Is this the start of the end for visitor moorings on the Thames?

[nipper]

Today I left the River Wey after three lovely weeks visiting Grandchildren and old friends and turned left at Thames lock and am now cruising the River Thames.

How disappointing that the first mooring that I chose to stay the night at after entering the Thames from the river Wey is now not a public mooring despite being on my Pearson's and on E-canal Mapp!

On reaching this mooring, Ryepeck Meadow visitor moorings, there are signs giving notice of £100 charge for stopping and with 30 days to make that payment!

Is this now common place on the Thames?

Maybe, I have made a mistake on purchasing a months licence?

I did spend three weeks on the Thames two years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it, with no such restriction like the above!

Looking on the net, apparently a contractor has been appointed by the local council to enforce mooring restrictions at Ryepeck Meadow and council owned land at Shepperton.

If this is so, then it will be my last visit here!

Nipper

[bassplayer]

It seems as though other autorities have taken a leaf out of CRT's books. Take a photo of these signs, send them to the council concerned and ask them to provide a copy of the legal paperwork backing the notices. Remind them that if none is forthcoming the signs should be removed as they are misleading the general public

[David Mack]

Spelthorne's BYELAWS FOR PLEASURE GROUNDS, PUBLIC WALKS AND OPEN SPACES (here) state:

 

"25. No person shall in any ground having a frontage to the River Thames moor any boat except where any part of the ground has by notice affixed in a conspicuous position been set aside by the Council as a place where mooring is permitted provided always that no boat moored pursuant to this byelaw shall remain moored in the ground for more than 24 hours in any period of 48 hours."

 

So where there are notices permitting mooring you can stay for 24 hours in any 48. But otherwise no.

 

Richmond has similarly restricted mooring.

[bassplayer]

Spelthorne's BYELAWS FOR PLEASURE GROUNDS, PUBLIC WALKS AND OPEN SPACES (here) state:

 

"25. No person shall in any ground having a frontage to the River Thames moor any boat except where any part of the ground has by notice affixed in a conspicuous position been set aside by the Council as a place where mooring is permitted provided always that no boat moored pursuant to this byelaw shall remain moored in the ground for more than 24 hours in any period of 48 hours."

 

So where there are notices permitting mooring you can stay for 24 hours in any 48. But otherwise no.

 

Richmond has similarly restricted mooring.

There's local byelaws and law. There's CRT's guidelines and law. Any authority putting up signs must abide by law.

 

 

So long as we don't bother questioning this crap we are nothing but sheep...

[magnetman]

Rypecks Meadow is.privately owned I believe although there were previously EA signs there.

 

You would get away with an overnight stop there but I understand people don't want to as the signage is quite threatening.

 

That particular mooring was squatted completely for about 3 years which is why the signs have been put up.

 

I am of the rule following type but I am sorely tempted to stop there on our trip to Oxford this month as it was one of my preferred mooring locations before the squatters turned up. Lovely blackberries there

 

 

So long as we don't bother questioning this crap we are nothing but sheep...

I believe there are fairly strong laws looking after riparian owners on the Thames.

 

Happy to be corrected - as always

[bassplayer]

Rypecks Meadow is.privately owned I believe although there were previously EA signs there.

 

You would get away with an overnight stop there but I understand people don't want to as the signage is quite threatening.

 

That particular mooring was squatted completely for about 3 years which is why the signs have been put up.

 

I am of the rule following type but I am sorely tempted to stop there on our trip to Oxford this month as it was one of my preferred mooring locations before the squatters turned up. Lovely blackberries there

 

I believe there are fairly strong laws looking after riparian owners on the Thames.

 

Happy to be corrected - as always

If thats the case I'm sure the local authority will oblige with copies of the relevant law.

[MtB]

I think there are still plenty of places where you can moor overnight for seven or ten quid, rather than the £100 at Ryepeck.

[David Mack]

There's local byelaws and law.

 

Local Byelaws are the Law.

