The Vine Prog Today, Friday

[MtB]

 

Agreed... 1) If you need to be near where you work and where your kids go to school, you almost certainly cannot be a continuous cruiser.

 

 

I need to be within driving distance of work. Work is wherever the punters are who call me for boiler repairs.

 

I've recently been to Ely in Cambridgeshire, Portsmouth (twice), Camberley Surrey, Grays (Essex), Oxford, Bristol, Bedford and Daventry.

 

Where should my mooring be?

[Nightwatch]

Its always been the same, living on your boat is a grey area, we did it for years and just kept our heads down and moved a bit or had a towpath mooring and quietly lived on. Thing is that that was 35 years ago and the world was a lot different, having a boat meant that you felt an affinity to the world of the industrial/boaty thing. Nowadays there is an undeniable housing crisis, earning £20k is a very good wage for many and it won't buy conventional housing. Anybody with half a brain can see that a boat is a good home and there are lots of affordable ones. There is no way I will condemn anybody for making a home for themselves with what money they've got. Perhaps CRT could widen bits of canals where they own both banks for moorings and instead of the undefinable CC licence return to the old cruising licence and an 11 month / semi residential mooring on the wide bits. The 'problem' isn't going away so maybe CRT should grow up and find ways to accomodate boat dwellers. More revenue, rules that it is possible to comply with, how could anybody possibly complain?

In years gone by I would have liked to have lived in places that I couldn't afford. So I didn't.

 

If people living on boats want to live in the Bath area or London or any other area for that matter and can't find a residential mooring because there aren't any, or they can't afford a residential mooring, then the truth is that maybe a reassessment of their life style needs to be carried out.

 

There are already moorings throughout the system where boats can be accommodated, why spend an enormous amount of money on widening canals to satisfy the few people who can't get their heads around what continual cruising really means.

 

Martyn. Continual Leisure Cruiser.

I need to be within driving distance of work. Work is wherever the punters are who call me for boiler repairs.

 

I've recently been to Ely in Cambridgeshire, Portsmouth (twice), Camberley Surrey, Grays (Essex), Oxford, Bristol, Bedford and Daventry.

 

Where should my mooring be?

Do you need a permanant mooring in,say, Reading, Newbury, Banbury? You are not tied to any place in particular.

 

Martyn

[MtB]

Similar debates rage on the property market forums.

 

"I earn an average wage in London. I should be able to afford an average house there (£700k). It's SO UNFAIR"...

[Graham Davis]

Its always been the same, living on your boat is a grey area, we did it for years and just kept our heads down and moved a bit or had a towpath mooring and quietly lived on. Thing is that that was 35 years ago and the world was a lot different, having a boat meant that you felt an affinity to the world of the industrial/boaty thing. Nowadays there is an undeniable housing crisis, earning £20k is a very good wage for many and it won't buy conventional housing. Anybody with half a brain can see that a boat is a good home and there are lots of affordable ones. There is no way I will condemn anybody for making a home for themselves with what money they've got. Perhaps CRT could widen bits of canals where they own both banks for moorings and instead of the undefinable CC licence return to the old cruising licence and an 11 month / semi residential mooring on the wide bits. The 'problem' isn't going away so maybe CRT should grow up and find ways to accomodate boat dwellers. More revenue, rules that it is possible to comply with, how could anybody possibly complain?

 

Why should they "grow up"?

CaRT are a navigation authority and you seem to want them to become a housing authority.

Who is going to pay for these "widenings"?

What mooring fees do you expect them to charge? The local full residential rates?

How are they going to get Planning permission for these residential moorings?

Do you really want the canals becoming linear housing estates?

[dor]

I have suggested before that these people should buy a motor home and then park it in the middle of their preferred town on a Council car park.

 

There is not much difference between that and expecting to moor a boat in the middle of their preferred town on a C&RT towpath.

 

Now how long do we think they would last on the first option?

[Peter X]

I feel that it would be useful if CRT could come up with some definition of what they think is far enough, not for the benefit of the "IT'S SO UNFAIR" brigade, but for those CC'ers who do follow the spirit of the law, but might have some valid temporary reason to slow down their progress and want to be confident they're moving enough that they don't need to contact CRT to explain.

 

Of course CRT don't have any power to write the law, but if they give guidance and assure boaters that anyone following that guidance will not be subject to any enforcement action, it provides useful clarity. If CRT guidance is reasonable and takes into account the outcomes of the few cases that have ever gone to court, they can hope that any case they do bring based upon it will go their way. It should help to reduce their expenditure on lawyers.

