't be acceptable to them as a log, a few people on here will already know why I am asking this.

 

One of the Office cleaners would probably be your best bet, any one of them is likely to know more about how to run a Navigation Authority than C&RT's so-called Management.

[AMModels]

TBF being a CCer should mean travelling constantly throughout the system, staying just within London should mean you arent a CCer but a CMer.

[spadefoot]

TBF being a CCer should mean travelling constantly throughout the system, staying just within London should mean you arent a CCer but a CMer.

Constantly travelling is a bit harsh. Also, "throughout the system" is not possible for a whole lot of boats due to length and or width.

The rules on CC are supposed to catch those who stay in one spot/place/area/parish/timezone for too long, but can just as easily catch out those who travel too far and too fast for the logging methods which CRT use. For instance, one could easily be logged in Devizes, travel to Keynsham (end of navigation give or take) then return to Devizes again before next logged and appear to have overstayed in Devizes.

Also, difficult to define London, but anyone who spends all their time there is a bit weird although not necessarily breaking this weeks T&Cs.

[Murflynn]

TBF being a CCer should mean travelling constantly throughout the system, staying just within London should mean you arent a CCer but a CMer.

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

[Alan de Enfield]

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

 

That's fine unless you happen to be waiting over 9 months to save up enough to buy the part you need to fix your engine.

[Fat Boat]

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

Lock miles or straight miles?

[Sabcat]

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

 

Unless I've missed something "continuous cruiser" is nothing more than colloquial term and as such means the square root of nothing, even if you do type it in all caps like and angry teenager on Myspace. The law says that a boat has a home mooring or :"the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances."

[Jess--]

deleted

posted in wrong window

Edited June 29, 2015 by Jess--

[gaggle]

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

 

Wonderful person , meet like people like you but not very often thankfully along the canals , I find telling them to FRO shuts them up and sends them scurrying off .

 

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

 

 

Wonderful person , meet like people like you but not very often thankfully along the canals , I find telling them to FRO shuts them up and sends them scurrying off .

 

 

Not heard that one so did a search in the online dictionary and came up with 'movement' - "the trees were moving to and fro" - guessed that was not what you meant so tried the "Urban Dictionary" and came up with :

 

fro

the shortened version of afro, a very cool hairstyle popular in the 70's and forever popular with the blacks, although white people can have fros. Take Judith for example. her hair frizzes and sticks up more than most.

'man u gotta watch for judiths fro it almost knocked me out!'

Maybe you should just use 'English' to reply to the post then we would know what you were talking about.

[matty40s]

Writing frack route off may involve the wrath of the moderators.

[Alan de Enfield]

Writing frack route off may involve the wrath of the moderators.

 

I have yet to see any evidence that Fracking causes the problems the 'antis' seem to go on about.

[Naughty Cal]

Writing frack route off may involve the wrath of the moderators.

I think Gaggle is having a bad week.

[Murflynn]

 

Unless I've missed something "continuous cruiser" is nothing more than colloquial term and as such means the square root of nothing, even if you do type it in all caps like and angry teenager on Myspace. The law says that a boat has a home mooring or :"the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances."

.................. and moving the boat a few miles every 14 days, and back to the same or another location 14 days after that DOES NOT ( ) fulfill either the spirit or the reasonable interpretation of those requirements).

 

 

....................... oh, and your avatar seems to depict you as the "angry teenager". I have no idea what "Myspace" is about, although I guess it might be another of those silly ("social media") systems where angry teenagers take and broadcast silly face selfies and videos of their mates smacking smaller peeps. Your avatar suggest that you may be familiar with such stuff.

 

Your reaction suggests that you are a CMer who is inconvenienced by having to move your boat occasionally.

Writing frack route off may involve the wrath of the moderators.

why?

it's just a series of unconnected words.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Murflynn

[spadefoot]

agree.

 

again the CMer sympathisers will find all sorts of loopholes/exception like Devizes to Keynsham and return, or limitations for widebeams, but that does not negate the concept that a CCer should be CONTINUOUSLY CRUISING, and if he/she has any imagination he/she will explore as much of the system as possible.

 

as I proposed in another thread, it might be simpler for CRT to specific a minimum range measured along the route taken, within which you must cruise, e.g.:

- 10 miles in any 14 day period

- 50 miles in any 90 day period

- 100 miles in any year.

 

- obvious exceptions for weather conditions (floods, ice), unforeseeable health problems and canal closures.

- if a breakdown means he/she can't comply with the 14 day requirement, the 90 day requirement to still stand.

 

 

it's not rocket science.

There We Are Then.

I wasn't trying to find loopholes or exceptions, nor suggesting that merely cruising between Devizes & Keynsham repeatedly is ok, just pointing out that a system designed badly to catch out one sort of misdemeanour will inevitably catch innocent & genuine CCers from time to time. Or did you not read the OP?

[Sabcat]

Your reaction suggests that you are a CMer who is inconvenienced by having to move your boat occasionally.

 

Interesting the way your mind works. I view your machinations on the subject as nothing more than prejudiced drivel unconnected with the law and you think that tells you something about my living arrangements.

[gaggle]

.................. and moving the boat a few miles every 14 days, and back to the same or another location 14 days after that DOES NOT ( ) fulfill either the spirit or the reasonable interpretation of those requirements).

 

 

....................... oh, and your avatar seems to depict you as the "angry teenager". I have no idea what "Myspace" is about, although I guess it might be another of those silly ("social media") systems where angry teenagers take and broadcast silly face selfies and videos of their mates smacking smaller peeps. Your avatar suggest that you may be familiar with such stuff.

 

Your reaction suggests that you are a CMer who is inconvenienced by having to move your boat occasionally.

why?

it's just a series of unconnected words.

 

Your proposals , what exactly are you going to fix should they be accepted and put into practise ,how much really are you affected by people overstaying , probably not at all.

[Paul C]

Gaggle: Type outside the box, not in it!