Jump to content

What happens to boats with moorings in closed sections?


mattcyp

Featured Posts

As a boat owner with a mooring on the section of the L&L that is due to close, what happens to moored boats in these sections?  Do CRT maintain levels even though no boats can move through the locks, or are the boats expected to sit on the bottom? 

 

CRT moorings manager for the area I'm in doesn't have a clue, but has promised to try and find out.  His only suggestion was that if I can't get the boat back to its mooring before they close the locks, I'll have to keep moving it every 2 weeks until they re-open the canal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd imagine they'll do whatever the water level does. If they're chaining up the locks and disabling the gear as I've read, I can't imagine they'll send staff out to recommission and work them just for water levels sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, mattcyp said:

As a boat owner with a mooring on the section of the L&L that is due to close, what happens to moored boats in these sections?  Do CRT maintain levels even though no boats can move through the locks, or are the boats expected to sit on the bottom? 

 

CRT moorings manager for the area I'm in doesn't have a clue, but has promised to try and find out.  His only suggestion was that if I can't get the boat back to its mooring before they close the locks, I'll have to keep moving it every 2 weeks until they re-open the canal. 

As you have a mooring and may be forced off it temporarily, i think you could put the case that it is 'reasonable' for you to remain in one place for more than 14 days. There is reference to this in the terms and conditions of the continuous cruising licence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mattcyp said:

As a boat owner with a mooring on the section of the L&L that is due to close, what happens to moored boats in these sections?  Do CRT maintain levels even though no boats can move through the locks, or are the boats expected to sit on the bottom? 

 

CRT moorings manager for the area I'm in doesn't have a clue, but has promised to try and find out.  His only suggestion was that if I can't get the boat back to its mooring before they close the locks, I'll have to keep moving it every 2 weeks until they re-open the canal. 

Looking at the notice, they are planning to ash up the gates to reduce unplanned water leakage.

 

As I understand it, they then maintain a minimum feed level that will just keep enough water running over the weirs to keep the pounds up.

 

Essentially they close the canal when there is just enough water left to do this for the rest of the summer. If we get rain and the reservoir levels recover they will re-open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Meanderingviking said:

As you have a mooring and may be forced off it temporarily, i think you could put the case that it is 'reasonable' for you to remain in one place for more than 14 days. There is reference to this in the terms and conditions of the continuous cruising licence. 

I think you need to re-read the relevant Section of the 1995 British Waterways Act, the requirement to move every 14 days applies only to Licence holders without a 'home' mooring.

Edited by DonCorleone
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, mattcyp said:

As a boat owner with a mooring on the section of the L&L that is due to close, what happens to moored boats in these sections?  Do CRT maintain levels even though no boats can move through the locks, or are the boats expected to sit on the bottom? 

I would complain to CRT about the lack of communication, all moorers on the effected section should really have received a communication (letter/email, etc.) at the same time of the stoppage notification and what the plan is and how it will affect the permanent moorers . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Meanderingviking said:

As you have a mooring and may be forced off it temporarily, i think you could put the case that it is 'reasonable' for you to remain in one place for more than 14 days. There is reference to this in the terms and conditions of the continuous cruising licence. 

A few years ago there was a failure at Calcutt top lock, which meant for an extended period, in Feb and March I think, Calcutt locks were closed in addition to a planned closure of Stockton locks.  That meant that the boats in Calcutt marina were trapped.  We were offered the option to move the boat above Calcutt top lock for the duration it we  wanted to keep using the boat.  A couple of boats did but we decided not to given it was winter and we would then have no electricity.  So based on that I would have thought they would contact all owners moored on the effected section and given them the option to relocate, particularly given it is summer and more are likely to want to use their boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Meanderingviking said:

As you have a mooring and may be forced off it temporarily, i think you could put the case that it is 'reasonable' for you to remain in one place for more than 14 days. There is reference to this in the terms and conditions of the continuous cruising licence. 

When we had the breach in Leeds my home moorings was affected and inaccessible for around 3 months (due to the dredging).  I just stayed put in the centre of Leeds, had nothing from CRT regarding me staying put.   Was winter tho.     I would take offence (and would tell them that wasn't acceptable) if I wasn't able to get back to my home moorings and had to keep cruising because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DonCorleone said:

I think you need to re-read the relevant Section of the 1995 British Waterways Act, the requirement to move every 14 days applies only to Licence holders without a 'home' mooring.