 

The big snag is, I'm aware that CRT have made some attempt at such guidance based upon distance, and don't know whether it would really be practical to give clearer guidance. As has been said, how many boaters know where parish boundaries are? Those would probably be closer together on the ever-popular Regent's Canal anyway due to the high density of population in London. The devil is in the detail.

[Bee]

 

Why should they "grow up"?

CaRT are a navigation authority and you seem to want them to become a housing authority.

Who is going to pay for these "widenings"?

What mooring fees do you expect them to charge? The local full residential rates?

How are they going to get Planning permission for these residential moorings?

Do you really want the canals becoming linear housing estates?

Just floating a few ideas really. CRT are in the enviable position of running something where there is huge demand for their 'product', most companies or organisations have to try really hard for customers. There is a huge demand for residential moorings, CRT could/should see this as an opportunity, I wonder if 11 months occupancy could get round the planning permission obstacle? New branches or widenings would pay for themselves in a few years. As long as new boats keep coming on to the system then there will be linear boat parks anyway whether they are lived on or not. CRT is a navigation authority but also has to keep anglers,walkers, cyclists (!) and lots of other folk happy (ish) so they might as well accommodate their liveaboard customers instead of getting in a huge tangle and upsetting everybody.

[Graham Davis]

Just floating a few ideas really. CRT are in the enviable position of running something where there is huge demand for their 'product', most companies or organisations have to try really hard for customers(1) There is a huge demand for residential moorings,(2) CRT could/should see this as an opportunity, I wonder if 11 months occupancy could get round the planning permission obstacle? New branches or widenings would pay for themselves in a few years (3). As long as new boats keep coming on to the system then there will be linear boat parks anyway whether they are lived on or not(4). CRT is a navigation authority but also has to keep anglers,walkers, cyclists (!) and lots of other folk happy (ish) so they might as well accommodate their liveaboard customers instead of getting in a huge tangle and upsetting everybody. (5)

 

1/ Is there? Haven't the number of boats recorded on the cut gone down lately?

2/ Again, is there? Can you provide evidence of that? Is it that there is some demand in some small areas?

3/ Even to build these widenings or branches there would still need to be Planning Permission sought, and they have to be paid for first; where is the money to pay for that going to come from, both in land acquisition and in the construction?

4/ Again, are there extra boats coming onto the system?

5/ Agreed, but they are not and cannot be a HOUSING authority!

[Midnight]

I feel that it would be useful if CRT could come up with some definition of what they think is far enough, not for the benefit of the "IT'S SO UNFAIR" brigade, but for those

 

I think they did, didn't they 15-20 miles a year?

 

People who have to ask are usually the ones who intend to move the least.

 

People who can't manage 15-20 miles a year can expect everything CRT can throw at them.

 

People who don't wish to move at all should expect same or pay for a residential mooring fee.

 

It's very likely none of the above will 'satisfy the board' and will fall foul of CRT enforcement and get little sympathy from the majority of boat owners.!

 

"IT'S SO UNFAIR" - - continuous moaners!

 

Edited April 30, 2016 by Midnight

[MtB]

 

I think they did, didn't they 15-20 miles a year?

 

People who have to ask are usually the ones who intend to move the least.

 

People who can't manage 15-20 miles a year can expect everything CRT can throw at them.

 

People who don't wish to move at all should expect same or pay for a residential mooring fee.

 

It's very likely none of the above will 'satisfy the board' and will fall foul of CRT enforcement and get little sympathy from the majority of boat owners.!

 

"IT'S SO UNFAIR" - - continuous moaners!

 

 

 

Not quite. They came up with a 'cruising range', which is subtly different. So subtly different that most people misinterpret it as the distance they have to cruise in a year.

 

I think CRT might have dropped it now, so confusing people find the concept of regularly cruising up and down between two points 25 miles apart, as opposed to being required to move 25 miles a year.

[Murflynn]

you want to be a CCer? ....... then get out and cruise, continuously.

 

you want to be a CMer? ........ then get a mooring

 

 

I have suggested before that these people should buy a motor home and then park it in the middle of their preferred town on a Council car park.

 

There is not much difference between that and expecting to moor a boat in the middle of their preferred town on a C&RT towpath.

 

Now how long do we think they would last on the first option?

absolutely.

 

 

If people say that they would like to enjoy life on the water, but live close to the facilities, there may be a market for the conversion of gravel pits and raw water reservoirs into houseboating estates, or the creation of new lakes for that purpose. We would soon find out the economic price of creating and maintaining such facilities, that the CMers seem to want for next to nothing..

