South East Visitor Moorings Consultation - Batchworth, Berkhamsted, Marsworth & Braunston

[jenlyn]

 

To my understanding it is a charge being levied for doing something that they do not want done. Thus it is a threat, do this and it will cost you money. Now to me that is a fine for being naughty.

 

As I posted earlier I cannot find anything in statue that permits or gives CRT authority to fine for misconduct. If I understand correctly they could bring over stayers before the Magistrates court where they can be fined on summary conviction.

No. It would be a civil matter. However, it is to all intent and purpose being promoted as a fine.

[Graham.m]

No. It would be a civil matter. However, it is to all intent and purpose being promoted as a fine.

 

Sorry what would be a civil matter?

[nicknorman]

We've only been south of Blisworth a couple of times, neither recent, so can't comment on the current experience but from an outsiders point of view the mix of different durations seems reasonable to me. At Braunston it is mostly 48hr but that is a good thing because it does get very busy there. Plenty of towpath just outside Braunston for those folk wanting to stay 2 weeks.

 

Alan, do you feel strongly that there is something fundamentally wrong with the proposals?

 

As to the £25 its legality is perhaps questionable but on the other hand, what is the point in having short term mooring restrictions if there is no way to enforce them? As usual it is the small minority of overstaying pisstakers that force CRT's hand. Of course if one complies with the time limits, the aim of which is to ensure the facility can be shared by all, then the question of £25 doesn't arise. Those who are moaning on about it presumably are accustomed to being able to treat the short term restrictions with impunity without regard for "playing and sharing nicely". Bring it on, I say.

Edited January 5, 2016 by nicknorman

[jenlyn]

As usual it is the small minority of overstaying pisstakers that force CRT's hand.

Or perhaps it's to stop those shiny Hudson brass polishers from hogging all the honeyspots in the summer months

[Graham.m]

We've only been south of Blisworth a couple of times, neither recent, so can't comment on the current experience but from an outsiders point of view the mix of different durations seems reasonable to me. At Braunston it is mostly 48hr but that is a good thing because it does get very busy there. Plenty of towpath just outside Braunston for those folk wanting to stay 2 weeks.

 

Alan, do you feel strongly that there is something fundamentally wrong with the proposals?

 

As to the £25 its legality is perhaps questionable but on the other hand, what is the point in having short term mooring restrictions if there is no way to enforce them? As usual it is the small minority of overstaying pisstakers that force CRT's hand. Of course if one complies with the time limits, the aim of which is to ensure the facility can be shared by all, then the question of £25 doesn't arise. Those who are moaning on about it presumably are accustomed to being able to treat the short term restrictions with impunity without regard for "playing and sharing nicely". Bring it on, I say.

As I understand it CRT have the right to take them before a magistrate's court. With that I have no problem. I do have a problem with CRT being judge, jury and beneficiary.

[Ange]

It is not a fine it is charge that is advertised on a notice.

 

Just as per my example of a supermarket car park.

There's no comparison between a supermarket carpark and a multi use recreational area that is also used by liveaboards. How can you think there is?

 

Of course it's a fine.

[Arthur Marshall]

I can't see how it can be argued that CRT can't do this. Many years ago they purloined the whole of the Llangollen moorings and charged for them but (I presume because it was a bit out of the way) no-one complained much. Bit late now to start telling them they can't do it elsewhere - lucky it's only for overstaying.

[bassplayer]

Maybe I'm missing something here. I thought the statitory law says you can moor up to 14 days anywhere.

 

If someone was taken to court by CRT for staying 14 days on a CRT designated 2 day mooring wouldn't CRT lose?

 

If someone was taken to court bt CRT for not paying the daily £25 'overstay fine', wouldn't CRT lose that too? In fact it may be considered an illegal fine and CRT could end up being sued by anyone who has paid this 'fine' in the past.

 

Have CRT taken anyone to court yet for failing to comply with either of the above?

[bottle]

My posts, did exactly as expected.

 

I will be taking no further part in this thread.

[Arthur Marshall]

Maybe I'm missing something here. I thought the statitory law says you can moor up to 14 days anywhere.

Does it say you can moor for 14 days for free? As above, you can't at Llangollen. And you can't at bits of the towpath which are CRT longterm moorings. And as far as I know, you can't at lock landings and water points. The trouble is, unless you've got bolshy souls like Tony and Nigel who don't take this stuff lying down, it all becomes accepted custom and practice, which charging for moorings (post Llangollen) now is. I presume no-one made a fuss about that because it was oop north, not darn sarf.