 

And Spelthorne seem to be taking enforcement seriously:

 

https://www.spelthorne.gov.uk/article/9927/Council-prosecutes-boat-owner-for-illegal-mooring

https://www.spelthorne.gov.uk/article/10288/Three-prosecuted-for-illegal-mooring-in-Spelthorne

https://www.spelthorne.gov.uk/article/10083/Council-secures-triple-prosecution-for-illegal-mooring

Edited August 4, 2015 by David Mack

[magnetman]

Directly opposite the Ryepeck £100 signs there is a concrete edge one can stop on or just 5 minutes upstream on the other side there are free moorings on Chertsey meads. Not quite as easy to deal with but quite nice moorings and nice Blackberries

 

Chertsey meads can be a bit naughty so this is not a specific recommendation but for overnight it is an alternative if you don't want to beard the lion by mooring beside the aggressive signage.

[bassplayer]

I think there are still plenty of places where you can moor overnight for seven or ten quid, rather than the £100 at Ryepeck.

Yeah but...

 

First there's 100's of other places to moor without the threat of £100 fines.

 

Then there's 10's of other places to moor without the threat of £100 fines.

 

Then there's no places...

 

Sound familiar?

[MtB]

Directly opposite the Ryepeck £100 signs there is a concrete edge one can stop on or just 5 minutes upstream on the other side there are free moorings on Chertsey meads. Not quite as easy to deal with but quite nice moorings and nice Blackberries

 

Chertsey meads can be a bit naughty so this is not a specific recommendation but for overnight it is an alternative if you don't want to beard the lion by mooring beside the aggressive signage.

 

 

I'm pretty certain the legitimate liveaboards adjacent to Ryepeck Meadows would be on the phone to Spelthorne Council the instant they hear mooring stakes being hammered in!

[magnetman]

Yes quite likely if I do it because I have shocking amounts of random objects on the roof of my barge and an old paint job and dirty clothes and a nice little dinghy towing behind. And children. And a misses.

And solar panels. And a carefree look

Perhaps I can educate them by pointing out that I in fact pay twice as much as them for my,"legitimate liveaboard" residential mooring but like to go on holiday when kids are not at school

[MtB]

Yes quite likely if I do it because I have shocking amounts of random objects on the roof of my barge and an old paint job and dirty clothes and a nice little dinghy towing behind. And children. And a misses.

And solar panels. And a carefree look

Perhaps I can educate them by pointing out that I in fact pay twice as much as them for my,"legitimate liveaboard" residential mooring but like to go on holiday when kids are not at school

 

 

Sorry I had my Thames head on. By 'legitimate liveaboards' I meant rectangular steel boxes that never go anywhere and are trying to kid themselves they are houses. Different animal totally to a real cruising liveaboard.

[bassplayer]

 

Local Byelaws are the Law.

 

 

Not if byelaw contradicts law. Enforcement also has to be legal. There are laws to protect the public from deception and harasssment.

[abraxus]

Not if byelaw contradicts law. Enforcement also has to be legal. There are laws to protect the public from deception and harasssment.

 

So where do these byelaws contradict law? As far as I'm aware there are no rights to just moor up wherever you like on the Thames, for as long as you like. Much of the land is private, and so the owners are within their rights to restrict moorings if they so choose.

 

And how are the public being deceived and harassed? It seems it was the public who put pressure on the council to do something, due to boats overstaying and dumping waste in the river.

 

If visitor moorings have been lost, then the fault lies not with the local council, and is instead due to the selfishness and lack of consideration shown by a minority who think they can do what they like, regardless of how it affects others.

Edited August 4, 2015 by abraxus

[magnetman]

 

So where do these byelaws contradict law? As far as I'm aware there are no rights to just moor up wherever you like on the Thames, for as long as you like. Much of the land is private, and so the owners are within their rights to restrict moorings if they so choose.

 

And how are the public being deceived and harassed? It seems it was the public who put pressure on the council to do something, due to boats overstaying and dumping waste in the river.

