Bargees Complain about Schooling Problems

[magpie patrick]

 

And if it isn't successful - what then? Why should anyone pay for a CRT mooring. As an intelligent middle class person I can see a loophole to exploit a mile wide there

 

This is a horrendous mess that needs a pragmatic solution

 

Richard

 

 

This is true. However what is the end result if a free for all develops with anyone who can get their hands on a boat grabs a length of towpath and stays there endlessly.

 

 

No one, not even the NBTA, is seriously advocating that not moving at all is permissible, acceptable or desirable. Ther ehas for some time been an attempt to blur the distinction between those who don't move far (significant minority?) and those who don't move at all (very, very few). One of the results of this bit of the policy being effectively enforced is that Lutine is in Fenny Compton Marina for 5 weeks because I don't have time to move her at all. (she does actually have a permanent mooring on the K&A as well but that's beside the point)

 

Edit cos I mucked up the quotes

Edited August 4, 2016 by magpie patrick

[RLWP]

Why should they get away with it and we all keep by the rules and pay or pay extra.

 

There's going to have to be some messy, complicated solution to this for this group of people. And I'm afraid it will look like someone is 'getting away with it'

 

Richard

[magnetman]

 

Probably because CRT may not own the offside, and even if they did they'd probably need to get planning permission for permanent moorings.

Exactly and they will not get that permission. It will never happen because leisure boaters and land dwellers are the massive majority and will ensure that it will not happen.

[magpie patrick]

 

 

This is a horrendous mess that needs a pragmatic solution

 

Richard

 

Indeed, and those of us trying to find one aren't aided by the sabre rattlers on either side

[RLWP]

Exactly and they will not get that permission. It will never happen because leisure boaters and land dwellers are the massive majority and will ensure that it will not happen.

 

What's it got to do with leisure boaters?

 

Richard

 

those of us trying to find one

 

So you are involved with this issue now?

 

Richard

[Alan de Enfield]

 

 

........ One of the results of this bit of the policy being effectively enforced is that Lutine is in Fenny Compton Marina for 5 weeks because I don't have time to move her at all. (she does actually have a permanent mooring on the K&A as well but that's beside the point)

 

 

 

Are you suggesting that you should be just allowed to 'dump' your boat for 5 weeks because you are too busy to move it ?

[dogless]

Some of these responses are quite saddening.

 

Rog

[magpie patrick]

 

Are you suggesting that you should be just allowed to 'dump' your boat for 5 weeks because you are too busy to move it ?

 

No, I'm not, and neither is anyone else. I was making the point that in fact you can't do this as the law requires you to move every 14 days, so, as I had a lot on I put it in a marina. Some people are suggesting that this is what others want though

 

 

So you are involved with this issue now?

 

Richard

 

Professionally yes, you may recall I posted a link to survey a couple of months ago

[magnetman]

 

What's it got to do with leisure boaters?

 

Richard

 

 

 

Richard

As I understand it (and I am very occasionally wrong so I have an excuse) there is a generally strong opposition to the creation of new on line moorings because of having to slow down - in fact I believe that CRT and formerly BW have/had a policy of reducing on line moorings when new marinas were opened up.

 

It is an assumption I admit but this seems to be related to leisure use of the waterways by people on a schedule.

 

I am in both camps as I have an on line residential mooring but I also go boating so I recognise the problem about lines and lines of boats.

 

Anyway its an old argument but I think its a reason more residential (on line as that's the only way in high land value areas) moorings are not being provided. And other reasons.

[AMModels]

Dear crt

 

I have a 12 month cc licance and no mooring.

 

Ive just decided that i may or may not have or want children but incase i do i want them to go to a local state school. Also if i move the trees will block my solar panels and I wont be able to watch tv or play on my xbox like criminals can in there cells and there for your forcing me and my past present & future childern to having a lower level of life than a criminal and there for its my human right that you cant force me to move due to the above argument if you try and come back with any argument ill just pop my fingers in my ears and shut my eyes while going la la la and there for automatically over powering you responces.

 

Why should they get away with it and we all keep by the rules and pay or pay extra.

 

Simple live by the rules or face being forced to move on. They can always home school except exams and just plan in advance to go to a local school for exams.

 

Get away with what? They would be on a recognised mooring paid for and all above board. They would be living by the rules.

 

Probably because CRT may not own the offside, and even if they did they'd probably need to get planning permission for permanent moorings.

CRT are getting money in from selling off unwanted property, use it to buy wanted real estate such as the offside in certain places. The moorers would use the present services, the ones they use anyway moored on the towpath side and merely navigate to deal with effluent and fuel needs. Sell the idea as social/affordable housing and the local council will jump at it to massage their figures.

You could even get a developer to buy the land and deal with planning as a sop to them then building massively expensive penis extension housing.

[magnetman]

could even get a developer to buy the land and deal with planning as a sop to them then building massively expensive penis extension housing.

 

If someone can do a 5 storey wide beam canal boat with a mains connected bog.

 

Typo edit

Edited August 4, 2016 by magnetman

[dogless]

Having to slow down because of moored boats trumps allowing young families to moor within a restricted area ?

 

Come on folks, we aren't that small minded surely.

 

Let them have a roving mooring permit. They are 'paying their way' which seems to matter to some,

they can get to work and their kids to school,

and to be honest, we who are lucky enough to enjoy our leisure boating wouldn't wish to be in their position or have their problems.

