Jump to content

CRT and continuous cruising


DavidAN

Featured Posts

9 minutes ago, rbrtcrowther said:

Put bluntly, There going the tell the free spiritual earth loving just about floating canal dwellers with probably no engine and hardly any money... That they either move and navigate.... Or spend several thousand quid on a marin mooring....

 

And frankly why not? Why should "free spiritual earth loving just about floating canal dwellers" be excused from moving or having a proper mooring?

They knew the deal when they applied for their licence. Or do you think they should be excused licenses too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea its a tricky one... I've just got a holiday boat and Maria mooring. I was just pointing out that this new rule is clearly aimed at a certain people.. And some of the most interesting and friendly people you'll meet... Its the waterways equivalent to the traveller problem on on land..... Perhaps the crt should build dedicated marinas for the Non travelling boat community just like some councils do.... Just sayin..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Paranoid or what!

It's targetted against boats, not people. If the mouldy old lifeboat that never moves and the rusty narrowboat with no engine were allowed to claim their own personal length of towpath and never move, more would appear neighbours and eventually whole shanty towns of boats that never move would organically grow. Most (but not all) boaters don't like to see this happening. Hence the need to bear down on on non-moving boats.

I'm sorry Mike, but I think its not that clear cut.

On our most local stretches of the GU, there are large numbers of largely static boats, some of which are dead scruffy and run down, often with masses of stuff piled on the roof, others of which are almost spanking new wide-beams with unscratched paintwork, and lines of large shiny fenders.

From my own observations, I have little doubt that enforcement spend far more time in proportion on the scruffy boats than the posh ones, (although I clearly can't produce statistical information that backs this up).  I have certainly seen data checkers walk orcycle past a line of smart boats then stop to record the run down ones on multiple occasions.

Clearly in many cases the owners of the lush wide-beams could be affording a home mooring, but choose not to, whereas I agree they may well be beyond the means of the "scruffy" boat owners.  Plus a lot of local marinas have minimum standards about boat appearance, so might well no accept them in anyway, eve if they could pay £4K to £6K per year.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

exactly... The waterways should be available to all...perhaps finding suitable moorings at an affordable price with toilet facilities for less fortunate few is the way forward... Lets be honest a mooring doesn't take a.lot of maintaining.. On land they have affordable homes. Why not affordable moorings.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, rbrtcrowther said:

On land they have affordable homes

Even these are unaffordable to some.

I know - lets just give anyone who wants one a 'free house', but then they have no job or income & cannot afford the 55" TV and internet access so lets make that free as well, where does it end ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

I'm sorry Mike, but I think its not that clear cut.

On our most local stretches of the GU, there are large numbers of largely static boats, some of which are dead scruffy and run down, often with masses of stuff piled on the roof, others of which are almost spanking new wide-beams with unscratched paintwork, and lines of large shiny fenders.

From my own observations, I have little doubt that enforcement spend far more time in proportion on the scruffy boats than the posh ones, (although I clearly can't produce statistical information that backs this up).  I have certainly seen data checkers walk orcycle past a line of smart boats then stop to record the run down ones on multiple occasions.

Clearly in many cases the owners of the lush wide-beams could be affording a home mooring, but choose not to, whereas I agree they may well be beyond the means of the "scruffy" boat owners.  Plus a lot of local marinas have minimum standards about boat appearance, so might well no accept them in anyway, eve if they could pay £4K to £6K per year.

Not sure that this is still true.

A few years ago I gave potential new boaters the advice "if you keep your boat clean and tidy and speak pleasantly to the enforcement officer then you can get away with almost anything". I think things have changed. Numbers are now written down by an anonymous data recorders and fed into a computers that makes impartial decisions that are then acted upon by a person in an office who has probably not even seen the boat in question.

In your observations it might be that the recorder is on a specific mission to record certain boats that are already of interest, and also some of them are in the habit of walking past the boats they are recording, memorising the number, and stopping a few yards later to enter that number into the little computer.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Even these are unaffordable to some.

I know - lets just give anyone who wants one a 'free house', but then they have no job or income & cannot afford the 55" TV and internet access so lets make that free as well, where does it end ?

Hows the view from up there...

  • Angry 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, rbrtcrowther said:

exactly... The waterways should be available to all...perhaps finding suitable moorings at an affordable price with toilet facilities for less fortunate few is the way forward... Lets be honest a mooring doesn't take a.lot of maintaining.. On land they have affordable homes. Why not affordable moorings.?