[Steilsteven]

 

 

no but some folk do so they know they are doing it correct, how do you know how far you have to move? you may not be going by the laws as loads of other CC`ers, nothing wrong with wanting to know how to stick to rules, CRT should give a an area as Dyertribe says or a distance,

 

Easy things in life are such a ball ache at times, why make it so hard.

Might as well introduce 'bus stops' and make people go from one to another clocking up so many in a year.

 

I like to choose how far I go, where I go, where I stop and for how long ( within the fourteen day ruling ) I stay at any location.

How far that takes me in miles over a year is irrelevant, what is important is why I'm doing it.

I'm doing it because I like to go from place to place by boat on a continuous journey i.e. bona fide navigating.

 

The only people who are making life hard, are the ones who feel the need to ask ''How far is far enough'' because they are, or intend to be, doing something that the 1995 act wasn't intended for.

 

Keith

[Bee]

 

1/ Is there? Haven't the number of boats recorded on the cut gone down lately?

2/ Again, is there? Can you provide evidence of that? Is it that there is some demand in some small areas?

3/ Even to build these widenings or branches there would still need to be Planning Permission sought, and they have to be paid for first; where is the money to pay for that going to come from, both in land acquisition and in the construction?

4/ Again, are there extra boats coming onto the system?

5/ Agreed, but they are not and cannot be a HOUSING authority!

I've always assumed there must be a huge demand for residential moorings just because there are so many people living on boats, maybe people would rather have all the aggro of trying to CC whilst working and sending kids to school. A lot of people who have CC licences are obviously not really continually cruising, doesn't bother me, in fact that is what I would be doing as a way of being as legit. as possible whilst living on my boat if I had to.

CRT would not be a housing authority by providing moorings, they would be if they provided homes, ie boats though. Didn't know boat numbers have gone down, wonder where they've gone? We had a residential mooring some years ago and at the time they were like hens teeth but it was a huge relief to be legit and able to send the kids to school.

[Midnight]

 

 

Not quite. They came up with a 'cruising range', which is subtly different. So subtly different that most people misinterpret it as the distance they have to cruise in a year.

 

I think CRT might have dropped it now, so confusing people find the concept of regularly cruising up and down between two points 25 miles apart, as opposed to being required to move 25 miles a year.

 

Yes MTB I see what you mean - cruising range the distance CRT expect you to travel in a year to 'satisfy the board' is still confusing.

 

As CRT have no powers to state a minimum distance between places they will have to rely on case by case scrutiny of who are and who are not cruising 'bona fide' and 'satisfying the board'.

 

Not good for continuous moaners but it's not that difficult to stay out of enforcement if you are genuinely a cc'er.

 

Edited because brain wasn't in gear on first draft

Edited April 30, 2016 by Midnight

[BMC problems]

The repeated pushing of the '' it's my home '' angle is starting to grate with me.

This has no bearing whatsoever on anyone's failure to '' satisfy the board '' and is not a problem to lay at CaRT's door.

 

If you have chosen to live on a boat ( like we have ), then that's your choice. If you choose to have children, fine.

If you choose to also continuously cruise, that's fine too, provided that you actually want to cruise.

It won't be easy, bearing in mind getting to work and getting the children to school from distant locations but it is possible,it just depends on how eager you are to cruise and how much you want children. If that sounds too much like hard work, then it's not for you.

 

I don't want a definitive answer to '' how far is far enough '' thank you, so please stop asking the stupid question.

 

Keith

I agree that ' boats are homes ' is irrelevant but I do wish people ( as you have just done ) would stop blaming boaters for this confusion. it's CRT who use terms like 'not far enough' and 'range'. it seems fairly natural for people to ask for definitions of these terms, particularly if it affects their right to use their boats.

Might as well introduce 'bus stops' and make people go from one to another clocking up so many in a year.

 

I like to choose how far I go, where I go, where I stop and for how long ( within the fourteen day ruling ) I stay at any location.

How far that takes me in miles over a year is irrelevant, what is important is why I'm doing it.

I'm doing it because I like to go from place to place by boat on a continuous journey i.e. bona fide navigating.

 

The only people who are making life hard, are the ones who feel the need to ask ''How far is far enough'' because they are, or intend to be, doing something that the 1995 act wasn't intended for.

 

Keith

Pursuing this, as you say, the 1995 Act does not mention distance so that cannot be a criteria on the issue of a license.

Might as well introduce 'bus stops' and make people go from one to another clocking up so many in a year.

 

I like to choose how far I go, where I go, where I stop and for how long ( within the fourteen day ruling ) I stay at any location.

