Jump to content

Winter Moorings - Planned to fail?


pearley

Featured Posts

In answer to Anges post regarding the uptake of the Winter Moorings,

it appears to be pretty poor in the Milton Keynes area.

 

I don't understand how there can be any take up of any Winter Moorings in the Milton Keynes area unless things have changed since the originally proposed list of sites.

 

From memory I thought CRT had made nothing available between Cosggrove to the North and Stoke Hammond to the South. That is probably a very well "populated" 14 miles or so with, (I thought) no availability at all.

 

I know people in the MK area were very unhappy about this.

 

Have CRT subsequently added sites in MK to their list, and if so, where are those sites, please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't understand how there can be any take up of any Winter Moorings in the Milton Keynes area unless things have changed since the originally proposed list of sites.

 

From memory I thought CRT had made nothing available between Cosggrove to the North and Stoke Hammond to the South. That is probably a very well "populated" 14 miles or so with, (I thought) no availability at all.

 

I know people in the MK area were very unhappy about this.

 

Have CRT subsequently added sites in MK to their list, and if so, where are those sites, please?

Only ones I know of are stoke Hammond and cosgrove. When I came through the former a few days ago, it was full.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only ones I know of are stoke Hammond and cosgrove. When I came through the former a few days ago, it was full.

 

Neither of which are in Milton Keynes of course, which is why I don't understand the post from CDS.

 

The situation is bonkers, isn't it? The live aboard boats in Milton Keynes attract a lot of bad comment from other boaters, some of whom I know become somewhat more tolerant of them if it can be demonstrated they are paying additional money into CRT's coffers for what is basically just a bit of tow-path. The general winter tow-path actually attracted support from some of those who are hardly fans of the live-aboards in that area.

 

I have sat in meetings where CRT have tried to claim they have put the fixed Winter Mooring Sites where people actually want them, but in the entirety of Milton Keynes there certainly were none on the original list, and I have not yet heard or seen anything to say that CRT have relented on this.

 

Upminster!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Neither of which are in Milton Keynes of course, which is why I don't understand the post from CDS.

 

The situation is bonkers, isn't it? The live aboard boats in Milton Keynes attract a lot of bad comment from other boaters, some of whom I know become somewhat more tolerant of them if it can be demonstrated they are paying additional money into CRT's coffers for what is basically just a bit of tow-path. The general winter tow-path actually attracted support from some of those who are hardly fans of the live-aboards in that area.

 

I have sat in meetings where CRT have tried to claim they have put the fixed Winter Mooring Sites where people actually want them, but in the entirety of Milton Keynes there certainly were none on the original list, and I have not yet heard or seen anything to say that CRT have relented on this.

 

Upminster!

Well the boats at stoke Hammond were not "locals" that I recognised.

Of course, they may not have winter moorings, but the local coal boat seemed to think they did. (it's always busy there anyway).

 

I know CRT were monitoring sites last winter that were displaying permits in their windows, using volunteers. I spoke to one at the time.

At the July associations meeting, I was told that CRT had chosen the most popular sites being used by permit holders 2014-15.

Either their data system was as useless as the position monitoring one, or the person reading the data didn't understand it.

I prefer to believe that parry is just putting winter moorers out of site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The boats at Stoke Hammond were presumably not winter moorers as the winter mooring permit hasn't started

and as for my post not being understood,during the last couple of years of the " Roving Permit Trial "

Continuous Cruisers from the Milton Keynes area have moored at Cosgrove for the proximity of the

water point or possibly the " Tranquility " as I've seen mentioned in CRT press releases.

Clear enough for you now Alan? You mention live aboard boaters in Milton Keynes and being one for

many many years I have to declare an interest here,interesting you link being inclusive to an ability to pay extra money

to the CRT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have probably missed something here (nowt new there then :)) But why have the trust scrapped something that was quite clearly very popular ??

Maybe I have answered my own question but I would like to know the reasoning behind it.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I have answered my own question but I would like to know the reasoning behind it.........

As I understand it, there is some question over the legality. CRT might not have authority to allow someone to stay for longer than 28days. If this is the case it surely is the same for the stationery winter mooring permits?

 

Regards kris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The boats at Stoke Hammond were presumably not winter moorers as the winter mooring permit hasn't started

and as for my post not being understood,during the last couple of years of the " Roving Permit Trial "

Continuous Cruisers from the Milton Keynes area have moored at Cosgrove for the proximity of the

water point or possibly the " Tranquility " as I've seen mentioned in CRT press releases.

Clear enough for you now Alan? You mention live aboard boaters in Milton Keynes and being one for

many many years I have to declare an interest here,interesting you link being inclusive to an ability to pay extra money

to the CRT.

 

Your initial post referred to "in the Milton Keynes area", which covers a lot of canal, but I think not many would think includes Cosgrove, so I think my point remains There can be no take upof WMs in the actual MK area, because, unless they have since relented, CRT are not making any available.

 

Your final sentence is your words, and nothing to do with mine. I have not I think mentioned anything to do with inclusiveness!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well geographically you can nitpick all you want but the facts are as I've stated and I

believe even Milton Keynes IWA maintain as far as there also in their cleanups etc ? please

correct me if I'm wrong about that.

