Overstaying apparently

[Alan de Enfield]

Never seen any lockies record my number.

 

Manned locks - we have been logged at every (manned) lock on every trip we have made in the last few years. (Non Volly Operate Locks).

They ask for boat name, number and date of expiry of licence, it is entered into a PDA, but (apparently) is never downloaded to C&RTs 'system'.

 

When a forum member came under enforcement for 'insufficient movement' he explained to C&RT that he had moved 100s of miles thru C&RT manned locks and had been 'logged' at every one. C&RT would not accept the lockies PDA as evidence.

 

Another member here was a C&RT lockie and he offered to support the 'boater' with historical evidence (from his PDA) that he had moved between the claimed dates of 'non-movement'.

 

Never heard what happened.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Alan de Enfield

[Naughty Cal]

 

Manned locks - we have been logged at every (manned) lock on every trip we have made in the last few years. (Non Volly Operate Locks).

They ask for boat name, number and date of expiry of licence, it is entered into a PDA, but (apparently) is never downloaded to C&RTs 'system'.

But must be recorded somewhere as they produce a sheet of boat movements through locks each year.

 

It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to merge the two systems.

[WotEver]

 

It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to merge the two systems.

This is CaRT we're talking about.

[Gareth E]

One way of avoiding the 'radar' is to work out when the data logger visits a particular area. They need to do this at 14 day intervals to fit in with the 14 day rule. And they do. So, once the logger has departed you're free to moor wherever you like. On day 13 proceed to a place where you would like CRT to log you, to give the impression that you're on a nice progressive journey. And so it goes on. Add in a longer cruise once a year to create a bit more distance. Needs a bit of planning but it's doable, I see a lot of it.

[Alan de Enfield]

One way of avoiding the 'radar' is to work out when the data logger visits a particular area. They need to do this at 14 day intervals to fit in with the 14 day rule. And they do. So, once the logger has departed you're free to moor wherever you like. On day 13 proceed to a place where you would like CRT to log you, to give the impression that you're on a nice progressive journey. And so it goes on. Add in a longer cruise once a year to create a bit more distance. Needs a bit of planning but it's doable, I see a lot of it.

 

Why not just boat in compliance with the 'spirit' of the rules - it really is a lot more simple than 'closing the curtains and hiding from the rent man every week

 

No need to watch out for the 'bogey-man' and as he appears start your engine and move off', then return when he has gone.

 

Why not just tell the truth "I cannot comply" - get a mooring and cut your stress levels to zero.

[alan_fincher]

But must be recorded somewhere as they produce a sheet of boat movements through locks each year.

 

It shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to merge the two systems.

 

Most of the canal based lockage reports, at least, are based solely on the automated equipment that records the water level in the lock.

 

This records one lock operation whether there are zero, one, two (or more) boats in the lock. It knows absolutely nothing about whether a boat is in a lock or not, only whether it has been emptied or filled.

 

I have only knowingly been recorded using a BW or CRT lock on the Rivers Severn and Weaver, and when locking through either Limehouse Lock or Thames Lock Brentford when moving between the canal and tidal Thames.

 

(Oh, except if a zealous CRT data recorder just happens to pass if I'm using a lock - some do include moving boats in what they record, but most do not appear to - another potential anomaly in the data gathered).

[Murflynn]

One way of avoiding the 'radar' is to work out when the data logger visits a particular area. They need to do this at 14 day intervals to fit in with the 14 day rule. And they do. So, once the logger has departed you're free to moor wherever you like. On day 13 proceed to a place where you would like CRT to log you, to give the impression that you're on a nice progressive journey. And so it goes on. Add in a longer cruise once a year to create a bit more distance. Needs a bit of planning but it's doable, I see a lot of it.

why would you want to encourage boaters moorers to avoid the spirit of the rules?

 

 

EDIT - that's just what Alan of Enfield said.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Murflynn

[Naughty Cal]

 

Most of the canal based lockage reports, at least, are based solely on the automated equipment that records the water level in the lock.

 

This records one lock operation whether there are zero, one, two (or more) boats in the lock. It knows absolutely nothing about whether a boat is in a lock or not, only whether it has been emptied or filled.

 

I have only knowingly been recorded using a BW or CRT lock on the Rivers Severn and Weaver, and when locking through either Limehouse Lock or Thames Lock Brentford when moving between the canal and tidal Thames.

 

(Oh, except if a zealous CRT data recorder just happens to pass if I'm using a lock - some do include moving boats in what they record, but most do not appear to - another potential anomaly in the data gathered).

I believe the manned locks we use the records are based on the lockies logs.

 

It usually says on the lock useage data sheet manual recording, or something to that effect.

