March of the Widebeams

[Victor Vectis]

That would explain why it was back just round the corner when I went through there last October.

 

ETA Does Section 8 apply to craft unsuitable for the waterway?

Edited April 3, 2023 by Victor Vectis

[roland elsdon]

Gas axe and angle grinders are available from a number of local hire shops.

[Captain Pegg]

7 hours ago, Jimbobs said:

It was still there on Saturday. I stopped at the water point between it and the bridge and a local wandered past and got chatting. According to him, the boat is now stuck as it’s too fat to get through a couple of bridges further on and some repairs to a towpath under a bridge behind it now mean it can’t get back either. He reckons it’s been there for about a year….

When I passed it a week ago I noted that the stem post seemed to be in line with the edge of the narrowboat moored in front of it. The angle of the boats may have affected the apparent view but it suggested that this boat may be 14’ wide. If so that’s wider than the published craft dimensions and we know CRT have had issues maintaining even those on this canal.

[dogless]

 

 

Same boat just round the corner on 20 September 2022

 

Rog

Edited April 4, 2023 by dogless

[Old Janner]

Passed the boat last week on 7 April. Not a good photo, but it shows how inconveniently placed it is.

[Mike Todd]

11 hours ago, Old Janner said:

Passed the boat last week on 7 April. Not a good photo, but it shows how inconveniently placed it is.

Ditto see nbalchemy.blogspot.com. It really is a safety issue.  I also wondered what CaRT would do if a similar sized boat tried to pass in the opposite direction.

[haggis]

We are on the Leigh branch which is obviously " wide boat land " . There are loads of them mostly with the dreadful looking tucked in sides at the front. This is a suitable area for them though and we even see some moving .

Edited April 11, 2023 by haggis

[magnetman]

The Thames is completely overloaded by these awful things as well. 

 

It is a problem because some owners of pleasant moorings have decided to let the moorings for winter to wide beam canal boats. OK this was winter but if they just keep on paying then they will be blocking a lot of areas which were previously nice and accessible moorings. 

 

Another thing I hate about these things is they always seem to run the engine just when you want to relax in the evening. 

 

The numbers will increase. Last time I went to Lechlade which was a couple of yars ago in summer there were about 6 of them there. 

 

They are inappropriate. Understandable but basically inappropriate. 

 

Nothing can be done and I suppose if the CRT hit then with extra licence fees even more will turn up on the River. 

 

 

[Lady M]

They'll still be paying CRT something as part of the Gold Licence fee.  

[MtB]

7 minutes ago, Lady C said:

They'll still be paying CRT something as part of the Gold Licence fee.  

 

Not if they commit fully to The Thames and by an EA licence.

 

 

Or buy one, even!

 

 

[LadyG]

I don't know the back story or the travel options, but why is the owner doing nothing, it looks like an ongoing expense.

[magnetman]

Earlier someone pointed out the the boat could not fit through the bridges.

 

One wonders how it got there in the first place. 

 

Plasma cutter might be useful here. 

 

Why has it not been S8 by the CRT and disposed of?

These dreadful warts so often seem to also have shockingly ugly canvas things. Once they age a bit they are going to be very tatty. Those canopies are very expensive for what they are. Someone told me they can be thousands of pounds although this seems improbable. 

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Earlier someone pointed out the the boat could not fit through the bridges.

 

One wonders how it got there in the first place. 

 

Plasma cutter might be useful here. 

 

Why has it not been S8 by the CRT and disposed of?

These dreadful warts so often seem to also have shockingly ugly canvas things. Once they age a bit they are going to be very tatty. Those canopies are very expensive for what they are. Someone told me they can be thousands of pounds although this seems improbable. 

 

 

As the nominally 'wide' canals (those with 14ft width locks) get progressively more infested with these abominations, the delights of the narrow navigations such as the Oxford will become more widely recognised and in demand.

 

I'd be embarrassed to put one of those monstrosities into a small canal like the GU or K&A but lots of people feel fine about it, which teaches us something about human nature. 

 

Not sure what though! 

 

[Lady M]

41 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Not if they commit fully to The Thames and by an EA licence.

 

 

Or buy one, even!