How far that takes me in miles over a year is irrelevant, what is important is why I'm doing it.

I'm doing it because I like to go from place to place by boat on a continuous journey i.e. bona fide navigating.

 

The only people who are making life hard, are the ones who feel the need to ask ''How far is far enough'' because they are, or intend to be, doing something that the 1995 act wasn't intended for.

 

Keith

Pursuing this, as you say, the 1995 Act does not mention distance so that cannot be a criteria on the issue of a license.

Might as well introduce 'bus stops' and make people go from one to another clocking up so many in a year.

 

I like to choose how far I go, where I go, where I stop and for how long ( within the fourteen day ruling ) I stay at any location.

How far that takes me in miles over a year is irrelevant, what is important is why I'm doing it.

I'm doing it because I like to go from place to place by boat on a continuous journey i.e. bona fide navigating.

 

The only people who are making life hard, are the ones who feel the need to ask ''How far is far enough'' because they are, or intend to be, doing something that the 1995 act wasn't intended for.

 

Keith

Pursuing this, as you say, the 1995 Act does not mention distance so that cannot be a criteria on the issue of a license.

Might as well introduce 'bus stops' and make people go from one to another clocking up so many in a year.

 

I like to choose how far I go, where I go, where I stop and for how long ( within the fourteen day ruling ) I stay at any location.

How far that takes me in miles over a year is irrelevant, what is important is why I'm doing it.

I'm doing it because I like to go from place to place by boat on a continuous journey i.e. bona fide navigating.

 

The only people who are making life hard, are the ones who feel the need to ask ''How far is far enough'' because they are, or intend to be, doing something that the 1995 act wasn't intended for.

 

Keith

Pursuing this, as you say, the 1995 Act does not mention distance so that cannot be a criteria on the issue of a license.

don't know what happened there, it was a good point but not so important I had to say it four times

[Alan de Enfield]

I've always assumed there must be a huge demand for residential moorings just because there are so many people living on boats, maybe people would rather have all the aggro of trying to CC whilst working and sending kids to school. A lot of people who have CC licences are obviously not really continually cruising, doesn't bother me, in fact that is what I would be doing as a way of being as legit. as possible whilst living on my boat if I had to.

CRT would not be a housing authority by providing moorings, they would be if they provided homes, ie boats though. Didn't know boat numbers have gone down, wonder where they've gone? We had a residential mooring some years ago and at the time they were like hens teeth but it was a huge relief to be legit and able to send the kids to school.

 

According to C&RT figures they issue about 5000 'boat without a home mooring' (CC) licence per annum.

Not all of these are liveaboards - some being owned by leisure boaters who 'leave their boat' during the week and cruise at weekends / holidays (also known as 'dumpers')

 

Of these 5000 approximately 50% have had contact from C&RT regarding them not travelling enough to satisfy the board.

Of these (approximately) 2500 a few have now left the waterways and many have 'revised their cruising'

 

The hardcore 'non-moving liveaboards' probably number in the 'low hundreds', and of those some / many complain that they either cannot afford a mooring, or that they do not wish to live in a 'council estate'.

 

I would suggest that there is not in fact a 'huge demand' for residential moorings even in the well known 'honey-spots'.

[BMC problems]

but probably enough to whittle that 'few hundred' down.

[MtB]

 

Yes MTB I see what you mean - cruising range the distance CRT expect you to travel in a year to 'satisfy the board' is still confusing.

 

As CRT have no powers to state a minimum distance between places they will have to rely on case by case scrutiny of who are and who are not cruising 'bona fide' and 'satisfying the board'.

 

Not good for continuous moaners but it's not that difficult to stay out of enforcement if you are genuinely a cc'er.

 

Edited because brain wasn't in gear on first draft

 

 

 

Yes exactly. I think CRT are saying a boater maintaining the 'cruising range' definitely satisfies the board.

 

A boater cruising a smaller range may or may not still satisfy the board.

 

The important point is only the boaters cruising a smaller range are at any risk at all of failing to satisfy the board.

[Claude]

 

I see, good at spotting parish boundaries are you? I'm not

 

Parish isn't in the act, and I'm pretty sure has never been an officially recognised 'place' for waterways

 

I bet that somewhere on the cut you can find three parish boundaries crossing the canal no more than a hundred metres apart

 

Richard

 

I never knew where the parish boundaries were when I used to CC, but I think those blaming CRT for not defining how far one needs to move are just trying to find loopholes in the rules to allow them to carry on not making an effort to move (I'm not including you in this - I was just responding to your parish boundaries question).