There are affordable moorings, many farmers field moorings are pretty affordable certainly compared to a marina near London. But if you want to live near London I think you will find that there is no affordable housing for the asking. Likewise probably no affordable moorings. There is no right to live in the most expensive city in the UK unless you can afford it. Fact of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps there are other ways of helping the situation.... Perhaps by volunteering for the trust struggling boater might be rewarded with an exemption from moving.. Or perhaps be allowed to move a shorter distance.. or maybe move as they work.. Clearing reeds and trees. Painting ect.. Perhaps Swampy and Star would get a bit more sympathy if the 10miles of the grand union they lived on was immaculately kept... Just sayin;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, rbrtcrowther said:

Perhaps there are other ways of helping the situation.... Perhaps by volunteering for the trust struggling boater might be rewarded with an exemption from moving.

Am I alone in thinking that Rbrt's idea may have "legs"? Volunteer lock-keepers at busy places, for example? Or being responsible for the cleaning and upkeep of a sanny station? (Someone cleans our local one regularly but I have no idea whether it's a local boater, a kindly villager or a CART employee).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

On our most local stretches of the GU, there are large numbers of largely static boats, some of which are dead scruffy and run down, often with masses of stuff piled on the roof, others of which are almost spanking new wide-beams with unscratched paintwork, and lines of large shiny fenders.

From my own observations, I have little doubt that enforcement spend far more time in proportion on the scruffy boats than the posh ones, (although I clearly can't produce statistical information that backs this up).  I have certainly seen data checkers walk orcycle past a line of smart boats then stop to record the run down ones on multiple occasions.

 

As we now only venture below Cosgrove a couple days of times a year. It’s  the growth of the wide beams mentioned above that is most noticeable although it’s more likely to be depth at the bankside that prevents us mooring than crowding. The growth of widebeams also causes us navigational issues in places and CRT needs to be more aware of the need for vegetation management and dredging beyond the centre channel in the more popular wide beam cruising area.

It’s the diversity of boats on the cut  from “dead scruffy” to “shiny” that keeps us boating and as long as they remain largely static as opposed to static I don’t care too much what a boat looks like. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Paranoid or what!

It's targetted against boats, not people. If the mouldy old lifeboat that never moves and the rusty narrowboat with no engine were allowed to claim their own personal length of towpath and never move, more would appear neighbours and eventually whole shanty towns of boats that never move would organically grow. Most (but not all) boaters don't like to see this happening. Hence the need to bear down on on non-moving boats.

more paranoia?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rbrtcrowther said:

Perhaps there are other ways of helping the situation.... Perhaps by volunteering for the trust struggling boater might be rewarded with an exemption from moving.. Or perhaps be allowed to move a shorter distance.. or maybe move as they work.. Clearing reeds and trees. Painting ect.. Perhaps Swampy and Star would get a bit more sympathy if the 10miles of the grand union they lived on was immaculately kept... Just sayin;)

Something like this is and has been done. Boats have been given - not free, but - reduced charge moorings [even on 24 hour visitor moorings] on the basis that the owner acts as local warden, monitoring and advising on the day to day situation around them. For some reason the local instance of which I am aware has altered, and the official 'warden status' removed, but the boat is still allowed to remain 'permanently' on the 24 hour moorings on payment of an annual fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, rbrtcrowther said:

It may work.... A set number of voluntary hours work for crt must be carried out every 14days to allow a boat to remain in position... Or a a boat must move along and maintain X number of miles of water way..... Its free labour..

I see lots of problems with this though it would be a very good thing for a small number of people.

It would be complicated and time consuming to administer. CaRT do not have the legal powers to implement or properly control it so it would be abused, with court cases from "the usual suspects" challenging exactly how much work they have done. Quite a few of the people who want to remain in one place want to freeload (and believe it their right to do so) and quite a few have lost their work ethic to drink and drugs (oooh the truth is sometimes harsh), so will just continue to freeload by not really working thus creating more bad feeling and divisions.

The canal would benefit hugely from more younger boaters and families who genuinely want to live on and love the waterways. It really does not need people with no interest in the cut moving here in search of cheap housing.

There is already an option to sign on and get the licence paid, and even mooring and boat refurbishment, for those on no income.

I also suspect that most of the people who would benefit from this scheme would actually find work to pay for a mooring in the usual way.