 

 

 

I may be completely wrong but I thought you needed a mooring to get an EA licence?

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, Lady C said:

 

I may be completely wrong but I thought you needed a mooring to get an EA licence?

 

And, isn't the EA licence priced by area (hence fatty boats pay way more than anorexic boats) ?

[David Mack]

7 minutes ago, Lady C said:

 

I may be completely wrong but I thought you needed a mooring to get an EA licence?

In a previous thread it was said that although the form asks for a mooring, no checks are made, and if you leave the box blank a licence will still be issued.

[PaulJ]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

And, isn't the EA licence priced by area (hence fatty boats pay way more than anorexic boats) ?

Does on the Thames.

EA tried to do this on the Great Ouse and Nene but there was an outcry and they actually backed down in the end.

Shame as I would have actually been alot better off 😀

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, haggis said:

We are on the Leigh branch which is obviously " wide boat land " . There are loads of them mostly with the dreadful looking tucked in sides at the front. This is a suitable area for them though and we even see some moving .

Could not agree more, those that look like squashed flat frogs are bad enough, but who could buy those with that pinched look. I know there are some people who have no sense of style, but the rest of us have to avert our eyes.

[MtB]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

And, isn't the EA licence priced by area (hence fatty boats pay way more than anorexic boats) ?

 

That's a good point.

 

It's also another direction from which pressure on CRT will come to start charging fair and reasonable rates for widebeam licences. I suspect due to the current 'charge by length' policy, even a Gold License will be WAY cheaper than an EA license charged on deck area, which is used to reflect the sheer 'amount of boat' being licenced. Unlike the unfair CRT method of charging by length only. 

[dmr]

33 minutes ago, David Mack said:

In a previous thread it was said that although the form asks for a mooring, no checks are made, and if you leave the box blank a licence will still be issued.

There are loads of continuously moored residential boats on the Thames just above Kings lock, probably an extension of the Dukes cut community. A lock keeper said that they just say where they are moored and a licence is issued. The Thames is probably more out of control than the canals.

[MtB]

59 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

That's a good point.

 

It's also another direction from which pressure on CRT will come to start charging fair and reasonable rates for widebeam licences. I suspect due to the current 'charge by length' policy, even a Gold License will be WAY cheaper than an EA license charged on deck area, which is used to reflect the sheer 'amount of boat' being licenced. Unlike the unfair CRT method of charging by length only. 

 

Actually the difference is not as big as I expected.

 

CRT GOLD license for a 22m x 4m monstrosity: £1700

EA license for the same abomination: £2000

 

Both approx, rounded to convenient big numbers.

[Lady M]

Have to hope that enough of us chose 'charge by area' in the recent CRT survey.  Otherwise, it may be down to other users of the R Thames to start complaining if too many mooring places are blocked by non-moving boats.

[Bacchus]

I spoke to the owner of a fatty at Maidenhead last year, and he seemed quite proud of the fact that he had kept his 70' thing on a public mooring for 18 months...

 

It might help if the anachronous VAT rules which make a 65' * 12' boat cheaper than a 50' * 10' boat could be addressed!

[magnetman]

Was this below the Brunel bridge? 

 

 

I think it is council owned there so they need to get things organised and acquire a byelaw to control moorings. 

 

Problem with these byelaws is that they also negatively impact pleasure boaters. 

 

 

I think Spelthorne further down the River are doing a PSPO which is another approach.

Edited April 11, 2023 by magnetman

[Bacchus]

38 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Was this below the Brunel bridge? 

 

 

I think it is council owned there so they need to get things organised and acquire a byelaw to control moorings. 

 

Problem with these byelaws is that they also negatively impact pleasure boaters. 

 

 

I think Spelthorne further down the River are doing a PSPO which is another approach.

 

 

Yes, immediately downstream of the bridge. Nice spot to stop. obviously you get a  bit of train noise, but that seems to add to it rather than take away.

 

Just googled PSPO - be interesting to see how (if) that works. There has been a boat moored on a Spelthorne mooring for at least a year. EA enforcement notice caused it to be moved about 25m to a "non-mooring" bit of bank which is presumably also owned by Spelthorne.