[Graham.m]

I can't see how it can be argued that CRT can't do this. Many years ago they purloined the whole of the Llangollen moorings and charged for them but (I presume because it was a bit out of the way) no-one complained much. Bit late now to start telling them they can't do it elsewhere - lucky it's only for overstaying.

The only way I can think to explain is to me it is the same as police services imposing on the spot cash fines, which the service keeps and with no ability to take it to court.

 

Not good but best I can do at this time of the morning.

[Tuscan]

I can't see how it can be argued that CRT can't do this. Many years ago they purloined the whole of the Llangollen moorings and charged for them but (I presume because it was a bit out of the way) no-one complained much. Bit late now to start telling them they can't do it elsewhere - lucky it's only for overstaying.

CRT are allowed to charge for a service hence £6 at Llangollen which includes free electricity. It does appear that £25 with no additional service provided is just a fine in my opinion.

[jenlyn]

Does it say you can moor for 14 days for free? As above, you can't at Llangollen. And you can't at bits of the towpath which are CRT longterm moorings. And as far as I know, you can't at lock landings and water points. The trouble is, unless you've got bolshy souls like Tony and Nigel who don't take this stuff lying down, it all becomes accepted custom and practice, which charging for moorings (post Llangollen) now is. I presume no-one made a fuss about that because it was oop north, not darn sarf.

They offer electric hook up on those moorings don't they?

All the same, CRT are seemingly trying to turn the canals into caravan club sites, grading the charge of moorings according to the services provided. £25 for "nothing" seems a bit steep.

Edited January 6, 2016 by jenlyn

[Graham.m]

Does it say you can moor for 14 days for free? As above, you can't at Llangollen. And you can't at bits of the towpath which are CRT longterm moorings. And as far as I know, you can't at lock landings and water points. The trouble is, unless you've got bolshy souls like Tony and Nigel who don't take this stuff lying down, it all becomes accepted custom and practice, which charging for moorings (post Llangollen) now is. I presume no-one made a fuss about that because it was oop north, not darn sarf.

Unless people support people like Nigel, Leigh and Tony the Trust, not that I trust them, will end up being able to do whatever they want regardless of what the law say they can do.

 

I can only say support them and make your voice heard.

[Sir Nibble]

I have to say that whilst I don't dispute the right to do it I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would want to habitually stay anywhere for as long as 14 days. I can understand a visitor to Bath or Oxford or something wanting to do so but I cannot get away from the notion that every stop being a default 14 days is just a waste of a boat.

Like I said, I don't dispute the entitlement but to me personally it seems a recipe for tedium.

[Graham.m]

My posts, did exactly as expected.

 

I will be taking no further part in this thread.

What did your posts do, that would not have happened naturally?

My posts, did exactly as expected.

 

I will be taking no further part in this thread.

What did your posts do, that would not have happened naturally?

[jenlyn]

I have to say that whilst I don't dispute the right to do it I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would want to habitually stay anywhere for as long as 14 days. I can understand a visitor to Bath or Oxford or something wanting to do so but I cannot get away from the notion that every stop being a default 14 days is just a waste of a boat.

Like I said, I don't dispute the entitlement but to me personally it seems a recipe for tedium.

In the winter months, I tend to stop for 7-10 days, where as during the summer, maybe 3-4. That's just me, and I don't expect others to do the same. The law is quite clear on the 14 day, it's a shame that CRT are trying to "bend" it.

 

There are hundreds of boats owned by older folk, on moorings, who just like to potter about in the summer months. This sort of cr@p takes away their little enjoyment, it's unnecessary.

Edited January 6, 2016 by jenlyn

[Graham.m]

I have to say that whilst I don't dispute the right to do it I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would want to habitually stay anywhere for as long as 14 days. I can understand a visitor to Bath or Oxford or something wanting to do so but I cannot get away from the notion that every stop being a default 14 days is just a waste of a boat.

Like I said, I don't dispute the entitlement but to me personally it seems a recipe for tedium.

I can see where you are coming from. It is about retaining the right to do if the boater wants or needs.

