I am beginning to be concerned

[DeanS]

RD-024 is roughly Bridge 43 (Punchbowl Bridge) to Bridge 45 (Pike House Bridge).

 

can you share how you know this?

[Alan de Enfield]

 

can you share how you know this?

 

C&RT publish an excel spreadsheet of all of their 'assets' (each asset has an asset number)

Example

RD25-003 is lock 46.

RD28-003 is Cleg Hall Bridge

RD28- 028 is Cleg Hall Culvert

 

The 1st two letters denote the waterway (eg RT = River Trent)

The next number set is the distance (km) from the start point of the waterway

The last numbers set is the asset number (bridge, lock, culvert, drain, etc etc) that is within that km length, there could be many assets within a km)

 

Edit to add :

 

Allan added a link to the spreadsheet so you can download it yourself - I didn't have the link, just a copy.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Alan de Enfield

[Allan(nb Albert)]

 

I've never used Bridge numbers .....so would it make sense then to make a map, showing bridges...2kms apart...and ensure you are always in another 2km zone every 14 days, and by so doing, never have to worry about enforcement again....CRT aren't going to give us a map, so maybe we have to make our own.

 

If you stay away for a month, and come back to that place...without being logged elsewhere during that time....you'll get another letter

CaRT use a system of functional location for mapping assets.

 

RD means Rochdale Canal.

 

024 is the 24th Km length from datum - lock 1 (I think).

 

 

can you share how you know this?

The information comes from a FOI request from Nick Brown (NBTA) which is in the public domain.

 

FOI request

 

 

Cart's response was to provide a spreadsheet showing 'assets'.

 

They also provide a link to a map.

 

 

**** Edited to add - some forum members might have problems using data spreadsheet format but I am sure if they post the code which will be XX-999 or XX-999-999 somebody will be able to look it up for them.

 

**** Edited again to say I cross posted with Alan who has provided additional information on 'functional asset codes'.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Allan(nb Albert)

[nb Innisfree]

Run for your life and keep running, C&RT are after you.

 

Is that a chain saw in the distance, getting closer...?

[Alan de Enfield]

Run for your life and keep running, C&RT are after you.

 

Is that a chain saw in the distance, getting closer...?

 

No they sold them all 'orf' - that's why there are huge gaps in the asset number register.

[Dharl]

Thanks for posting the link to the map Allan, I think that will be very useful to many!

 

Interesting that the maps also show the parish boundaries , which is something that I have suggested in the past as a guide for "places".

 

As someone else has suggested by moving 2km every 14 days would mean not being sighted in the same spot twice, however CRTs system does seem to be not suitable and actually if you move your boat frequently then you are more likely to get "caught out" like Dean!! Surely a simple system using excell spreadsheets would have be easier and then better to search for either boats or by location!

[Nightwatch]

It's okay having a spreadsheet with asset numbers on which are locks bridges culverts and the like.

 

In all honesty I'm really not all that concerned about what bridge has what reference. It means nowt.

 

Now, if they were to say you have to move so many lock miles per week,month or year then that would make more sense to me.

 

Am I right in thinking that a few years ago there were some areas of the system that had unofficial residents occupying tow path moorings with all their belongings spread out along the tow path? Am I also right in thinking that something had to be done to discourage these unofficial residents to move on or obtain a mooring. In addition, am I right in thinking that BW and now CRT have done a sterling job in this, realising that more boats are licensed and perhaps on the move.

 

The result being the towpaths are,in the main, clear of personal stuff and boats are no longer continually overstaying in popular locations therefore creating more revenue for CRT.

 

This exercise must now be near completion and so why don't CRT stand down from being too proactive, regarding moorings and overstaying, save money from enforcement cost and spend more money on maintenance of the system.

 

Not all that clear, but I hope I have got the gist of this over.

[DeanS]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Thanks for posting the link to the map Allan, I think that will be very useful to many!

 

Interesting that the maps also show the parish boundaries , which is something that I have suggested in the past as a guide for "places".

 

As someone else has suggested by moving 2km every 14 days would mean not being sighted in the same spot twice, however CRTs system does seem to be not suitable and actually if you move your boat frequently then you are more likely to get "caught out" like Dean!! Surely a simple system using excell spreadsheets would have be easier and then better to search for either boats or by location!

Certainly, the comments of the judge in the Mayers case supports the view that 'place' means 'parish'.

 

... and the judge made it clear that he had taken into account all evidence provided by CaRT (including the Davies case) in coming to this conclusion.

 

However, Richard Parry has told me in no uncertain terms that there was nothing in the Mayers case that would cause them to reconsider their guidance.

[cotswoldsman]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

Are you realy trying to make your life complicated?

[Allan(nb Albert)]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

No!

 

CaRT say they consider each case individually.

 

I have already posted the a link that contains the 'flowchart' and 'letters'.

 

The FOI request that caused CaRT to publish the letters is here (although CaRT claim it was always their intention to do so).

[TheBiscuits]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

 

 

Technically, yes.

 

In practice, as John says, that is setting yourself up for more grief that you want or need. Let Tony Dunkley do it, as he appears to enjoy it! (Good for him by the way).

 

If you just want a quiet life cruising, I would say do more distance than the 1km sections on the map, and do them more often than 14 days.

