Jump to content

My Disaster of a holiday.


Featured Posts

One of the benefits of having a sterndrive is that you can lift it to significantly reduce your draft.

 

With the drive down our cruiser sits about 3ft in the water when static, 2 or 3 inches more when on the move. With the drive up this is reduced to around 18 inches. Steering isn't great with the drive up but it is a damn sight better then clonking the drive along the bottom of the canal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/news-flash/4076-twin-threat-to-mon-a-brec

 

As far as I am aware the Mon and Brec is the only waterway where CaRT have warned Defra that they may need to close sections on safety grounds..

 

Indeed, and very nearly happened after the last breach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like you want them to close the system down then!

As has already been said, the B & M has always been shallow and we are lucky it is open at all, following a few serious breaches.

 

No, not at all. I just think that these organisations should be responsible. If they don't maintain minimum depths they could at least use their 'enforcement teams' or 'volunteers' to keep a central database appraised as to what depths actually are. At least this way they could provide accurate information to their customers. In another thread it was said that most of their funding comes from boaters, so given social media could not C&RT customers organisise a mass license boycott to wake them up a bit to the sensibilities of their customer Service? Just remembering the fuel protests of 2000. People making excuses for C&RT and the E.A not maintaining that which they should be maintaining will only make things worse over time.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please find some legislation that defines "minimum depth"?

Do you expect them to measure and profile every inch of the system? Because that is what you are suggesting. Impossible to do!!

I do not think that boaters provide the majority of their funding.

Your proposals above would very quickly close the system down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please find some legislation that defines "minimum depth"?

Do you expect them to measure and profile every inch of the system? Because that is what you are suggesting. Impossible to do!!

 

 

 

I thought that too. Utterly unreasonable demand.

 

It would be cheaper to actually dredge the whole system than to survey every inch of it for depth, publish the results then field all the court cases from unreasonable boaters saying it is only 660mm deep where CRT says its 700mm deep and they damaged their boat as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate that 'to the millimetre' depths for every metre of waterway is not practical, but where there are known to be likely issues then they should have some sort of 'average depth' information. I just think that we as boaters cut these organisations too much slack with regards to maintenance of the waterways for the money they charge us each year. They waste too much money on middle managers, crap, nonsense signs and other such fripperies and we let them get away with it......me included!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is already a document produced by CRT that has suggested maximum vessel draft for their different waterways.

 

ETA: I take it back. They advertise this particular waterway as nearly 5ft max draft!

Edited by Naughty Cal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate that 'to the millimetre' depths for every metre of waterway is not practical, but where there are known to be likely issues then they should have some sort of 'average depth' information.

 

 

C'mon, give it some proper thinking. Surely you can see the flaw is stating 'average depth'!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not at all. I just think that these organisations should be responsible. If they don't maintain minimum depths they could at least use their 'enforcement teams' or 'volunteers' to keep a central database appraised as to what depths actually are. At least this way they could provide accurate information to their customers. In another thread it was said that most of their funding comes from boaters, so given social media could not C&RT customers organisise a mass license boycott to wake them up a bit to the sensibilities of their customer Service? Just remembering the fuel protests of 2000. People making excuses for C&RT and the E.A not maintaining that which they should be maintaining will only make things worse over time.....

 

Approximately a 1/3 of funding comes from boaters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon, give it some proper thinking. Surely you can see the flaw is stating 'average depth'!!!!!

It would at least give some idea around which to make decisions, as in the op's case. At no point in any of my comments have I said that the individual boater has no responsibility for their choices, but that the controlling authorities should have more, given the amount of money they take off us each year (11 years in my case). I feel that most people on here wouldn't tolerate their utilities being run to the same standard as the waterways (certainly not on a year on year basis).

Approximately a 1/3 of funding comes from boaters.

I stand corrected......but that's still a huge chunk and boaters could, if they were so inclined, make a protest that had to be taken notice of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

C'mon, give it some proper thinking. Surely you can see the flaw is stating 'average depth'!!!!!

 

It would at least give some idea around which to make decisions, as in the op's case. ...........

 

So - Its 4 foot 6" in one place and 6" in another place = average depth 2' 6" foot.

 

Not a lot of help to know the average depth id 2' 6"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stand corrected......but that's still a huge chunk and boaters could, if they were so inclined, make a protest that had to be taken notice of.

I suspect that the majority of boaters would be unprepared to be on the water unlicensed (with all it potential problems) or alternatively have nowhere to take the boat off the system. As a result I suspect you boycott would be a non starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am building a case and have already got a lot of support. If any one is interested. In boat license FAQ it asks is my boat suitable for a certain canal. It says download Dimension data. Does it say any where that the canal is unsuitable for my boat with a draught of 2ft 3. Its about time the boaters, boat hire company’s and marinas got together and made a case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are all Norman 32s 27" draft?

