Jump to content

CRT to introduce mooring strategy for its entire waterway system


GoodGurl
 Share

Featured Posts

Just to correct.......

Before the South East Visitor Mooring changes were made, the "tunnel" pound was already actually 2 day mooring, (though that was only signed at the Southern end, not the North end), and the "long" pound 2 locks down was actually only 24 hour mooring.

So, in its latest revision, the new SEVM regime is actually more relaxed than what it replaced, other than the issue of the £25 charges and "maximum days in a month" rules. It is, as you say, (in Summer months) 2 days at the top and 7 in the long pound. (You also now get relaxations in the winter months, which you did not before).

So the fact that is is now relatively deserted compared to what is claimed in the past is most certainly not down to the stay times being reduced, because actually the reverse is the case. I still hear people say things like "I prefer not to stop at a place where the signs threatening to charge me are in bigger letters than the ones saying how long I can stay", and that I think is part of the reason Stoke Bruerne sees less boats stopping, (and hence the museum and local pubs and restaurants probably suffer a loss of trade).

I love Stoke Bruerne, but I still insist that the SEVM initiative was not only unnecessary, but has actually proved to be a considerable own goal, particularly if South East waterways want maximum visitor numbers at the Museum, (which has also now transferred to be part of the SE remit).

From Tuscan's remarks it seems much the same applies at Foxton, a location I end up visiting far less often.

i also wonder whether it's the terms associated with the short stay (threats of £25 charge, no return etc) is the deciding factor. What is now clear after the recent consultation on Berkhampsted and Marsworth is that there is now a visitor mooring framework that gives the local waterways manager the criteria to decide whether to alter stay times. Perhaps now is the time to examine the data collected daily at Stoke Breune and Foxton with a view to changing stay times if the evidence supports it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much as I was going to post. I would especially welcome the opportunity to book a short mooring for a specific date, as in Rembrandt Gardens, in locations where either I wish to be sure of finding somewhere or where there is high demand. (Or has known extras such as electricity - see Llangollen mooring basin)

 

I would quite like to debate a longer term future where such premium facilities are chargeable as part of a plan to keep the general licence fee lower, so long as the experience available to those who only want to pay for the general licence is not seriously dented.

 

For example, I find it remarkable that features such as the Anderton Lift and the Standedge Tunnel, both of which involve significant staff costs to access, remain without additional charge.

 

As funding streams changes, it is not credible to refuse to engage in the debate. Much better to do so and seek to shape the outcome to be as favourable as possible.

Lo and behold the survey on this (for London) has now appeared! The power of the Forum . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just to correct.......

 

Before the South East Visitor Mooring changes were made, the "tunnel" pound was already actually 2 day mooring, (though that was only signed at the Southern end, not the North end), and the "long" pound 2 locks down was actually only 24 hour mooring.

 

So, in its latest revision, the new SEVM regime is actually more relaxed than what it replaced, other than the issue of the £25 charges and "maximum days in a month" rules. It is, as you say, (in Summer months) 2 days at the top and 7 in the long pound. (You also now get relaxations in the winter months, which you did not before).

 

So the fact that is is now relatively deserted compared to what is claimed in the past is most certainly not down to the stay times being reduced, because actually the reverse is the case. I still hear people say things like "I prefer not to stop at a place where the signs threatening to charge me are in bigger letters than the ones saying how long I can stay", and that I think is part of the reason Stoke Bruerne sees less boats stopping, (and hence the museum and local pubs and restaurants probably suffer a loss of trade).

 

I love Stoke Bruerne, but I still insist that the SEVM initiative was not only unnecessary, but has actually proved to be a considerable own goal, particularly if South East waterways want maximum visitor numbers at the Museum, (which has also now transferred to be part of the SE remit).

 

From Tuscan's remarks it seems much the same applies at Foxton, a location I end up visiting far less often.

The tunnel pound was 'assumed' to be 14 day before as there wasn't any signage to say otherwise. If there was a 48h sign at the southern end I don't remember it, but if there was then why wasn't a sign put at the Northern end? How did people coming in from the tunnel end know?

 

Anyway that's all in the past now. I personally think that the £25 notices are aggressive and send an unwelcome message to visiting boaters.

 

As I said before, people may worry that in an emergency or breakdown and have to leave the boat for a few days, they will run up a big bill.

 

Unfortunately it's the nice people who worry about doing the wrong thing who are being inconvenienced. Those who don't give a toss or/and aren't afraid to just play by the law let it go over their head.

