Winter mooring restrictions

[MHS]

I've just had a similar email about the Macclesfield. It did however have this statement at the bottom:

 

"Please note that where a winter mooring is part of a visitor mooring site, only 50% of the site will be for permit-holders. Therefore, though there is a restriction on half of the mooring site, the other half of the site will still be available throughout the winter period for visitors."

 

Has this been missed off your notice???

[cotswoldsman]

I've just had a similar email about the Macclesfield. It did however have this statement at the bottom:

 

"Please note that where a winter mooring is part of a visitor mooring site, only 50% of the site will be for permit-holders. Therefore, though there is a restriction on half of the mooring site, the other half of the site will still be available throughout the winter period for visitors."

 

Has this been missed off your notice???

If you are asking me yes it has been missed

[MHS]

If you are asking me yes it has been missed

Hopefully it's just a clerical error.

[Mike Todd]

All bridges on a Tuesday and Wednesday

Ah I think your refer to the G&S bit and I was referring to Droitwich!

[cotswoldsman]

Ah I think your refer to the G&S bit and I was referring to Droitwich!

I love a bit of confusion hehe

[Mrs Trackman]

No one would mind part of visitor moorings being winter mooring if we knew which were taken. Experience shows many are not but there is no way of knowing.

[dogless]

No one would mind part of visitor moorings being winter mooring if we knew which were taken. Experience shows many are not but there is no way of knowing.

My advice from C&RT was that if there is no boat, and no marker identifying the mooring as occupied, then use it as the visitor mooring

it is. It is only a winter mooring when someone hires it as such.

Rog

[Alan Saunders]

No one would mind part of visitor moorings being winter mooring if we knew which were taken. Experience shows many are not but there is no way of knowing.

In the past BW planted temporary signs indicating a reserved winter mooring for 'n/b xx, nn Metres'. Some paid top dollar for moorings with adjacent facilities but obtained a refund after the watertap froze and the elsan disposal, pump-out and toilet block failed, e.g. Kintbury.

 

More recently CRT simply reserved a length of bank, VM or 14 Day, for winter moorings, many of which remained unoccupied throughout the 'winter'.

 

The 'Winter Roving Towpath Mooring Permit' was the most progressive business move made by BW/CRT in many years, it provided nothing except a guaranteed income. Unfortunately, the CRT managers with a million pound budget cannot appreciate, or do not care, how a thousand pounds here or there from a thousand boats could make the difference between the success or failure of our UK waterways.

 

Alan

[cotswoldsman]

In the past BW planted temporary signs indicating a reserved winter mooring for 'n/b xx, nn Metres'. Some paid top dollar for moorings with adjacent facilities but obtained a refund after the watertap froze and the elsan disposal, pump-out and toilet block failed, e.g. Kintbury.

 

More recently CRT simply reserved a length of bank, VM or 14 Day, for winter moorings, many of which remained unoccupied throughout the 'winter'.

 

The 'Winter Roving Towpath Mooring Permit' was the most progressive business move made by BW/CRT in many years, it provided nothing except a guaranteed income. Unfortunately, the CRT managers with a million pound budget cannot appreciate, or do not care, how a thousand pounds here or there from a thousand boats could make the difference between the success or failure of our UK waterways.

 

Alan

Over £500,000 in 2 years. It seems that some simply did not like the idea of ccers having a product they liked and that outweighed any finincial concern. Parry felt the income was not significant more important to stop ccers being happy. It is a crazy CART world we live in

It was also a problem for some that the idea came from ccers

Edited September 19, 2015 by cotswoldsman

[kris88]

I would have thought the income from winter moorings was greater than the income from the friends scheme and less costly to acquire. So it does seem a crazy idea to stop RWMP.

 

Regards kris

[nicknorman]

Personally I thought the winter roving mooring permit was a good idea on all counts (even though we are not CCers) so it does seem a backward step, however as I understand it, it is a legal issue that has stymied them. We all think CRT should abide by the law when it comes to enforcement, so it would be somewhat hypocritical to want CRT to be law abiding regarding enforcement whilst condoning illegal roving mooring permits. A shame, but that's how it is.

[kris88]

They don't seem so willing to test the legality of the RWMP,as they are the rest of their interpretation of waterways legislation.

 

Regards kris

[alan_fincher]

So if they new believe it was illegal, are they going to take themselves to court for repeatedly breaking the law for the two previous winters?

Edited September 19, 2015 by alan_fincher

[nicknorman]

 

So if they new believe it was illegal, are they going to take themselves to court for repeatedly breaking the law for the two previous winters?

