Jump to content

Featured Posts

The canal system seems to be getting cluttered with all manor of signs just lately. These are soon to become a fixed feature. Like the ones at the Old turn in Brimingham. Also the "Welcome to -------" signs at popular places. If you think they are a waste of your money let Sophie.Castell@canalrivertrust.org.uk know.

 

Andrew

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

And did you signal before popping out into the fairway without keeping a good lookout.

I'm never sure how to do this, as a singlehander. I just shove me nose out very slowly and keep one hand on the backwards. I have the same problem in the run to Llangollen, though I usually manage that by doing it at ridiculously early hours.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The signs are no there for boaters - we're a captive market. It's for the visitors who don't have to pay for a licence - but whose footfall is used to justify the government grant......

ahhh I see. A bit like the cyclists in lycra that tear up the towpath they do not help to maintain then?

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar issue going through Armitage Tunnel, go through there regularly but the last two occasions as i've rounded the bend there has been a boat there and I've had to reverse back. It is annoying when they have crew sat there and could have walked along and told me to wait, not something you can do when single handing.

Edited by Rob-M
Link to post
Share on other sites

ahhh I see. A bit like the cyclists in lycra that tear up the towpath they do not help to maintain then?

 

Tim

oh, hasn't this been done to death? Apart from the old cliches about lycra, there's the difficult bit about them actually paying as much as any other non-boater. Given there are apparently so many boaters searching for the ever elusive free lunch (or mooring), why does this hoary old trope keep getting brought up?

Edited by The Toad in the Hole
  • Greenie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
mrsmelly, on 08 Nov 2016 - 5:54 PM, said:

ahhh I see. A bit like the cyclists in lycra that tear up the towpath they do not help to maintain then?

 

Tim

Umm - that's a bit controversial, as posts subsequent stated - but yes, as a class of user.

If an organisation is reliant on public funds for part of its income, it need to attract further users in order to justify those funds and perhaps mor from the public purse, be it central or local.

If Cart can say - "look we're doing something for public access and interest from other than boaters" then funds could come from other sources. So for instance, if footfall can be increased by the public using the towpaths, then perhaps LAs might be induced to stump up some cash.

 

No good waving the flag at the captive users - wave it a bit more to the greater unwashed??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar issue going through Armitage Tunnel, go through there regularly but the last two occasions as i've rounded the bend there has been a boat there and I've had to reverse back. It is annoying when they have crew sat there and could have walked along and told me to wait, not something you can do when single handing.

Well I never send crew ahead, If going towards Rugely I go very slowly expecting to back out, once I can see the far end and there is no one in there then its mine. same going the other way, once I am 50 yards up if no one comes under the bridge again its mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why does this hoary old trope keep getting brought up?

It's because there's still too many hoary old tropers on this forum.

Also the "Welcome to -------" signs at popular places. If you think they are a waste of your money let Sophie.Castell@canalrivertrust.org.uk know.

 

Andrew

Those "Welcome to----" signs are very useful. Cratch cover repairs, log & coal bag covers, waterproof cushion covers.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told at Willow Wren training to, at junctions to sound the horn for 5 seconds.

 

But have found via Google:

 

As a general guide;- http://narrowboatinfo.co.uk/use-of-the-horn/

 

One short blast means: I am turning to starboard (right);

Two short blasts means: I am turning to port (left);

Three short blasts means: I am stopping or going into reverse;

Four short and then one short means: I am turning right round to starboard (right);

Four short and then two short means: I am turning right round to port (left);

One long blast and two short blasts means: I cannot manoeuvre

One long continuous blast of ten seconds means I am here; and is very useful when approaching

blind corners and in dense fog.

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh, hasn't this been done to death? Apart from the old cliches about lycra, there's the difficult bit about them actually paying as much as any other non-boater. Given there are apparently so many boaters searching for the ever elusive free lunch (or mooring), why does this hoary old trope keep getting brought up?

