First experience of canal rage.

[Jrtm]

All of this at 30mph

[Paul C]

You really don't want to get too high on that horse when there's 40 tonnes of loaded boat coming at you in the opposite direction.

 

.....which is the approach of a thug.

 

You've basically lost sight of what is actually a "working" boat.

[Captain Pegg]

.....which is the approach of a thug.

 

You've basically lost sight of what is actually a "working" boat.

The issue is the principle that the most manoeuvrable craft gives way to the least manoeuvrable craft. The reasons why those craft are on the canal in the first place are not relevant. You really don't want to be in collision with a loaded fuel boat so that principle becomes even more important should you meet one.

 

My response was really triggered by what to me was a condescending statement on your behalf toward fuel boaters (and in the case of the folk I pictured genuine coal merchants). We have also had an assertion that historic boat owners are 'playing at it' on this thread. I find these strange sentiments.

 

Canals are there essentially as a leisure amenity today and that most definitely includes the steerers of hire boats. If they have to wait to give priority to a 'non-earning' craft they aren't actually being denied an opportunity to make money for the owners of that craft. No one has ever been late back to base because they had to give way to too many historic craft.

 

We also shouldn't lose sight that the owners of historic craft indirectly contribute a great deal of their own money toward canal life in general. Rallies and historic events may not be everyone's cup of tea but they generate interest and income for canal activities and charities. Their owners do deserve a bit of respect. The boats themselves are money pits.

 

To clarify my own position the majority of my boating experience is as a hirer despite the fact that I now own my own boat. My experience of historic craft is confined to a few days a year as a volunteer. On my last trip I was helping to provide a service with the intention of making money for the boat's owners so by your own definition was on a working boat. It would still have seemed to onlookers that we were playing at it though as we weren't loaded in the conventional sense. There are no easy definitions between work and leisure on the canal.

 

It's that experience that leads me to the conclusion that as a steerer of a modern narrowboat you ought to make the passage of a historic narrow boat as easy as you can.

 

JP

Edited September 8, 2016 by Captain Pegg

[mark99]

Historic boat owners need all the sympathy they can get. I for one feel sorry for those poor souls who have spend loads of good money on a 1930's wrecked "ford transit" of the waterway, paying for the use of whole width of canal but can only use the central narrow bit whilst worying whether it will still be afloat next time they put on a waistcoat and bowler and decide to play.

[PaddingtonBear]

I believe they prefer this to risking that any of the "rivets" may get knocked off![/quote

 

Or their shiney gunnels being scratched.

[PaddingtonBear]

At It is also true that being deep draughtier means that it is often the case ex working boats keep the channels clear in the absents of dredging

[nicknorman]

At It is also true that being deep draughtier means that it is often the case ex working boats keep the channels clear in the absents of dredging

Yeabut proper leisure boats don't need a channel! Well maybe Hudsons...

 

Anyway I think I'm right in saying that when you get your commercial licence for your fuel boat etc, it specifically says that the licence does not bestow any priority on its holder over a leisure licence holder.

 

Anyway the bottom line for me is that there is no published priority for working or hire or historic boats, with the exception of eg the huge gravel barges on the Trent (are they still running?) and so whilst steerers of such boats might think they are very important and claim priority, nobody else thinks that and it will just end in conflict and the nobification of said steerers in the eyes of most other canal users.

[nicknorman]

The issue is the principle that the most manoeuvrable craft gives way to the least manoeuvrable craft. The reasons why those craft are on the canal in the first place are not relevant. You really don't want to be in collision with a loaded fuel boat so that principle becomes even more important should you meet one.

My response was really triggered by what to me was a condescending statement on your behalf toward fuel boaters (and in the case of the folk I pictured genuine coal merchants). We have also had an assertion that historic boat owners are 'playing at it' on this thread. I find these strange sentiments.

Canals are there essentially as a leisure amenity today and that most definitely includes the steerers of hire boats. If they have to wait to give priority to a 'non-earning' craft they aren't actually being denied an opportunity to make money for the owners of that craft. No one has ever been late back to base because they had to give way to too many historic craft.

We also shouldn't lose sight that the owners of historic craft indirectly contribute a great deal of their own money toward canal life in general. Rallies and historic events may not be everyone's cup of tea but they generate interest and income for canal activities and charities. Their owners do deserve a bit of respect. The boats themselves are money pits.