 

There are always going to be some practical difficulties in defining exactly how far CCers have to move, but the point is that you just need to move a reasonable distance. Yes, "reasonable" is open to interpretation but if every facet of waterways life has to be fully defined then what an over-regulated lifestyle it will become (if indeed it has not already become).

 

If people truly make the effort to move but it then turns out that their idea of a reasonable distance isn't the same as CRT's I suppose legitimate issues may ensue. However, the irony is that some who say they want a "freer" lifestyle with less regulation are actually helping to produce just the opposite and increase the level of regulation by not complying with the spirit of the regs and and demanding definitions before they will comply.

 

Personally I would rather keep some ambiguity in the regs and therefore at least a small element of freedom.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Claude

[Graham Davis]

I've always assumed there must be a huge demand for residential moorings just because there are so many people living on boats, maybe people would rather have all the aggro of trying to CC whilst working and sending kids to school. A lot of people who have CC licences are obviously not really continually cruising, doesn't bother me, in fact that is what I would be doing as a way of being as legit. as possible whilst living on my boat if I had to.

CRT would not be a housing authority by providing moorings, they would be if they provided homes, ie boats though. Didn't know boat numbers have gone down, wonder where they've gone? We had a residential mooring some years ago and at the time they were like hens teeth but it was a huge relief to be legit and able to send the kids to school.

 

Assume = ass of u and me!

Don't assume, because invariably it is wrong.

 

If people want to work and have kids at school then without a lot of hard work "continuously cruising" is not for them. Unless they are willing to undertake that, then they need to find a legitimate mooring and accept that they will have to pay for it, just like everyone else.

Life's a bitch and then you're dead!

[Claude]

 

Assume = ass of u and me!

 

Life's a bitch and then you're dead!

 

Mmm... perhaps you could enlighten us with some more hackneyed cliches!

[MtB]

 

Mmm... perhaps you could enlighten us with some more hackneyed cliches!

 

 

I avoid cliches like the plague...

[alan_fincher]

 

The act of Parliament is very clear, you have to move to another place.

 

I'm sure you know that sentence in nonsense Sue.

 

The act makes absolutely no mention of "moving to another place". It only mentions "bona fide for navigation".

 

As we all know, what that means has been repeatedly established to be far from clear.

 

It doesn't help to keep suggesting that the act says things that it clearly does not, and never has!

[Richard10002]

 

I think they did, didn't they 15-20 miles a year?

 

 

 

I thought they said something along the lines of "15-20 miles wouldn't satisfy the rules"

 

So they didnt commit themselves to anything, they merely made it absolutely clear that someone who moved within a range of 20 miles in a year would not satisfy the rules. They didnt say that if you move within a range of more than 20 miles you will be satisfying the rules.

 

This leaves it wide open for them to suggest that a boater moving within a range of more than 20 miles in a year doesnt satisfy the rules.

 

There is nothing confusing about this.

 

But as soon as CRT says something like this, those that wish to abuse the rules, or continue to abuse the rules, pounce on it and spin it to suit their ends.

 

No wonder CRT are no longer willing to discuss distances at all, or any kind of clarification..

[Midnight]

 

I thought they said something along the lines of "15-20 miles wouldn't satisfy the rules"

 

So they didnt commit themselves to anything, they merely made it absolutely clear that someone who moved within a range of 20 miles in a year would not satisfy the rules. They didnt say that if you move within a range of more than 20 miles you will be satisfying the rules.

 

This leaves it wide open for them to suggest that a boater moving within a range of more than 20 miles in a year doesnt satisfy the rules.

 

There is nothing confusing about this.

 

But as soon as CRT says something like this, those that wish to abuse the rules, or continue to abuse the rules, pounce on it and spin it to suit their ends.

 

No wonder CRT are no longer willing to discuss distances at all, or any kind of clarification..

 

Yes I stand corrected

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/enjoy-the-waterways/boating/licensing-your-boat/enforcement/boaters-without-a-home-mooring-how-far-is-far-enough

 

"Whilst this means that we cannot set a universal minimum distance for compliance, we can advise that it is very unlikely that someone would be able to satisfy us that they have been genuinely cruising if their range of movement is less than 15-20 miles over the period of their licence. In most cases we would expect it to be greater than this."

It does suggest 25 miles may satisfy but then again that's range over the license period not distance from place to place.

 

In CRT's attempt to add some guidance I can see how confusing it has become. On the other hand most reasonably minded people would know what's expected. There's lots of cc'ers who find it easy enough to comply.