 

I'm afraid I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Boaters pay handsomely for the upkeep of the canals and towpath, cyclists (and walkers) pay nothing. This 'hoary old trope' will continue to be brought up, until the time when cyclists, walkers and anglers are seen to be bearing a proportionate cost of the upkeep of the waterways. Yes, there is a role for local authorities in this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm afraid I don't understand the point you are trying to make. Boaters pay handsomely for the upkeep of the canals and towpath, cyclists (and walkers) pay nothing. This 'hoary old trope' will continue to be brought up, until the time when cyclists, walkers and anglers are seen to be bearing a proportionate cost of the upkeep of the waterways. Yes, there is a role for local authorities in this.

Boaters pay to use (keep) their boats on the canals. Cyclists & walkers, who may also be boaters, pay towards upkeep through general taxation. They may also contribute by being a "friend" of CRT. They may also be volunteers, join in work parties, or get involved in fund-raising.

The "hoary old trope" will continue to be brought up until the "hoary old tropers" shut the flip up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boaters pay to use (keep) their boats on the canals. Cyclists & walkers, who may also be boaters, pay towards upkeep through general taxation. They may also contribute by being a "friend" of CRT. They may also be volunteers, join in work parties, or get involved in fund-raising.

The "hoary old trope" will continue to be brought up until the "hoary old tropers" shut the flip up.

This argument just won't stand up, unless and until figures are produced, showing how much of local taxation, by local authority area, is spent on the upkeep of the canals. Nice idea, but where is the proof?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This argument just won't stand up, unless and until figures are produced, showing how much of local taxation, by local authority area, is spent on the upkeep of the canals. Nice idea, but where is the proof?

You could argue that BW was basically a navigation affair, but unfortunately CRT isn't. Its terms of reference are about all users, including the odd vole, and us boaters are only a proportion of its remit. An error, in my view, but we have to live with it. Edited by Arthur Marshall
Link to post
Share on other sites

This argument just won't stand up, unless and until figures are produced, showing how much of local taxation, by local authority area, is spent on the upkeep of the canals. Nice idea, but where is the proof?

It isn't an argument, or opinion, it's fact. The bulk of CRT's funding comes from government. This money is raised through general taxation.

Walkers & cyclists may also be boaters. Fact.

Walkers & cyclists may be "friends" of CRT. Fact

Walkers & cyclists may be volunteers or fund-raisers. Fact.

 

Walkers & cyclists, if that's all they are, cause very little wear & tear to the canals except for towpaths.

Boaters, if that's all they are, cause huge amounts of wear & tear to towpaths, locks, bridges, bank edges etc..

 

You cannot simply divide users of the waterways system into "them & us". All you do is create unnecessary friction.

  • Greenie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't an argument, or opinion, it's fact. The bulk of CRT's funding comes from government. This money is raised through general taxation.

Walkers & cyclists may also be boaters. Fact.

Walkers & cyclists may be "friends" of CRT. Fact

Walkers & cyclists may be volunteers or fund-raisers. Fact.

 

Walkers & cyclists, if that's all they are, cause very little wear & tear to the canals except for towpaths.

Boaters, if that's all they are, cause huge amounts of wear & tear to towpaths, locks, bridges, bank edges etc..

 

You cannot simply divide users of the waterways system into "them & us". All you do is create unnecessary friction.

 

That may be true but quite a few cyclists do not endear themselves to the boating fraternity do they? As a for instance I whilst driving my boat have never run into a cyclist or pedestrian, however I have on several occasions had to dodge out of the way of speeding morons on cycles on the towpath so they are stating " This is my towpath " get out of my way. Hardly conducive to good boating/cycling relations is it.

 

Tim

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't an argument, or opinion, it's fact. The bulk of CRT's funding comes from government. This money is raised through general taxation.

Walkers & cyclists may also be boaters. Fact.

Walkers & cyclists may be "friends" of CRT. Fact

Walkers & cyclists may be volunteers or fund-raisers. Fact.

 

Walkers & cyclists, if that's all they are, cause very little wear & tear to the canals except for towpaths.

Boaters, if that's all they are, cause huge amounts of wear & tear to towpaths, locks, bridges, bank edges etc..

 

You cannot simply divide users of the waterways system into "them & us". All you do is create unnecessary friction.