To clarify my own position the majority of my boating experience is as a hirer despite the fact that I now own my own boat. My experience of historic craft is confined to a few days a year as a volunteer. On my last trip I was helping to provide a service with the intention of making money for the boat's owners so by your own definition was on a working boat. It would still have seemed to onlookers that we were playing at it though as we weren't loaded in the conventional sense. There are no easy definitions between work and leisure on the canal.

It's that experience that leads me to the conclusion that as a steerer of a modern narrowboat you ought to make the passage of a historic narrow boat as easy as you can.

JP

Taking your paras in turn:

 

Nobody wants to collide with anyone but the responsibility for avoiding that lies with both parties.

 

You can't just put a few bags of coal on your boat which you might or might not sell, and them claim priority. Anyway if you go storming past everyone flat out squishing little boats into the bushes, you aren't going to sell much coal.

 

People who want to own and run their money-pit historic boats do so because they want to, that doesn't earn them any respect over anyone else. I don't mind them doing it within reason but it is like driving up behind an Austen 7 on the roads, OK from time to time if you are not in a hurry but you wouldn't want the roads swamped with vintage cars.

 

I see absolutely no reason why I or anyone else should make the passage of someone's anachronistic plaything as easy as possible. I will of course give them the same courtesy as I would any other boater, no more and no less.

 

Anyway you are gamekeeper turned poacher!

[AndyV]

This thread has veered off in all sorts of directions and become concerned, it seems, with who has the most right to be "playing" on the canals. We have got a long way from the point I think.

Everyone who pays for the appropriate licence for what they are doing surely has equal right to be there. It seems to me that the problem is that there is a vast difference in the experience levels and understanding of canal users. Perhaps even more importantly the canals reflect the same differences as in general life that some want to be polite and courteous to everyone they meet and others are more concerned with getting whatever they are doing done, and don't care what that means for anybody else.

It is easy to look back to working boat days and say that the way things were done then is the "right" way. Whether and how much to slow for moored boats, how much to pull aside to pass an oncoming boat and what should be the "rules" at a bridge, blind bridge or bend etc are all things that different people beleive different things about. Until the rules are clear there is always going to be chaos.

I am fascinated by the "old ways" and try to do things in what I understand or been have shown to be the "right way". I fully understand however that! for example, some people are going to think that I am a ****** for not pulling over far enough to pass.

The only way for there to be a clear understanding would be for there to be a clear set of "rules" for operating a canal craft. For me though this would be a short step from mandatory training and qualifications. I, for one, would far rather have the chaos.

[Dave_P]

 

We're talking about priorities, all else being equal. A hire boat is working, earning a profit for its owner.

 

In fact, I think almost all fuel boats could have a tough time proving they're working boats. If we include the capital cost of the boat in the financial calculations, they veer somewhat perilously towards "hobbyist" or "lifestyle choice" rather than being truly commercial and able to stand on their own two feet as viable businesses.

I'm not sure John and Jenny Jackson would consider themselves to be hobbyists! I'm pretty sure their business is viable and has been for many years.

[Jrtm]

You right nick no boat has the given right to priority over another unless its a flyboat (not sure you can get fly licance any more)

But its the atitued of no respect or understanding of other craft on the waterway that i beleive causes most problems be it when you pass with how far over people think you should be how fast people are going and how people react when they meet. Like i said before i find more people are adopting the old bmw atitude.

I wasnt saying my list is correct or should be followed its just what i was tort and ill happyly give way.

 

At the same time if its shallow and cant move over any more i ant going to move over any more i not going to get stuck for nobody but im not going to cause a crash due to that.

 

There must have neen a semi code in working days otherwise i ccould see all sorts of crashes.

 

Intresting nick that youll give way to a loaded boat on the trent but not a loaded boat on the canal? Dont really see a diffrence. Would love to see what you do if you met a fully loaded boat round a blind corner.

In some ways i do agree with you but a little common sense goes a long way and people in general seam to have lost that. Think of the people that ended up in rivers or stuck coz they followed there sat nav rather than thinking that road look a bit narrow for my car or this track isnt a road...

[alan_fincher]

Yeabut proper leisure boats don't need a channel! Well maybe Hudsons...

 

Anyway I think I'm right in saying that when you get your commercial licence for your fuel boat etc, it specifically says that the licence does not bestow any priority on its holder over a leisure licence holder.