[Sir Nibble]

I'm not familiar with this particular site. What is there, and how many days does it take to properly appreciate it? Just being devils advocate and looking at the situation of visitor moorings from 180%, What was the mooring established for? Just a break from pins? Or so that boats can conveniently visit a town or attraction? I would be hard pressed to kill 14 days in Oxford for instance though I can see that a research project in the Bodleian may require longer. There are few places that can't be seen in 7 days and I don't recall ever staying longer than 3 days anywhere but never felt rushed. Although my case is not typical because for me the whole point of my boat was to be boating. Surely the acid test of mooring limits is "Does this allow sufficient time to enjoy the place/facility the mooring was established to access."

[nicknorman]

There are hundreds of boats owned by older folk, on moorings, who just like to potter about in the summer months. This sort of cr@p takes away their little enjoyment, it's unnecessary.

I'm not quite sure if you are saying you are against any mooring restrictions short of 14 days, or not?

 

If you are, I'd say that what takes away folks little enjoyment (whether older or not) is an inability to make a spontaneous stop at an interesting village / pub or whatever, due to all the nearby moorings being taken up by 14 dayers. This is why mooring restrictions at popular sights are a good thing.

 

Of course this is much less of an issue in winter and that's why I think CRT have got it right by relaxing many of the restrictions over the winter.

[Graham.m]

I'm not familiar with this particular site. What is there, and how many days does it take to properly appreciate it? Just being devils advocate and looking at the situation of visitor moorings from 180%, What was the mooring established for? Just a break from pins? Or so that boats can conveniently visit a town or attraction? I would be hard pressed to kill 14 days in Oxford for instance though I can see that a research project in the Bodleian may require longer. There are few places that can't be seen in 7 days and I don't recall ever staying longer than 3 days anywhere but never felt rushed. Although my case is not typical because for me the whole point of my boat was to be boating. Surely the acid test of mooring limits is "Does this allow sufficient time to enjoy the place/facility the mooring was established to access."

 

I don't know your level of fitness but if you can DO Oxford in three days you have missed so much even if you are a young fit 21 year old. Heck a visit to the Bodleian could even take the best part of a day to fully appreciate it.

 

However if you are of mature years with arthritis setting in things take longer and hence you need to stay longer. Of course if you are disabled even longer

[jenlyn]

I'm not quite sure if you are saying you are against any mooring restrictions short of 14 days, or not?

 

If you are, I'd say that what takes away folks little enjoyment (whether older or not) is an inability to make a spontaneous stop at an interesting village / pub or whatever, due to all the nearby moorings being taken up by 14 dayers. This is why mooring restrictions at popular sights are a good thing.

 

Of course this is much less of an issue in winter and that's why I think CRT have got it right by relaxing many of the restrictions over the winter.

The maps state these new features will be "all year round".

As for the rest of your post, the restrictions at stoke bruerne, foxton and thrupp just stopped people from visiting full stop, and yes there is evidence, the businesses in stoke bruerne and foxton have been moaning about lack of trade.

[bassplayer]

Does it say you can moor for 14 days for free? As above, you can't at Llangollen. And you can't at bits of the towpath which are CRT longterm moorings. And as far as I know, you can't at lock landings and water points. The trouble is, unless you've got bolshy souls like Tony and Nigel who don't take this stuff lying down, it all becomes accepted custom and practice, which charging for moorings (post Llangollen) now is. I presume no-one made a fuss about that because it was oop north, not darn sarf.

The law doesn't say you can moor for an additional fee either. I thought we already pay for that privilege with our boat licence.

 

I agree CRT seem to be able to do what they want which is why I'm querying the legalities of what they are doing.

 

Out of curiosity what is the legal process for CRT to turn a bit of towpath into a paid up permanent mooring (permit only)? Presumably they have to go through some legal process to do that as they are changing the use of the land/site. Maybe they don't....

[Sir Nibble]

 

I don't know your level of fitness but if you can DO Oxford in three days you have missed so much even if you are a young fit 21 year old. Heck a visit to the Bodleian could even take the best part of a day to fully appreciate it.

 

However if you are of mature years with arthritis setting in things take longer and hence you need to stay longer. Of course if you are disabled even longer

I entirely accept what you say and as I said don't dispute the entitlement nor that for some it is entirely appropriate, although I would rather spend the time at the helm personally. How many of Oxford's 14 day moorings are occupied by visitors to the city off each morning to explore I wonder.

[nicknorman]

The maps state these new features will be "all year round".

For Batchworth there is a relaxation by the inclusion of 7 day moorings, compared to 3 day at the moment (or should that be 2 day?). For Berko and Marsworth there are significant sections that are not "all year round". Perhaps you should re-read the text?