Blimey I didn't know that. So if you have a home mooring you can stay anywhere on the towpath for as long as you want then and never need to move?

  • Horror 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Blimey I didn't know that. So if you have a home mooring you can stay anywhere on the towpath for as long as you want then and never need to move?

According to the act, yes, that's exactly what it says.

 

The "move every 14 days" is explicitly only detailed in the act for those with no home mooring, and no limit is placed on those who have.

But that's just what the act says.  BW / CRT have in their wisdom decided that it applies to all, not just those without a home mooring, and I guess most of us would agree that is fair and sensible.

But they really don't have the force of law behind them, in my honest view of things.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input all.

Yes, it does seem reasonable that if I can't take the boat back to its mooring, it should be ok to leave it somewhere for more than 14 days.  I don't imagine that will be a tough bridge to cross, should I come to it. 

 

48 minutes ago, mayalld said:

Looking at the notice, they are planning to ash up the gates to reduce unplanned water leakage.

As I understand it, they then maintain a minimum feed level that will just keep enough water running over the weirs to keep the pounds up.

 

Thanks, that has prompted me to re-read the notice.  To "ash up the gates" is to insert strips of ash into the joins to minimise leakage?  My hope would be that their plan is as you say, and the canal becomes a linear duck pond, instead of a half filled ditch. 

 

 

Re. the two comments about imagining they would tell moorers (multi-qouting eludes me!).  The chap I spoke to seemed a bit put out that I wanted to know what was going to happen, and had no idea himself. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

According to the act, yes, that's exactly what it says.

 

The "move every 14 days" is explicitly only detailed in the act for those with no home mooring, and no limit is placed on those who have.

But that's just what the act says.  BW / CRT have in their wisdom decided that it applies to all, not just those without a home mooring, and I guess most of us would agree that is fair and sensible.

But they really don't have the force of law behind them, in my honest view of things.

Trouble is Alan its a case of will you get a licence next time round? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mattcyp said:

Re. the two comments about imagining they would tell moorers (multi-qouting eludes me!).  The chap I spoke to seemed a bit put out that I wanted to know what was going to happen, and had no idea himself. 

CRT shouldn't have been surprised on the obvious basic questions you have been moored there and be in contact with you all regarding.  It's sh1te customer service that they haven't.   They can't predict the weather of course, but they can communicate with you on what they plan to do and expected estimates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mrsmelly said:

Trouble is Alan its a case of will you get a licence next time round? 

It's not a game we play - it would be highly unusual for us to spend 14 days on any mooring other than our home one.  In fact a week would be unusual for us.

 

I was commenting solely on what the law says.

I would suggest whether anybody, (whether with or without a home mooring), is likely to have any issues at renewal will depend on whether CRT have been on to them at any stage indicating they are unhappy about what they have been up to.

 

Generally I think if CRT have not been "on your case" at any point, you can reasonably argue that you have not been notified you have failed to "satisfy the board".

But as I say, I'm commenting from a theoretical view point, because I would class us as people highly unlikely to be challenged unless CRT have made a mistake.  For example if they have recorded us at the same place 3 weeks apart, but failed to record we have been somewhere else maybe 100 miles away between those two dates - something I would easily expect to sort out by showing them a cruise diary and a few photos!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Robbo said:

What would they refuse the license on tho?

I think Alan is right in that it doesn't happen to anyone but pee takers, it would never happen to us although in the ops case re the closure I reckon if you talk to them they would leave you alone. In normal situations I reckon they could find anything they want could fall foul of one or another term or condition?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, DonCorleone said:

I think you need to re-read the relevant Section of the 1995 British Waterways Act, the requirement to move every 14 days applies only to Licence holders without a 'home' mooring.

 

28 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

According to the act, yes, that's exactly what it says.

 

The "move every 14 days" is explicitly only detailed in the act for those with no home mooring, and no limit is placed on those who have.

But that's just what the act says.  BW / CRT have in their wisdom decided that it applies to all, not just those without a home mooring, and I guess most of us would agree that is fair and sensible.

But they really don't have the force of law behind them, in my honest view of things.