 

Anyway the bottom line for me is that there is no published priority for working or hire or historic boats, with the exception of eg the huge gravel barges on the Trent (are they still running?) and so whilst steerers of such boats might think they are very important and claim priority, nobody else thinks that and it will just end in conflict and the nobification of said steerers in the eyes of most other canal users.

 

So consider the case when the very hard working owners of one of our pairs of local fuel boats, (and whatever you think they are exceedingly hard working), are coming the other way through a Grand Union bridge hole. They have the butty on a long line, up to (say) 100 feet behind the motor.

 

You are coming the other way but their motor is already in the bridge hole, so you have to let it through.

 

However the butty is still 100 feet away, and you are now closer. So as they have no priority over you, are you going to try going through?

 

Or do you expect the unpowered butty, maybe weighing 40 tons overall, to stop for you?

 

You may think I'm being facetious, but I am not. They get faced with this situation from time to time, and they are forced to cope when people throw themselves into a dangerous situation through their ignorance.

 

We have at least two of the coal boaters who are forum members and are regularly out in all weathers providing their services to other boaters and canalside customers - Brian on Alton, and Martin ("Junior") on Halsall. Do you really think they are just hobby boaters playing at historic boats, with absolutely no concept of any real business behind them? If you do, we must agree to differ. I wouldn't (and couldn't) do it, but my hat is firmly off to the committed few who actually do.

Edited September 8, 2016 by alan_fincher

[Jrtm]

A bit of common sence goes a long way. Im pretty sure ivor and mel wernt just playing boats. Im sure they came across a few incidents like above.

[Paul C]

I don't think anyone arguing against a larger/heavier/deeper drafted boat, or a boat under tow or otherwise restricted in its maneouvrability, being given the room it needs. Its just common sense.

 

However there also seems to be a feeling that ex-working boats have somehow earned a priority over others on the waterways, which is not justified because they are no longer working. To lean on this false justification is going to cause conflict sooner or later.

[Jrtm]

I don't think anyone arguing against a larger/heavier/deeper drafted boat, or a boat under tow or otherwise restricted in its maneouvrability, being given the room it needs. Its just common sense.

 

However there also seems to be a feeling that ex-working boats have somehow earned a priority over others on the waterways, which is not justified because they are no longer working. To lean on this false justification is going to cause conflict sooner or later.

No a historic boat dosnt have any right over another but as you say its comon sence says to give them a little extra room.

A loaded boat can be new or old brinklow have even built new working boats for people if i saw this loaded i would still give way but that dont mean i couldnt pass yhem with only 6 inches between us were others seam to think you can only pass all craft at a min of 20 foot between you. Its comon sence like i said which most people i now meet seam to have lost.

[nicknorman]

So consider the case when the very hard working owners of one of our pairs of local fuel boats, (and whatever you think they are exceedingly hard working), are coming the other way through a Grand Union bridge hole. They have the butty on a long line, up to (say) 100 feet behind the motor.

 

You are coming the other way but their motor is already in the bridge hole, so you have to let it through.

 

However the butty is still 100 feet away, and you are now closer. So as they have no priority over you, are you going to try going through?

 

Or do you expect the unpowered butty, maybe weighing 40 tons overall, to stop for you?

 

You may think I'm being facetious, but I am not. They get faced with this situation from time to time, and they are forced to cope when people throw themselves into a dangerous situation through their ignorance.

We have at least two of the coal boaters who are forum members and are regularly out in all weathers providing their services to other boaters and canalside customers - Brian on Alton, and Martin ("Junior") on Halsall. Do you really think they are just hobby boaters playing at historic boats, with absolutely no concept of any real business behind them? If you do, we must agree to differ. I wouldn't (and couldn't) do it, but my hat is firmly off to the committed few who actually do.

I did say that towing and in particular long lining was a bit of an exception, however the towing boat needs to make this unusual activity clear. I recall coming round a bend on the Coventry, graham edgson was coming the other way. He picked up a sign saying "towing" as he was long lining. This was great because the towed boat was out of sight and the line not easy to see. If he had just had a sign perched on the front of his boat saying "towing" I'd probably have thought it was left over from a previous tow, but as it was the situation was immediately clear.

 

Anyway the bottom line is that these activities are unusual and as such, the operators need to take steps to ensure that when coming up against other boats who may well be first timers and have no idea that towing even takes place, they can cope.