 

I'm sure if the £25 fine bit was removed from the 48h signs it would encourage more boaters to stay in SB. Why not try it for a year and see what happens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tunnel pound was 'assumed' to be 14 day before as there wasn't any signage to say otherwise. If there was a 48h sign at the southern end I don't remember it, but if there was then why wasn't a sign put at the Northern end? How did people coming in from the tunnel end know?

 

Anyway that's all in the past now. I personally think that the £25 notices are aggressive and send an unwelcome message to visiting boaters.

 

As I said before, people may worry that in an emergency or breakdown and have to leave the boat for a few days, they will run up a big bill.

 

Unfortunately it's the nice people who worry about doing the wrong thing who are being inconvenienced. Those who don't give a toss or/and aren't afraid to just play by the law let it go over their head.

 

I'm sure if the £25 fine bit was removed from the 48h signs it would encourage more boaters to stay in SB. Why not try it for a year and see what happens?

 

Yes, I can't disagree with any of that.

 

There definitely used to be a 48 hour sign towards the Southern end of the tunnel pound moorings, though whether it was ever matched by one marking the Northern limit I have no idea. As you say, you would not have known if you arrived from the North.

 

I believe Jeff Whyatt's obsession with this project has done Stoke Bruerne no good at all, but I'm not sure removal of the £25 signs would necessarily change the behaviour of people who used to overnight there, but no longer do.

 

However, to bring this back on topic, don't forget Stoke Bruerne, Foxton and Thrupp were also billed as a model that would get rolled oiut all over the system, (the initial South East proposal being for starting off with in excess of 20 locations alone). Common sense has prevailed, and despite many vested interests pushing for more of the same, it now seems unlikely that will happen.

 

I still see no reason why anything done for London, which is wholely unrepresentative of the network as a whole, should be applied in areas that bear few similarities.

 

I don't think NBTA can actually produce any evidence that support the claims made that started this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I can't disagree with any of that.

 

There definitely used to be a 48 hour sign towards the Southern end of the tunnel pound moorings, though whether it was ever matched by one marking the Northern limit I have no idea. As you say, you would not have known if you arrived from the North.

 

I believe Jeff Whyatt's obsession with this project has done Stoke Bruerne no good at all, but I'm not sure removal of the £25 signs would necessarily change the behaviour of people who used to overnight there, but no longer do.

 

However, to bring this back on topic, don't forget Stoke Bruerne, Foxton and Thrupp were also billed as a model that would get rolled oiut all over the system, (the initial South East proposal being for starting off with in excess of 20 locations alone). Common sense has prevailed, and despite many vested interests pushing for more of the same, it now seems unlikely that will happen.

 

I still see no reason why anything done for London, which is wholely unrepresentative of the network as a whole, should be applied in areas that bear few similarities.

 

I don't think NBTA can actually produce any evidence that support the claims made that started this thread.

Try going north out of Leighton Buzzard at most times. Some folk should be wary of what they push for, especially if 'obstruction' is the legal basis for such plans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see why i should have to pay to leave my boat somewhere. To start with 8/10 i cant get into the bank and often trying to find a 70 foot space late at night is bad enough. If i wanted to say in one place for a tume i buy a temp morning have you tried to moor at stoke bruerne? The longest is 7 days or pay as it is. Why should i pay just coz i want to stop in a nice town village and explore. I pay top wack for using the system coz i have a boat that some of the system was built for it to start with.

I dont mind paying if i want to go over the 14 days not a prob but why should we pay just to stop a few days for a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I dont see why i should have to pay to leave my boat somewhere. To start with 8/10 i cant get into the bank and often trying to find a 70 foot space late at night is bad enough. If i wanted to say in one place for a tume i buy a temp morning have you tried to moor at stoke bruerne? The longest is 7 days or pay as it is. Why should i pay just coz i want to stop in a nice town village and explore. I pay top wack for using the system coz i have a boat that some of the system was built for it to start with.

I dont mind paying if i want to go over the 14 days not a prob but why should we pay just to stop a few days for a week.

If i read your post right, i don't think there is an option of paying for a visitor mooring, the £25 " charge " is technically within the law, but still very dubious, and I suspect CRT don't want to push it in case it ends up in court. In which case £25 a night couldn't be justified as a fair charge, and it would be obvious it was intended as a penalty, which is unlawful. My FOI showed only a total of 7 out of 19 have been paid up to March this year, and 6 cancelled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having just been in Stoke Bruerne, and stopped over for the permitted times, It was noticeable how few boats stopped near the pubs and canal museum and (from chatting with them) how the non boating public were surprised to see so few boats or movements going on.