[Athy]

Do CART's licence checkers walk many miles along the towpaths of the land, or is a boat moored miles from the nearest road (for example on the South Oxford top pound) more likely to escape notice because the checkers prefer to park their car by a bridge and walk a short distance only?

[Dave Payne]

 

Manned locks - we have been logged at every (manned) lock on every trip we have made in the last few years. (Non Volly Operate Locks).

They ask for boat name, number and date of expiry of licence, it is entered into a PDA, but (apparently) is never downloaded to C&RTs 'system'.

 

When a forum member came under enforcement for 'insufficient movement' he explained to C&RT that he had moved 100s of miles thru C&RT manned locks and had been 'logged' at every one. C&RT would not accept the lockies PDA as evidence.

 

Another member here was a C&RT lockie and he offered to support the 'boater' with historical evidence (from his PDA) that he had moved between the claimed dates of 'non-movement'.

 

Never heard what happened.

I find this strange, and would welcome others input, I have never been asked at a lock where a lockie was operating for my details, or noticed them taking details of my boat.

[Naughty Cal]

I find this strange, and would welcome others input, I have never been asked at a lock where a lockie was operating for my details, or noticed them taking details of my boat.

We are talking about CRT operated manned only locks. For example the Trent tidal locks. Each boat is logged in and out.

[Dave Payne]

Been through the atherstone flight a lot and never been 'logged' that I know of.

[Alan de Enfield]

We are talking about CRT operated manned only locks. For example the Trent tidal locks. Each boat is logged in and out.

 

Not only 'tidal' - we can easily be logged at 5 non-tidal locks in 20 miles* cruising

 

* That's in one day - not per year (just to get back onto topic)

[Paul C]

Do CART's licence checkers walk many miles along the towpaths of the land, or is a boat moored miles from the nearest road (for example on the South Oxford top pound) more likely to escape notice because the checkers prefer to park their car by a bridge and walk a short distance only?

 

Yes they (collectively) walk the entire length of the towpaths ie including rural areas, stretches of canal away from roads, etc.

[pearley]

Do CART's licence checkers walk many miles along the towpaths of the land, or is a boat moored miles from the nearest road (for example on the South Oxford top pound) more likely to escape notice because the checkers prefer to park their car by a bridge and walk a short distance only?

Some do. Met one a couple of years ago in the wilds of the South Oxford and last March when moored at Chasewater we were logged by CRT. She said she was glad that, having walked all that way, there was a boat to make it worthwhile. Offered her a lift back but she declined saying the exercise was good for her.

[Naughty Cal]

 

Not only 'tidal' - we can easily be logged at 5 non-tidal locks in 20 miles* cruising

 

* That's in one day - not per year (just to get back onto topic)

Yes you can from your base, but the non tidal locks are not always manned

[Alan de Enfield]

Yes you can from your base, but the non tidal locks are not always manned

 

You are (of course) correct - no 'manning' in the Winter - 'there is no demand you know !!'

[alan_fincher]

I find this strange, and would welcome others input, I have never been asked at a lock where a lockie was operating for my details, or noticed them taking details of my boat.

 

They are trying to blind you with the fact that their experiences involve passages through river locks that are manned and operated by a member of CRT staff.

 

99.(something) percent of CRT locks are not manned and operated by CRT staff, and if you have only ever cruised Midlands canals, it is highly unlikely you will have witnessed one that is.

 

Hence whilst Alan and Rachel may well regularly have their boat details recorded whilst passing through locks, you almost certainly wil not have done.

 

It is kind of a distraction, because on only a very few CRT waterways would this data be available to add to that collected by the CRT boat recorders.

 

If you have ever been through Harecastle tunnel, the tunnel keeper will have recorded your boat details, but curiously (like my experience of the Severn and Weaver lock keepers) they only take boat name, not your uniquely identifying boat index number.

 

EDIT:

 

To acknowledge you may well also get recorded in some way at places with staircase locks operated by CRT lock-keepers, such as maybe the Bingley 5 and Bingley 3 Rises.

Edited December 16, 2016 by alan_fincher

[Alan de Enfield]

 

They are trying to blind you with the fact that their experiences involve passages through river locks that are manned and operated by a member of CRT staff.

 

99.(something) percent of CRT locks are not manned and operated by CRT staff, and if you have only ever cruised canals, it is highly unlikely you will have witnessed one that is.

 

Hence whilst Alan and Rachel may well regularly have their boat details recoded whilst passing through locks, you almost certainly wil not have done.

 

It is kind of a distraction, because on only a very few CRT waterways would this data be available to add to that collected by the CRT boat recorders.