 

As to working boats I'm sure that eg the 4counties fuel lot work quite hard but then there are lots of other workers on the cut and I can't help thinking that you regard them as different and superior simply because they have historic boats. I don't seem to recall you giving the same degree of worship to the Rev Reid and his hotel boats, for example.

Edited September 8, 2016 by nicknorman

[spadefoot]

All of this is well & good, but at what point should an ordinary, everyday, leisure boater, recognise that the boat coming the other way is a loaded working-boat? Or that it's deep-draughted & therefore needs more space?

The more you cruise, the more you notice, but if you just cruise now & then, how are you supposed to recognise historic craft?

[alan_fincher]

I don't think anyone arguing against a larger/heavier/deeper drafted boat, or a boat under tow or otherwise restricted in its maneouvrability, being given the room it needs. Its just common sense.

 

However there also seems to be a feeling that ex-working boats have somehow earned a priority over others on the waterways, which is not justified because they are no longer working. To lean on this false justification is going to cause conflict sooner or later.

 

Well I can absolutely assure you that most of us manage to rub along with most other canal users in more or less exactly the same way as we would have done if the boat were not an ex working boat.

 

i can say that in my case with some confidence, having owned a "modern" leisure boat alongside an "historic" for half a decade, and boated alternately with each, or sometimes both together.

 

What I can't do is make one of the boats that needs 3 feet of water to float in float in the 2 feet of water that the other might have floated in, and a lot of people do seem genuinely ignorant of which which bits of the canal an ex-working boat can be in and still retain control, and which bits it is not at all a good idea for it to end up in.

 

However in our case such failure to appreciate such matters seldom ends in conflict, but it does mean that occasionally we are placed in enough difficulty that people may have to wait until we have sorted ourselves out sufficiently that all can proceed again without incident. For example on a recent trip approaching a bridge hole a GRP cruiser was steaming towards it at great pace, and although we were closer, we were also slower, and both likely to arrive at the same point. He wasn't slowing, and after a lot of hard reverse and black smoke we did stop fully, but with the back end in shallow water by now, the bow swung left, blocking his exit from the bridge. He stopped easily of course, (as GRP boats generally can), but then before letting us sort ourselves out, decided it would be a good idea to force through wrong side of us, in a gap that was only made 7 feet wide by him pushing us two one side, and rubbing the towpath piling. Nothing was said, not even glowering looks were exchanged, but his ignorance probably means he has additional scrapes and black lines down his GRP boat not previously present.

 

We were not being "nobby" we reacted to a situation that could so easily have been avoided by him realising it was going to be far easier for him to slow up and let us through, than us trying to stop 25 tons of boat in a hurry in shallow water. Had he done so, of course, he would have been through far faster than he eventually was.

 

I am not for a moment denying their are no "nobby" historic boat owners - we meet enough of them to know there are, but equally there are some "nobby" Hudson owners, GRP owners, Colecraft owners or even Springer owners. I genuinelydo not believe the pecentage of "nobbiness" to be any greater in the world of historic boat ownership than it amongst others who own and operate narrow boats.

 

But I would say that, wouldn't I!

 

EDIT: To correct detail of which way our bow swung, hence (maybe!) making that bit make more sense!

Edited September 8, 2016 by alan_fincher

[Chertsey]

My new line in such situations is 'if you can't get through there, how are you going to get into a lock?'

I only just learned that I shoul keep right.
Belated apologies to all

You shouldn't. You should keep in the middle and pass to the right.

[alan_fincher]

As to working boats I'm sure that eg the 4counties fuel lot work quite hard but then there are lots of other workers on the cut and I can't help thinking that you regard them as different and superior simply because they have historic boats. I don't seem to recall you giving the same degree of worship to the Rev Reid and his hotel boats, for example.

 

No, I don't think historic boat owners should be considered superior at all, and I challenge to to find one post in the thousands I have ever made that suggests anything of the sort.

 

I have always argued that those of us just doing it as a hobby, (which I most clearly am), have no special rights or priority over anybody else, and that it is incumbent on us to be seen to be behaving as well and competently as we are able, and with good manners. In just the same way as if I were steering a Hudson, I do get it wrong sometimes, and will always try and doi so with the least possible impact (literally or otherwise!) on others.

 

I personally do not feel hotel boats have any priority over others, although clearly some of their owners do. If their planned schedule does not allow a good chance of completing a days itinerary safely and without needing priority, then they need to amend their schedule.