 

The Judge in the Myers case obviously disagrees with you :

 

The judgement in the case of CaRT v Mayers states that repeated journeys between the same two places would be 'bona fide navigation' if the boater had specific reason for making repeated journeys over the same stretch of canal. HHJ Halbert also stated that any requirement by CaRT to use a substantial part of the canal network was not justified by Section 17(3)(c)(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995 because the requirement to use the boat for bona fide navigation is 'temporal not geographical'.

6:3 There are clear anomalies in both positions, CRT clearly regard the occupation of moorings by permanently residential boat owners who do not move very much as a significant problem (see paragraphs 3.5 and 3.6 above). However, neither the statutory regime in subsection 17(3) nor the guidelines can deal with this problem. A boat which has a home mooring is not required to be “bona fide” used for navigation throughout the period of the licence, but neither is it required to ever use its home mooring. The act requires that the mooring is available, it does not say it must be used. The guidelines also have this effect. The boat is still subject to the restriction that it must not stay in the same place for more than 14 days but there is nothing whatever to stop it being shuffled between two locations quite close together provided they are far enough apart to constitute different places. If those who are causing the overcrowding at popular spots have home moorings anywhere in the country the present regime cannot control their overuse of the popular spots. Such an owner could cruise to and fro along the Kennet & Avon canal near Bristol and the home mooring could be in Birmingham and totally unused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The boat is still subject to the restriction that it must not stay in the same place for more than 14 days

 

Maybe the judge said that because Mr Mayers agreed to the T&Cs when purchasing his licence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, mattcyp said:

Thanks, that has prompted me to re-read the notice.  To "ash up the gates" is to insert strips of ash into the joins to minimise leakage?  My hope would be that their plan is as you say, and the canal becomes a linear duck pond, instead of a half filled ditch.

 

 

To "ash up" the gates is to drop ash from a fire onto the outside of the leak. The leaking water carries the ash into the gap and seals it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Maybe the judge said that because Mr Mayers agreed to the T&Cs when purchasing his licence.

I could be wrong, but I don't think that at that time ( Jan 15) C&RT had re-written their T&Cs to impose 'CC' rules on 'non-CCers'.(May 15 issue)

Isn't just the latest T&Cs that require that ?

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

I could be wrong, but I don't think that at that time C&RT had re-written their T&Cs to impose 'CC' rules on 'non-CCers'.

Isn't just the latest T&Cs that require that ?

 

No, the T&Cs have always said no mooring for more than 14 days. 

 

This is different from the latest rule which attempts to impose CC rules on HMers away from home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

No, the T&Cs have always said no mooring for more than 14 days. 

 

This is different from the latest rule which attempts to impose CC rules on HMers away from home. 

Ah - yes I remember now some posts a while ago from Nigel Moore.

 

Something to the effect :

 

There is no legal right for a boat with a Home Mooring to stop for any period of time (legally not even one night) but out of the goodness of their Hearts C&RT allow up to 14 days. This is at their 'grace & favour' and could be rescinded at a moments notice.

 

Boats without a home mooring actually have the legal right to stay for 14 days (unless etc etc)

 

If I could get on a bit better with the forum search feature I'd have a look for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand it, CCers have to move "from place to place", however that is defined. Us home moorers just have to move, but can stay within the same area, but both are subject to the 14 day rule. The difference is in the distances required as home moorers don't need to be on a continuous cruise. Logically, CRT should agree to extensions if you can't get home. 

Additionally, when we all got stuck on the end of the Shroppie for six months due to aquaduct failure, we got a licence refund. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Arthur Marshall said:

As I understand it, CCers have to move "from place to place", however that is defined. Us home moorers just have to move, but can stay within the same area, but both are subject to the 14 day rule. The difference is in the distances required as home moorers don't need to be on a continuous cruise. Logically, CRT should agree to extensions if you can't get home. 

Additionally, when we all got stuck on the end of the Shroppie for six months due to aquaduct failure, we got a licence refund. 

I think what you say there is how it used to be defined, but the current T&C’s impose the CC “to a new place” type movement requirement on all.  It is interesting thoughthat as has been pointed out the actual act does not allow boats with a home mooring to stop anywhere, or perhaps the they can stay anywhere for any length of time, it is just not clear and does not I think reflect how the canals are used today, hence CRT using the T&C’s to try and get some control.

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.