 

If you have ever been through Harecastle tunnel, the tunnel keeper will have recorded your boat details, but curiously (like my experience of the Severn and Weaver lock keepers) they only take boat name, not your uniquely identifying boat index number.

 

Yes - we are (maybe) being a bit 'naughty' but the fact that C&RT are unable to merge logging data is pathetic when it results in boaters being accused of 'not moving' when there is evidence available that they have moved.

 

We have been 'registered / logged' at Harecastle, On the Llangollen / Hurleston flight and at Anderton Boat Lift - and basically anywhere else that you need to 'book'.

[alan_fincher]

We have been 'registered / logged' at Harecastle, On the Llangollen / Hurleston flight and at Anderton Boat Lift - and basically anywhere else that you need to 'book'.

 

Yes, on reflection we must have been logged through places like Tuel Lane Lock, though to what extent such data is retained after the event, I have no idea.

[dmr]

One way of avoiding the 'radar' is to work out when the data logger visits a particular area. They need to do this at 14 day intervals to fit in with the 14 day rule. And they do. So, once the logger has departed you're free to moor wherever you like. On day 13 proceed to a place where you would like CRT to log you, to give the impression that you're on a nice progressive journey. And so it goes on. Add in a longer cruise once a year to create a bit more distance. Needs a bit of planning but it's doable, I see a lot of it.

 

A fair few boats on the K&A do try to move to avoid checking day (Thursdays) but CaRT do check on other days just once in a while so its not a foolproof tactic.

 

................Dave

[john6767]

We are talking about CRT operated manned only locks. For example the Trent tidal locks. Each boat is logged in and out.

The boat number is also recorded at locks on the Severn, and at some bridges on the G&S

[cuthound]

Do CART's licence checkers walk many miles along the towpaths of the land, or is a boat moored miles from the nearest road (for example on the South Oxford top pound) more likely to escape notice because the checkers prefer to park their car by a bridge and walk a short distance only?

The local CRT boat checker in my area rides a bike, so able to cover some considerable distance in a day along the Coventry Canal.

[Mike Todd]

 

They are trying to blind you with the fact that their experiences involve passages through river locks that are manned and operated by a member of CRT staff.

 

99.(something) percent of CRT locks are not manned and operated by CRT staff, and if you have only ever cruised Midlands canals, it is highly unlikely you will have witnessed one that is.

 

Hence whilst Alan and Rachel may well regularly have their boat details recorded whilst passing through locks, you almost certainly wil not have done.

 

It is kind of a distraction, because on only a very few CRT waterways would this data be available to add to that collected by the CRT boat recorders.

 

If you have ever been through Harecastle tunnel, the tunnel keeper will have recorded your boat details, but curiously (like my experience of the Severn and Weaver lock keepers) they only take boat name, not your uniquely identifying boat index number.

 

EDIT:

 

To acknowledge you may well also get recorded in some way at places with staircase locks operated by CRT lock-keepers, such as maybe the Bingley 5 and Bingley 3 Rises.

Are the tunnel keepers only making notes to assist them check boats out than have been checked in?

[Mike Todd]

 

Yes - we are (maybe) being a bit 'naughty' but the fact that C&RT are unable to merge logging data is pathetic when it results in boaters being accused of 'not moving' when there is evidence available that they have moved.

 

We have been 'registered / logged' at Harecastle, On the Llangollen / Hurleston flight and at Anderton Boat Lift - and basically anywhere else that you need to 'book'.

But we do have to remember why the data is being recorded - to identify those not complying with CC and mooring 'rules'. They are not interested (nor should anyone) in having an accurate record of the movement of every boat. Whilst it is also likely that some staff will operate their system in ways not really approved from above, in general they are only concerned to use the data as a start point in the enforcement process. Whatever anyone seems to have heard individual staff say, I would be very surprised is a court was not prepared to take into consideration all sorts of evidence and to weigh it according to its pedigree. If a boater is really that keen (s)he could always seek a court order for records such as those kept at locks to be disclosed as relevant evidence.

 

Most Thames lock keepers also take notes - no idea what they do with them and, of course, they can only do so when they are there. Again, yhey could be sought as evidence in extremis.

 

Apart from the privacy and data protection issues, I doubt whether most of us would really want to spend significantly more money in collecting data that goes well beyond the needs of the enforcement process. At the moment, and I suspect for a long time to come, CaRT are only able to tackle the really obvious cases and I would be surprised if the current data collection fails to identify them. OK so there are some false positives (ie boats picked out that are in fact compliant by any standard) but it is likely to be cheaper, if a tad irksome, to live with them and just back off when challenged by the boater.