Your argument has one flaw.

 

I am a boater. I pay a fee to use the waterways which I am happy to pay. I also appreciate that the upkeep of canals for boats is probably the largest expense.

 

However, I also own a house and I am a taxpayer so I also pay taxes to central government and local authorities.

 

No matter which way you look at it I am paying twice towards canal expenditure, once as a boater and secondly as a taxpayer. A cyclist or walker only pays once. I concede that an angler will pay a small sum separately which may or may not cover its costs.

 

I have never argued that all users should pay the same, boats obviously cause the greatest upkeep costs, but to deny the above is to deny the facts.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

That may be true but quite a few cyclists do not endear themselves to the boating fraternity do they? As a for instance I whilst driving my boat have never run into a cyclist or pedestrian, however I have on several occasions had to dodge out of the way of speeding morons on cycles on the towpath so they are stating " This is my towpath " get out of my way. Hardly conducive to good boating/cycling relations is it.

 

Tim

You are lucky. My wife was forced off the towpath by a speeding cyclist shouting "Get off the cycle path".

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your argument has one flaw.

 

I am a boater. I pay a fee to use the waterways which I am happy to pay. I also appreciate that the upkeep of canals for boats is probably the largest expense.

 

However, I also own a house and I am a taxpayer so I also pay taxes to central government and local authorities.

 

No matter which way you look at it I am paying twice towards canal expenditure, once as a boater and secondly as a taxpayer. A cyclist or walker only pays once. I concede that an angler will pay a small sum separately which may or may not cover its costs.

 

I have never argued that all users should pay the same, boats obviously cause the greatest upkeep costs, but to deny the above is to deny the facts.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

You are lucky. My wife was forced off the towpath by a speeding cyclist shouting "Get off the cycle path".

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Sorry George, are you purposely misreading what I said? You have not found a flaw, you have re-inforced whilst simultaneously missing my point.

I clearly said that walkers & cyclists may also be boaters.

I have a boat, I am a boater. Sometimes I go for a walk, therefore sometimes I'm a walker. Sometimes I cycle, therefore, sometimes I'm a cyclist.

I pay boat licence, I pay taxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That may be true but quite a few cyclists do not endear themselves to the boating fraternity do they? As a for instance I whilst driving my boat have never run into a cyclist or pedestrian, however I have on several occasions had to dodge out of the way of speeding morons on cycles on the towpath so they are stating " This is my towpath " get out of my way. Hardly conducive to good boating/cycling relations is it.

 

Tim

So there are selfish people in this country. Some of them cycle badly on the towpaths whilst wearing lycra.

Chances are they do most things selfishly, including walking, driving, shopping, business & voting. What can I say?

  • Greenie 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry George, are you purposely misreading what I said? You have not found a flaw, you have re-inforced whilst simultaneously missing my point.

I clearly said that walkers & cyclists may also be boaters.

I have a boat, I am a boater. Sometimes I go for a walk, therefore sometimes I'm a walker. Sometimes I cycle, therefore, sometimes I'm a cyclist.

I pay boat licence, I pay taxes.

So you are just like me. You pay twice. Once as a boater and once as a taxpayer.

 

Cyclists who do not own a boat pay once, as a taxpayer.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are just like me. You pay twice. Once as a boater and once as a taxpayer.

 

Cyclists who do not own a boat pay once, as a taxpayer.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Yes, that's pretty much how things work in a tax-paying democracy.

There are several parallels. Take the Arts for example. Ballet & opera are subsidised through taxation, but if you actually want to attend, you pay again by buying a ticket.

We all contribute to the Highways whether we drive or not, nobody has to pay to walk down the pavement or use a Pelican crossing but if you wish to use a car, you pay extra.

Here's another one (you'll like this), supermarkets. If you use a supermarket, you pay for the goods, but you pay again, through tax, for the transport infrastructure that enables the supermarkets to function, and again (through taxation) for the tax-credits which enable the supermarkets to employ workers on low wages. Even if you never use a supermarket, you still pay the last two.

Good isn't it.

  • Greenie 2
Link to post
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.