You clearly then go on to talk about other boaters becoming "more tolerant"if more money

is paid to CRT,what boaters where Alan? Kriss you have that spot on sir

Edited by CDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wreck ferret asks the question over the reasoning behind the scrapping of the roving permit and i,d

like to put the following up for comment and debate.Its my contention that the vested interests have

put an end to these permits and by saying that I mean firstly the marinas which pay money to CRT

and have saw moorers leave because of extortionate pricing and the boater becomes aware that he

can have six months mooring for £500 (last years price for 70 foot) and move every two weeks all summer

as opposed to £4000 for a year in a marina.People with end of garden moorings are in similar positions,

with a roving permit boating communities spring up for six months in winter opposite their shiny end of

garden boats paying less than they are.Then there is the third factor,the intolerant householder which Jenlyn,

Big Col,and others have thankfully highlighted at Giffard Park earlier this year,these are the reasons the Roving

Permit is scrapped.CRT will take everyones point of view except the Boater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CRT are adamant that best legal advice suggests that they cannot legally offer the roving winter mooring permit - which, if you accept that, of course means they have taken quite a lot of money off people for the last two winters selling them something illegal - I can't somehow see the monies for these permits being returned to those who bought them.

 

I have spoken to Richard Parry briefly on the topic, and he insisted it was the legality issue that had killed it, not pressure from vested interests.

At the end of the day all anybody can do is make up their own minds about which of the above is the more convincing argument, or whether indeed the true answer is a bit of mix and match between the two.I know what I think, but what I think chanes nothing, so is kind of irrelevant!).

For the record, I personally would have liked to see them continue, even though I am never likely to be somebody looking for one. Not a perfect answer, of course, and not for everybody, but I know many full time live aboards who have taken them in one or more of the last two winters, and been very grateful for them. It seemed asensible compromise that benefited some, and nobody was forced to like them - if anyone preferred to remain strictly CC-ing through those months, they remained of course perfectly able to do so, just as they always have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wreck ferret asks the question over the reasoning behind the scrapping of the roving permit and i,d

like to put the following up for comment and debate.Its my contention that the vested interests have

put an end to these permits and by saying that I mean firstly the marinas which pay money to CRT

and have saw moorers leave because of extortionate pricing and the boater becomes aware that he

can have six months mooring for £500 (last years price for 70 foot) and move every two weeks all summer

as opposed to £4000 for a year in a marina.People with end of garden moorings are in similar positions,

with a roving permit boating communities spring up for six months in winter opposite their shiny end of

garden boats paying less than they are.Then there is the third factor,the intolerant householder which Jenlyn,

Big Col,and others have thankfully highlighted at Giffard Park earlier this year,these are the reasons the Roving

Permit is scrapped.CRT will take everyones point of view except the Boater.

The winter moorings roving permit has been under attack since it started. NABO were constantly pushing the legality of the idea with CRT.

Quite simply, (and in my opinion) a couple of people within NABO did not like the idea of not being involved, and consequently set about getting rid of them. There was even an email exchange between John Sloan and Mike rod the day before one of the association-crt meetings (where nabo were yet again going to make an issue of them), John reminded Mike that he was a member of NABO, and had received no previous correspondence from NABO regarding any discussion of winter moorings.

 

My partner was also a member of NABO, and never at any time asked for her opinion on winter moorings.

As I have stated before, the joint association meetings did not suit NABO, Mark Tizard and Mike rod did not like working jointly with other associations. Its a shame, because it was the way forward, but sadly, an opportunity lost.

 

When Richard parry met myself and John to tell us the roving mooring permit was not going ahead, he stated then that the winter mooring permits were borderline legally. This after we asked specifically about the make up of the two permits.

 

There will never be an opportunity for CRT to work with boat owners unless some put their egos away.

Compromise was the agenda for some of us, a way forward. It's a shame that some just cannot work toward "compromise" whilst being a "critical friend".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the same Jenlyn who told me that me before one of the meetings that he personally disagreed with John and did not support roving winter moorings. the same Jenlyn who at the last meeting of the associations was not minuted as objecting to the withdrawal of the roving permits. I'll leave you to play to your gallery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the same Jenlyn who told me that me before one of the meetings that he personally disagreed with John and did not support roving winter moorings. the same Jenlyn who at the last meeting of the associations was not minuted as objecting to the withdrawal of the roving permits. I'll leave you to play to your gallery.

Yes, I was indeed against the roving winter permit. John is well aware of that, along with many others. (it's not the revelation you seem to hope it is).

However, I supported and pushed for them because a good number of people suggested I did so.

I had to "compromise" and put my own views aside.

Perhaps something you should try.

As I have stated many times, it's not about me, or you, it's about everyone.

 

I'll leave you to play to your ego wink.png

Edited by jenlyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To an outside observer, it would be much better if there were freely available meeting notes from any discussions CRT had with any "Association" members about their plans to scrap the Winter General Towpath mooring permits, whether with an individual association, or multiple associations. If any formal record exists of any discussion, (beyond CRT telling people the eventual outcome), then I have yet to see it, and would be grateful if somebody could link to anything that does exist.

 

In the absense of any record, (assuming there is none), I don't think this kind of exchange between you guys subsequently really helps the case very much, frankly, but that I guess is your call.

Actually I think that opposition from all manner of different people may have helped drive the nail in the coffin, as undoubtedly resident complaints did arise at some locations, and I would suggest that from what I have seen NBTA do not (on the whole) wish to buy into this kind of thing either. (Some strange bedfellows may I think have been influential in the demise, made all the odder by the fact the arrangement had some very unlikely supporters!) A very odd episode, and one that doesn't give me a lot of hope for the future.

To what extent have CRT spelled out to anybody the actually argument around "legality" - I tried asking and did not get any answer I found helpful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In over three decades as a continuous cruiser I never cease to marvel at these associations and

several times over the years I've spoken to the occasional IWA member about my sadness that

they could never find some common ground with the continuous cruiser in order to take things

forward,thats my hope for the future Alan,as the canals become social housing for a lot of people

the asset is under pressure and under threat like never before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.