 

If visitor moorings have been lost, then the fault lies not with the local council, and is instead due to the selfishness and lack of consideration shown by a minority who think they can do what they like, regardless of how it affects others.

Is the RIGHT answer

[bassplayer]

 

 

If visitor moorings have been lost, then the fault lies not with the local council, and is instead due to the selfishness and lack of consideration shown by a minority who think they can do what they like, regardless of how it affects others.

...or alternatively the selfishness and lack of consideration of a few local residents who have infliences over local council members...you know the sort...the kind of people who think they can do what they like regardless of how it affects others...

[abraxus]

...or alternatively the selfishness and lack of consideration of a few local residents who have infliences over local council members...you know the sort...the kind of people who think they can do what they like regardless of how it affects others...

 

But they weren't acting selfishly or without consideration, they acted in reponse to overstaying and waste being dumped in the river, something that no-one wants. From what I gather it wasn't just local residents either, but busineses and other boaters.

 

I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you bemoaning the loss of short term visitor moorings, or are you suggesting that people should be able to just squat wherever they like on the river, without either permission or paying for it?

Edited August 4, 2015 by abraxus

[Drayke]

I’ve just spent 5 weeks going from Reading to Teddington and back and there are plenty of 24hr free moorings. There are at least seven 24hr and one 48hr mooring sites in and around the Shepperton/Walton area alone. Just obey the rules and you will be OK.

 

Fred

[bassplayer]

 

But they weren't acting selfishly or without consideration, they acted in reponse to overstaying and waste being dumped in the river, something that no-one wants. From what I gather it wasn't just local residents either, but busineses and other boaters.

 

I'm not really sure what your point is. Are you bemoaning the loss of short term visitor moorings, or are you suggesting that people should be able to just squat wherever they like on the river, without either permission or paying for it?

Just pointing out that there are piss takers on both sides. The use of threatening signage is spoiling everyones enjoyment just to appease the few.

[mark99]

Just pointing out that there are piss takers on both sides. The use of threatening signage is spoiling everyones enjoyment just to appease the few.

 

 

I'm afraid your romantic view of all boaters gaily wandering up and down the waterways obeying the rules, respecting neighbours and surroundings, slipping in and out of districts on their progressive journeys is not quite right.

 

There are pockets where people "plot up" and have to get evicted - as seen in a couple of places on the Thames in that area recently. Some then creep back using the cover of "lack of signage/clear warnings". So your answer please?

[StephenA]

Just pointing out that there are piss takers on both sides. The use of threatening signage is spoiling everyones enjoyment just to appease the few.

 

If it's private land and the owner had people squatting there then what do you expect him to do? He has a legitimate right as the land owner to control mooring on his land. If he was previously "open" to the idea of boats mooring on his land for free (or a small fee) but then they took the piss then what else do you expect him to do?

 

He had to put up some signs obviously or people would just simply go back on there and you'd end up with the same problem again.

Edited August 5, 2015 by StephenA

[bassplayer]

I think you both need to revisit the OP before taking me out of context. I understand this was about a threatening sign being put up where there was a public mooring. How many more moorings will be lost if we just stand by and watch?

[magnetman]

Moorings owned by the EA will remain public at 24 hours. Pretty sure this particular mooring is owned by a private individual which means they can tell people not to moor there.

 

Loss of this type of mooring is being caused by inappropriate use by -some- boaters. This is a fact.

 

In theory yes other land owners will do the same but they never were 'public' moorings where it is a private landowner they were in effect 'authorised' moorings which is a different thing. Public moorings are those owned by the EA which I believe will always be public but with a 24hr limit, technically . some councils may react to the squatter problem by banning mooring in their land entirely. This has apparently happened around Teddington although its a moot point about whether it has had any effect as some of the 'problem' boats are still there.

 

People who believe that all moorings along the Thames are "public" are sadly mistaken.

Edited August 5, 2015 by magnetman

[b0atman]

Ran out of greenies but totally with Abraxus on this the few again ruin things for the majority.