 

Rog

[magnetman]

A bit like holiday makers visiting Kos and complaining about people sleeping on the beach ?

[AMModels]

 

No, I'm not, and neither is anyone else. I was making the point that in fact you can't do this as the law requires you to move every 14 days, so, as I had a lot on I put it in a marina. Some people are suggesting that this is what others want though

 

Professionally yes, you may recall I posted a link to survey a couple of months ago

As you have a permanent mooring anyway I thought you were immune to the 14 day rule? If not it should mean that because the 14 day rule is obviously there to deal with those without moorings rather than those who may cruise long distances from home and then have a period of time where they cant get to the boat.

 

If someone can do a 5 storey wide beam canal boat with a mains connected bog.

 

Typo edit

not quite what I had in mind, I was thinking they get the PP and land by the canal for this scheme and are then allowed to use that as the affordable part of their development elsewhere.

[roland elsdon]

sorry if I'm simple but surely the solution is obvious. Accept compromise alternative lifestyle or children, you can't have both. Most of my aquaintancies living on boats when we were at a dangerous age on finding biology had upset their lifestyle moved off. Some came back, others lived happily ever after. Life is a compromise

[Jrtm]

No but they would be paying 50% less than just being on the towpath! +then you need access to the boats might as well just give them the towpath

[Graham Davis]

Cake & eat it, blah blah blah. What some don't realise, or want to accept, is that, there is no cake left because a lot of self-rightous, middle-aged baby-boomers, have had it all.

 

Blah Blah Blah.

 

Good at criticism but I note you don't provide an answer, just insults

[Dyertribe]

Seems to me that the attraction of the canals is the scenery and laid back 'vibe' which attracts people of all walks of life.

If the waterways are just linear moorings with nowhere for those of us who, when on the water, like to stop at towns, cities etc to moor the system will have the potential to become a ghetto for the disenfranchised.

Not that attractive to the holiday maker or retiree.

 

Which brings me to a question:

What happens if I, as a CCing parent of children enrolled in a local school, shuffle off a few miles down the cut and when I shuffle back again some other family in the same position has taken the mooring and now I have no suitable mooring to enable my children to attend school?

a) suck it up

ask some old or childless boater to sling their hook

c) stamp my foot, complain to CRT, the Media, anyone that it's not fair and something should be done about it?

 

Discuss

[Graham Davis]

Why dont CRT grant mooring rights on the offside to these Barge dwellers? They can then get their kids at school, get to jobs etc etc. The mooring rights will be just that with no services beyond what they have on the towpath but it gives them the right to stay in that area. Say 50% of regular moorings or so in that area?

 

Because CaRT would have to persuade the local Council to grant Planning Permission to allow it, and can you see (say) Bath Council agreeing to that?

[cereal tiller]

Cake & eat it, blah blah blah. What some don't realise, or want to accept, is that, there is no cake left because a lot of self-rightous, middle-aged baby-boomers, have had it all.

Please explain just what you are implying,sounds rather vague and senseless

 

 

CT

[magpie patrick]

Seems to me that the attraction of the canals is the scenery and laid back 'vibe' which attracts people of all walks of life.

If the waterways are just linear moorings with nowhere for those of us who, when on the water, like to stop at towns, cities etc to moor the system will have the potential to become a ghetto for the disenfranchised.

Not that attractive to the holiday maker or retiree.

 

Which brings me to a question:

What happens if I, as a CCing parent of children enrolled in a local school, shuffle off a few miles down the cut and when I shuffle back again some other family in the same position has taken the mooring and now I have no suitable mooring to enable my children to attend school?

a) suck it up

ask some old or childless boater to sling their hook

c) stamp my foot, complain to CRT, the Media, anyone that it's not fair and something should be done about it?

 

Discuss

 

Fair question but I don't think that actually happens - what is happening is that people are being told that three miles either side of the school isn't enough, within that three miles they will find somewhere to moor, as will everybody else at the moment.

 

By and large 48 hour moorings etc are respected and away from these nearly all boaters move within 14 days, it's the distance they move that is the sticking point.

 

There will come a point where the canals will get overwhelmed and no amount of shuffling will work, that's something that some agencies are looking at in some areas

Edited August 4, 2016 by magpie patrick

[AMModels]

No but they would be paying 50% less than just being on the towpath! +then you need access to the boats might as well just give them the towpath

 

well no theyd be paying 100% more than on the towpath because they dont pay anything on the towpath surely?

 

Because CaRT would have to persuade the local Council to grant Planning Permission to allow it, and can you see (say) Bath Council agreeing to that?

See my later replies as well.

[magpie patrick]

 

Because CaRT would have to persuade the local Council to grant Planning Permission to allow it, and can you see (say) Bath Council agreeing to that?

 

I wouldn't take Bath City Council's name in vain in this particular instance, they are looking in some detail at the issues on exactly this sort of thing

Edited August 4, 2016 by magpie patrick

[jonno22]

That's true but the liveaboard community were up in arms in opposition before that came to light and it was they in fact who ferreted that out and trumped CaRT with it.

you mean CART actually listened to them for a change and dropped a scheme their manegement was so keen to bring in?

[mark99]

The obvious solution is for CaRT to provide a taxi from anywhere on the system to convey anyones child to the school of the boaters choice.