If it did work then bits of London and Bradford on Avon would be really really clean, whilst the rest of the system got even more neglected.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rbrtcrowther said:

exactly... The waterways should be available to all...perhaps finding suitable moorings at an affordable price with toilet facilities for less fortunate few is the way forward... Lets be honest a mooring doesn't take a lot of maintaining.. On land they have affordable homes. Why not affordable moorings.?

On online mooring may not take a lot of maintaining. But most boaters don't want to boat past endless lines of moored boats, and so CRT (and BW before them) have encouraged the development of offline moorings.

A marina may not take a lot of maintaining either, but it does cost a lot to construct, and nobody is going to build a marina unless they can recoup the outlay from mooring fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rbrtcrowther said:

It may work.... A set number of voluntary hours work for crt must be carried out every 14days to allow a boat to remain in position... Or a a boat must move along and maintain X number of miles of water way..... Its free labour..

Just wonderin like but are you a " Vegan "by any chance?

  • Horror 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, David Mack said:

...  But most boaters don't want to boat past endless lines of moored boats, and so CRT (and BW before them) have encouraged the development of offline moorings. ...

This would be ameliorated by CRT amending the recommendations on boaters activities to state that no reduction in speed is required when passing online moorings.

  • longterm moorings should have proper mooring rings/anchors so moorers should be able to adequately secure their boats
  • longterm moorings should have adequate depth 
  • boaters unhappy with that should move to marinas

Speed reduction for people online but not on longterm moorings should remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rbrtcrowther said:

Put bluntly, There going the tell the free spiritual, RULES DON'T APPLY TO ME, EVERYONE OWES ME A LIVING, earth loving just about floating canal dwellers with probably no engine and hardly any money... That they either move and navigate.... Or spend several thousand quid on a marin mooring....

Edited that for you.

And as for your last sentence, tough; life's a bitch and then you're dead. Get over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rbrtcrowther said:

No idea its a tricky one... I've just got a holiday boat and Maria mooring. I was just pointing out that this new rule is clearly aimed at a certain people.. And some of the most interesting and friendly people you'll meet... Its the waterways equivalent to the traveller problem on on land..... Perhaps the crt should build dedicated marinas for the Non travelling boat community just like some councils do.... Just sayin..

Which would have to be built and paid for put of licence fees, making the licence even less affordable for those struggling to pay it now, but who meet the very relaxed "continuous cruising" requirements.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. If you don't want to to move, then a boat is not the right type of accommodation for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, system 4-50 said:

This would be ameliorated by CRT amending the recommendations on boaters activities to state that no reduction in speed is required when passing online moorings.

  • longterm moorings should have proper mooring rings/anchors so moorers should be able to adequately secure their boats
  • longterm moorings should have adequate depth 
  • boaters unhappy with that should move to marinas

Speed reduction for people online but not on longterm moorings should remain.

I pass every moored boat at tickover always have done always will do. I find it in no way onerous. A few revs if blowing a gale so I don't blow into them otherwise tickover wether one lone boat or 2 miles of them.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

 

  • longterm moorings should have adequate depth 

Most certainly. On our stretch of L.T. moorings there is one notoriously silted, currently unoccupied berth beside which someone has erected an almost convincing-looking sign which reads "Dunflotin - home mooring".

I can, however, foresee a problem arising if CART wish to dredge such stretches to a suitable depth: if boats are unoccupied, then the dredger will not be able to dredge the bit underneath them. The crew could, I suppose, untie each boat, move it, dredge that patch, pull the boat back in and retie it, but that would be laborious and irksome. Is this in fact done when L.T. moorings are dredged?

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, system 4-50 said:

This would be ameliorated by CRT amending the recommendations on boaters activities to state that no reduction in speed is required when passing online moorings.

  • longterm moorings should have proper mooring rings/anchors so moorers should be able to adequately secure their boats
  • longterm moorings should have adequate depth 
  • boaters unhappy with that should move to marinas

Speed reduction for people online but not on longterm moorings should remain.

So are you saying that a boat will be disturbed less by passing boats if its on moored on rings rather than pins?

Have you ever actually been on a (correctly) moored boat on a typical canal when a large widebeam goes past at 4 mph ???

Many canals have a saucer profile, they were made that way, so its not really a case of dredging to the edge, more like reprofiling and maybe relining and building a new edge.

Many boats display a "sow down or pass at tickover" notice. Maybe you should "put your money where your mouth is" and whenever you moor erect a notice saying "Please pass at normal maximum cruising speed" :D 

  • Greenie 1
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.