 

Richard

Unlikely.

The website www.normanboats.co.uk gives the draught for a Norman 32 as 1' 10"

That will be with no outboard or sterndrive at a guess.

 

Very similar to ours with the drive raised to the surface.

Edited by Naughty Cal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Norman has an Enfield Leg and a 3 cylinder Kubota diesel which is what gives it the draught of 27". There are thousand of boats out there with Enfield Legs plus all the other makes of legs. Norman made approx 7000 boats of all sizes up to 32ft. Even boats with large out boards can have a draught of 27" I have a Norman 25 with an enfield leg that sits even a little bit lower because it has a Perkins 4108 in it. I also have a Calumcraft with a Sonic leg and a Escort diesel which measures 2ft 6. How did these boats manage to navigate canals if there was not enough water. The CRT want you to use the canal but it is not fit for purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Norman has an Enfield Leg and a 3 cylinder Kubota diesel which is what gives it the draught of 27". There are thousand of boats out there with Enfield Legs plus all the other makes of legs. Norman made approx 7000 boats of all sizes up to 32ft. Even boats with large out boards can have a draught of 27" I have a Norman 25 with an enfield leg that sits even a little bit lower because it has a Perkins 4108 in it. I also have a Calumcraft with a Sonic leg and a Escort diesel which measures 2ft 6. How did these boats manage to navigate canals if there was not enough water. The CRT want you to use the canal but it is not fit for purpose.

Perhaps they used waterways that were more suitable for their draft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with the OP on this, for the money C&RT charge for their license they should have some obligations to maintain a minimum depth for navigation.

 

Like any commercial organisation CRT have to prioritise its spending. It has many other priorities than that which boaters just see.

 

The figures for dredging for three years:

 

2012/13 2013/4 2014/5

£4.0m £ 5.5m £6.5m

K&A / L&L / M&B 50%spot 50%spot

 

Figures from an Operations Presentation to the IWA October 2012

 

From Dredging strategy meeting presented to the Navigation Advisory Group (NAG) September 2012

 

Expensive- generally £100k/km to +£500k/km
Waste Regs. making this increasingly expensive (doubled 2003 to 2006)
Series of Acts and Regulations 1998 to 2005 – still continuing – Trust not exempt in any way
Traditional disposal to landfill or to banks and behind bank protection preferred
Liquid waste now banned so pre-treatment required - lime, centrifuge, PFA
Dredging methods
Traditional excavation using floating plant and hoppers - normal
Land based excavators possible if access allows - rare
Water Injection Dredging (Rivers, G&S)
Cutter Suction Dredging - rare
Hoeing and Raking – Rivers, and occasional for weed and debris removal
Spot dredging – often high unit costs due to site set up

Treatment & Disposal

On-site treatment to lower water content by vacuum, centrifuge, lime, mixing, spreading, drying – expensive, laborious and may increase disposal volumes.
Disposal as on-site backfill to piles or bank protection - preferred
Disposal to local agricultural land – environmental legislation
Disposal to licensed Trust owned tip – few left with adequate capacity
Disposal to licensed waste site – few available in UK, large transport costs

The Trusts Dredging Strategy

Annual Dredging Expenditure

 

1998/99 £500,000

1999/00 £1,685,000

2000/01 £2,778,000

2001/02 £3,773,000

2002/03 £6,817,000

2003/04 £4,950,000

2004/05 £2,230,000

2005/06 £4,649,000

2006/07 £5,132,000

2007/08 £4,770,000

2008/09 £2,978,000

2009/10 £3,453,000

2010/11 £3.546,000

2011/12 £3,742,000

 

Current 10 year Average = £4m/year

(excludes approx. £0.75m to £1.0m/year spot dredging
So I am afraid it is a little more complex than just getting a dredger out.
Edited by Ray T
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The website www.normanboats.co.uk gives the draught for a Norman 32 as 1' 10"

 

 

Unlikely.

That will be with no outboard or sterndrive at a guess.

 

Very similar to ours with the drive raised to the surface.

 

Thank you.

 

Richard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Like any commercial organisation CRT have to prioritise its spending. It has many other priorities than that which boaters just see.

 

The figures for dredging for three years:

 

2012/13 2013/4 2014/5

£4.0m £ 5.5m £6.5m

K&A / L&L / M&B 50%spot 50%spot

 

Figures from an Operations Presentation to the IWA October 2012

 

 

Amazing - they knew how much they had spent years before they spent it.

 

Since 2012 there is actually no legal requirement for C&RT to maintain any of the waterways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is already a document produced by CRT that has suggested maximum vessel draft for their different waterways.

 

ETA: I take it back. They advertise this particular waterway as nearly 5ft max draft!

From memory I think they say nearly 5ft over the lock sills and less elsewhere. Which is true, but unhelpful!

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
  • 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.