Then, having decided to support the Buckingham Canal Society Festival this coming weekend, we proceeded into Cosgrove with the intentoion of finding a mooring for this week.

What we found was that the entire Cosgrove enbankment was reserved, insufficient depth to moor between the Iron Trunk and Wolverton.

And the final nail in the coffin was the sign "maximum 14 days PER ANNUM" in Cosgrove ! So on through to New Bradwell, good mooring near the New Inn and we and our visiting guests will be supporting the New Bradwell Street Carnival on Saturday instead of the Buckingham Canal Event,

 

Certainly an own goal in my opinion.

 

Cheers. Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having just been in Stoke Bruerne, and stopped over for the permitted times, It was noticeable how few boats stopped near the pubs and canal museum and (from chatting with them) how the non boating public were surprised to see so few boats or movements going on.

Then, having decided to support the Buckingham Canal Society Festival this coming weekend, we proceeded into Cosgrove with the intentoion of finding a mooring for this week.

What we found was that the entire Cosgrove enbankment was reserved, insufficient depth to moor between the Iron Trunk and Wolverton.

And the final nail in the coffin was the sign "maximum 14 days PER ANNUM" in Cosgrove ! So on through to New Bradwell, good mooring near the New Inn and we and our visiting guests will be supporting the New Bradwell Street Carnival on Saturday instead of the Buckingham Canal Event,

 

Certainly an own goal in my opinion.

 

Cheers. Mick

Unfortunately those who authorised putting the signs up wouldn't agree. Good job you didn't park your car in the Cosgrove CRT car park area as well, apparently the marina have been putting illegal parking notices on cars for years.

 

The only way I can see around it, is to ignore the signs (so long as you stay within the law).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the final nail in the coffin was the sign "maximum 14 days PER ANNUM" in Cosgrove !

 

Signs that say "max 14 days per annum" or "max 14 days in a calendar year", are all, as far as I am aware, old British Waterways signs, (probably now rebranded by stick on CRT stickers), that went up many years before CRT came into existence.

 

It seems inconceivable that they have any legality, and I'm highly doubtful that any attempt has ever been made to enforce them, either in BW's days, or more recently under CRT.

 

I would put them in the category of well worth ignoring.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trouble is that as one of the " do as you are told" and " abide by the rules" boating types, I just get on with life, enjoy what comes along and try to understand just why anyone ( be it BW or CRT ) really thinks that such extreme regulation is necessary. I could see that Cosgrove would be a popular spot to stop, ( to walk the old course to Stratford, or the Great Ouse in either direction, or the great network of paths and cycle all the bridleways ) but is there really suffficient cause to be SO restrictive ! Funnily enough our home mooring happens to be right near to Foxton, and I have seen how the restrictive signs have affected the atmosphere there, especially out of season, when there really is no real pressure on mooring space.

Just how CRT get a sensible balance I just do not know, but surely it ought to be based upon careful assessments.

 

I am beginning to think I should just work on the selfish basis of "I'm allright Jack" and being close to 70 now play the "old codger, didn't understand/notice the sign" scam, It seems to work for all the shuttle back and forwards in a tiny area brigade.

 

Never mind. I hope the Buckingham Canal Society does well without my support. Cheers. Mick

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signs that say "max 14 days per annum" or "max 14 days in a calendar year", are all, as far as I am aware, old British Waterways signs, (probably now rebranded by stick on CRT stickers), that went up many years before CRT came into existence.

It seems inconceivable that they have any legality, and I'm highly doubtful that any attempt has ever been made to enforce them, either in BW's days, or more recently under CRT.

 

I would put them in the category of well worth ignoring.

 

Maybe so but they are still CRT signs , CRT have been made aware on many occasions yet chose to leave them in place , so they must want this stay time to remain no matter how dubious.we should ignore this just like the ones that state ' no return within........days'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe so but they are still CRT signs , CRT have been made aware on many occasions yet chose to leave them in place , so they must want this stay time to remain no matter how dubious.we should ignore this just like the ones that state ' no return within........days'

I think CRT would have us all stay in a marina if they could choose. Boaters are an inconvenience to them ;)

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
 Share

  • 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.