 

If you do eg 2 or 3 of the mapped sections every week or every 10 days, you will likely never get flagged. You might end up in some grim spots from your marina if you stick to that, but do that as a minimum, and you'll be fine.

 

Edited to add:

 

It's probably also worth mentioning, that Littleborough to New Islington is already over the (barely) acceptable 15-20 km range of cruising for a CCer, and you don't need to do that much as you have a home mooring!

 

Although I think in your particular case, I'd bee looking at a mooring somewhere up near Littleborough and not staying in the middle of town.

Edited August 13, 2015 by TheBiscuits

[nipper]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

Dean, cannot you accept that you were doing everything right, but CaRT needed to ask you a question, because there logging program is not fit for purpose and needed to make sure your were moving as they guest you were!

 

Now relax and stop making your life complicated and go boating!

 

Nipper

[DeanS]

I've asked for permission to overstay for 3 days, on the same location that their system mistakenly logged me as overstaying before....because I'm off to France for a week, and won't be able to move the boat till I'm back...and since I was logged at this exact location on the 7Aug, the logger will be back 3 days before I'm back from France.

 

I spoke to another boater who had been moored in Littleborough for 3 weeks, and hasn't received any letter.

It's got to be the purple paint, but I'm sticking with it.

 

Although I think in your particular case, I'd bee looking at a mooring somewhere up near Littleborough and not staying in the middle of town.

 

it makes no difference where my mooring actually is, as I don't make much use of it

[TheBiscuits]

it makes no difference where my mooring actually is, as I don't make much use of it

 

 

Ahah! A ghost moorer with a fat boat painted a hideous colour with solar panels and tyre fenders who bridge-hops.

 

And an immigrant to boot. Coming over here taking our bridge'oles etc etc

 

I have no idea why CRT and Peel Holdings seem to have it in for you.

 

Have you considered a Gold Licence so the EA can evict you too?

 

(None of the above should be taken at face value!)

[Tony Dunkley]

so...as long as you move from RD-001-something, to RD-002-something within 14days, , and are not logged their again without first being logged elsewhere (how would you know) , their computer wont spit a letter at you.

 

Is my thinking correct.

 

Why don't you just sell your boat, buy a big motor caravan and spend some time somewhere where there's less surveillance and regulation . . . . like Area 51 ?

[TheBiscuits]

 

Why don't you just sell your boat, buy a big motor caravan and spend some time somewhere where there's less surveillance and regulation . . . . like Area 51 ?

 

Have you seen the Roswell "autopsy" films? It makes Section 8 look preferable ...

 

And greenie, but you owe me a keyboard!

[DeanS]

ok, final question before I nod off..

 

If I happened to stay up here longer (I'm not, but hypothetically), and cruised my same style of cruising, I'm bound to keep getting these letters, which I plan to ignore completely.

 

Do they lead to anything....what would happen next in the enforcement process?

[Midnight]

ok, final question before I nod off..

 

If I happened to stay up here longer (I'm not, but hypothetically), and cruised my same style of cruising, I'm bound to keep getting these letters, which I plan to ignore completely.

 

Do they lead to anything....what would happen next in the enforcement process?

 

Life's too short Dean just go down to Tod next time it's easier than all this despair concern

 

edited to reflect title change

Edited August 14, 2015 by Midnight

[DeanS]

 

Life's too short Dean just go down to Tod next time it's easier than all this despair

 

the despair is purely virtual. In reality, I'm chilled

[bassplayer]

the despair is purely virtual. In reality, I'm chilled

So it's just attention seeking then?

 

Andy Warhol said "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes". If he could see into the future maybe that would be "In the future, everyone will be world-famous for the time they write on an Internet forum".

 

We're all in the same boat to be fair.

 

The nice thing about forums is that they show that some people still care in this world. Nobody likes injustice and this forum is beginning to show it has some weight.

[Tony Dunkley]

 

Have you seen the Roswell "autopsy" films? It makes Section 8 look preferable ...

 

And greenie, but you owe me a keyboard!

 

In the late 2000's an investigative journalist proved conclusively that those films were carefully staged elaborate fakes as had always been thought, and, in fact, the crew from the spaceship had all survived the crash. They were held at a secret location until early 2012, when after cosmetic surgery and being sworn to secrecy, they were released on condition that they left the US, settled in England, and never returned to the US.

They were tracked and followed to England by the journalist, and it was reported that they were last seen in early Spring 2012 moving desks, computers and filing cabinets into a large office block in Milton Keynes.

[DeanS]

So it's just attention seeking then?

 

 

 

 

not at all...I just thought it was of public interest...an example of the logging system, and how it's not working right. I shouldn't of used the word "despair.."....too emotive...."be concerned" is probably better

[Woodstock]

Dean have you actually contacted CRT- is it sorted?

[boathunter]

 

 

not at all...I just thought it was of public interest...an example of the logging system, and how it's not working right. I shouldn't of used the word "despair.."....too emotive...."be concerned" is probably better

I think everyone knows what you meant, it was quite clear what's bothering you. Some prefer to ignore obvious meaning, prefering to pick at the words and try to trip a poster up. I'd ignore those posts if I were you.