 

However the Reverend Martin Reed was an abnoxious, incompetent, dangerous foul mouthed arse who barged and blundered his way around the system being openly abusive and aggressive to many in his path. Many formal complaints were made to BW about his operation, and his licence to operate should have been revoked. Who in their right mind would have "worshiped" the Reverend Reed? I'm surprised you wish to use this dangerous arrogant idiot as an example of somebody for whom boating is their business - I find it hard to think of anybody else even half as bad.

[Jrtm]

 

Well I can absolutely assure you that most of us manage to rub along with most other canal users in more or less exactly the same way as we would have done if the boat were not an ex working boat.

 

i can say that in my case with some confidence, having owned a "modern" leisure boat alongside an "historic" for half a decade, and boated alternately with each, or sometimes both together.

 

What I can't do is make one of the boats that needs 3 feet of water to float in float in the 2 feet of water that the other might have floated in, and a lot of people do seem genuinely ignorant of which which bits of the canal an ex-working boat can be in and still retain control, and which bits it is not at all a good idea for it to end up in.

 

However in our case such failure to appreciate such matters seldom ends in conflict, but it does mean that occasionally we are placed in enough difficulty that people may have to wait until we have sorted ourselvesout sufficiently that all can proceed again without incident. For example on a recent trip approaching a bridge hole a GRP cruiser was steaming towards it at great pace, and although we were closer, we were also slower, and both likely to arrive at the same point. He wasn't slowing, and after a lot of hard reverse and black smoke we did, but with the back end in shallow water by now, the bow swung right, blocking his ext from the bridge. He stopped easily of course, (as GRP boats generally can), but then before letting us sort ourselves out, decided it would be a good idea to force through wrong side of us, in a gap that was only made 7 feet wide by him pushing us two one side, and rubbing the towpath piling. Nothing was said, not even glowering looks were exchanged, but his ignorance probably means he has additional scrapes and black lines down his GRP boat not previously present.

 

We were not being "nobby" we reacted to a situation that could so easily have been avoided by him realising it was going to be far easier for him to slow up and let us through, than us trying to stop 25 tons of boat in a hurry in shallow water. Had he done so, of course, he would have been through far faster than he eventually was.

 

I am not for a moment denying their are no "nobby" historic boat owners - we meet enough of them to know there are, but equally there are some "nobby" Hudson owners, GRP owners, Colecraft owners or even Springer owners. I genuinelydo not believe the pecentage of "nobbiness" to be any greater in the world of historic boat ownership than it amongst others who own and operate narrow boats.

 

But I would say that, wouldn't I!

Exactly my point. A little comon sence but its the ignorant bmw driver situation.

 

And the above is what im finding more. That was what my biggest oldest canal rage is but its getting more common than it use to be.

Edited September 8, 2016 by billybobbooth

[Chertsey]

I'd be very wary of making special cases for 'historic' or 'working' boats. A fair few modern boats are equally deep drafted. Ideally you would show the same respect and consideration to all boats. The main problem in my experience is people not thinking far enough ahead and adjusting their speed to avoid meeting in tricky places. And by adjusting I mean sometimes going slower, but also sometimes going faster, which people seem very disinclined to do.

[Jrtm]

I only just learned that I shoul keep right.

Belated apologies to all

Yes you should you should. infact if im coming past you should lift you boat out the water out of the way till ive passed if we meet at a bridge i expect you to reverse right back till your 1/4 away from the bridge. Only as i have a historic boat i have priority over you! Ha ha ha now get out of my way or ill crush you all.

[alan_fincher]

Yes you should you should. infact if im coming past you should lift you boat out the water out of the way till ive passed if we meet at a bridge i expect you to reverse right back till your 1/4 away from the bridge. Only as i have a historic boat i have priority over you! Ha ha ha now get out of my way or ill crush you all.

 

Ah! I think we may just have "outed" one of the "nobs"!

[Jrtm]

I'd be very wary of making special cases for 'historic' or 'working' boats. A fair few modern boats are equally deep drafted. Ideally you would show the same respect and consideration to all boats. The main problem in my experience is people not thinking far enough ahead and adjusting their speed to avoid meeting in tricky places. And by adjusting I mean sometimes going slower, but also sometimes going faster, which people seem very disinclined to do.

Yes there are very deep modern boats ive met a few and the owners but generally most arnt 3foot-3foot 9 in the water with no weight in but i dont concider a boat to have prioraty just curtsey and common sence. And yes sometimes stopping or slowing can actualy cause the problem.