Let me guess ... Probably not!

 

I know you are jaded with CRT but surely you can see the difference between doing something in good faith, vs continuing to do that thing after it has been pointed out to you that it's illegal? Even the CMers get a chance to mend their ways before they are actually prosecuted.

[cotswoldsman]

Personally I thought the winter roving mooring permit was a good idea on all counts (even though we are not CCers) so it does seem a backward step, however as I understand it, it is a legal issue that has stymied them. We all think CRT should abide by the law when it comes to enforcement, so it would be somewhat hypocritical to want CRT to be law abiding regarding enforcement whilst condoning illegal roving mooring permits. A shame, but that's how it is.

CART seem unwilling to tell us what the legal problem is that makes it still legal to have Towpath Moorings but more expensive in CART designated spots as aposed to boaters designated spots. I understand that you are happy to accept the wooly legal problem spin without explaination. I on the other hand find it difficult without seeing the legal advise.

Edited September 19, 2015 by cotswoldsman

[cotswoldsman]

I should also add that when CART issued the statement on this year's designated winter moorings they said a lot of the places had been chosen as they were popular last year with those on the Roving Winter Permit. Now that to me makes it even more confusing

[kris88]

Exactly if it's illegal to issue a roving winter mooring, it's illegal to issue stationary winter moorings. It seems to have been suggested the legal issue is giving the right to stay longer than 28days.

[jenlyn]

It's ridiculous, and frankly I am amazed that the sheer contradiction within CRT's statements on the subject, has not been picked up on by members of this forum. ( though I shouldn't be).

[Higgs]

CART seem unwilling to tell us what the legal problem is that makes it still legal to have Towpath Moorings but more expensive in CART designated spots as aposed to boaters designated spots. I understand that you are happy to accept the wooly legal problem spin without explaination. I on the other hand find it difficult without seeing the legal advise.

 

 

It may have nothing to do legality. More like the thin end of a wedge, for CRT to dance to boaters' tunes.

[magnetman]

Maybe keeping the roving permit was liable to pull people off long term moorings and out of marinas?

 

It did make life considerably easier being able to put a winter permit on and choose a favourite spot. Then in the summer move it about at weekends.

 

I don't think its a legal problem at all.

 

It also may have been too much of an encouragement for people who were considering a no home mooring declaration but not wedded to the lifestyle.

 

I mean maybe there was a prediction of a massive influx of new no home mooring boats who would not have been on a boat at all without the roving permit option being available.

[jenlyn]

Maybe keeping the roving permit was liable to pull people off long term moorings and out of marinas?

 

It did make life considerably easier being able to put a winter permit on and choose a favourite spot. Then in the summer move it about at weekends.

 

I don't think its a legal problem at all.

One of the biproducts of the permit (perhaps naively), was the hope it may drive marina prices down a little.

[magnetman]

Or being even more conspiratorial maybe CRT actually have seen figures from their boat spotting activities indicating that the roving permit directly resulted in a sudden spike in no home mooring declarations ?

 

(Be they existing boats or boats newly on the system)

Edited September 19, 2015 by magnetman

[Higgs]

Maybe keeping the roving permit was liable to pull people off long term moorings and out of marinas?

 

It did make life considerably easier being able to put a winter permit on and choose a favourite spot. Then in the summer move it about at weekends.

 

I don't think its a legal problem at all.

 

It also may have been too much of an encouragement for people who were considering a no home mooring declaration but not wedded to the lifestyle.

 

I mean maybe there was a prediction of a massive influx of new no home mooring boats who would not have been on a boat at all without the roving permit option being available.

 

 

Marina mooring doesn't just boil down to money. And anyway, winter is the least favoured season to be leaving marinas. It is generally the case that marinas gain moorers over the winter, who then disappear as the spring arrives.

[cotswoldsman]

Maybe keeping the roving permit was liable to pull people off long term moorings and out of marinas?

 

It did make life considerably easier being able to put a winter permit on and choose a favourite spot. Then in the summer move it about at weekends.

 

I don't think its a legal problem at all.

 

It also may have been too much of an encouragement for people who were considering a no home mooring declaration but not wedded to the lifestyle.

 

I mean maybe there was a prediction of a massive influx of new no home mooring boats who would not have been on a boat at all without the roving permit option being available.

I can buy into all of that and if that is the case again it goes to show CART is all about spin.

[magnetman]

One of the biproducts of the permit (perhaps naively), was the hope it may drive marina prices down a little.

But in areas with bwml marinas surely that would be counterproductive for CRT as they own bwml