BW's approach to Continuous Cruising?

[SimonRNABO]

My proposition:

 

BW's primary motivation in trying to introduce tighter regulation of continuous cruising is not about better management of the waterways for all, but about finding routes for generating additional income for BW from boaters.

 

Proposals for Roving Mooring Permits (or whatever name they are called by) support this: if you are prepared to pay a fee, BW will temporarily waive the rules.

 

If you pay any overstaying charges we set before you ren-ew you licence each year, we will continue to renew your licence for another year.

 

Discuss

 

Edited June 9, 2011 by SimonRNABO

[paddy r]

here we go

 

 

 

WOLF NIPPLE CHIPS GET THEM WHILE THERE HOT!!!!

[Proper Job]

PJ gets out his deck chair and cracks open a beer

[grahoom]

ptarmigan?

[blodger]

My proposition:

 

BW's primary motivation in trying to introduce tighter regulation of continuous cruising is not about better management of the waterways for all, but about finding routes for generating additional income for BW from boaters.

 

Proposals for Roving Mooring Permits (or whatever name they are called by) support this: if you are prepared to pay a fee, BW will temporarily waive the rules.

 

If you pay any overstaying charges we set before you ren-ew you licence each year, we will continue to renew your licence for another year.

 

Discuss

 

No need you are right but missed out the assistance given to BW by the self rightious home moorers insisting that all mooring problems are down to other than them.

 

Edited June 9, 2011 by blodger

[carlt]

 

If you pay any overstaying charges we set before you ren-ew you licence each year, we will continue to renew your licence for another year.

 

This would imply that an unwritten "roving permit" already exists.

[Proper Job]

ptarmigan?

Nah........ I find the feathers get stuck in my teeth

 

Hobgoblin......

[SimonRNABO]

Re Blodger: "...home moorers insisting that all mooring problems are down to other than them." - See http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=35526&st=160&p=640723entry640723

[mayalld]

Re Blodger: "...home moorers insisting that all mooring problems are down to other than them." - See http://www.canalworl...23

 

 

Would those be the same stats which have been extensively debunked here last week, as saying nothing of the sort?

[blodger]

Would those be the same stats which have been extensively debunked here last week, as saying nothing of the sort?

I thought we were awaiting stats from BW as a result of your FOI request for accuracy.

 

I am on about what fuels or justifies BW's persecution of CCER's beyond raising more revenue

[mayalld]

I thought we were awaiting stats from BW as a result of your FOI request for accuracy.

 

I am on about what fuels or justifies BW's persecution of CCER's beyond raising more revenue

 

We are indeed waiting for the stats. I merely question whether the stats that Simon refers to are the ones that were waved around here last week, which very clearly didn't say what they were claimed to say.

 

As to your second point, I simply don't accept that BW persecutes CCers.

 

I cannot see evidence of a single measure that BW has implemented that would adversely affect genuine CCers differentially from moorers.

 

I have seen measures that would affect those whose use of their boat is not in accordance with their licence.

[SimonRNABO]

We are indeed waiting for the stats. I merely question whether the stats that Simon refers to are the ones that were waved around here last week, which very clearly didn't say what they were claimed to say.

 

Please could you provide direction to last week's figures? The figures referred in my post I linked to above were from several years ago. If there is new evidence happy to consider it... Nabo has figures from BW from a recent WUSIG meeting which we are looking through at present but haven't commented on yet.

 

You also said in a previous post that what I said before was 'de-bunked' - again can you direct me to the detailed arguements offerred cos I ain't seen them?

 

Thanks

 

I have seen measures that would affect those whose use of their boat is not in accordance with their licence.

 

Hear, hear - Don't have any problem with measures that are equitable to all boaters.

[AlanH]

We are indeed waiting for the stats. I merely question whether the stats that Simon refers to are the ones that were waved around here last week, which very clearly didn't say what they were claimed to say.

 

As to your second point, I simply don't accept that BW persecutes CCers.

 

I cannot see evidence of a single measure that BW has implemented that would adversely affect genuine CCers differentially from moorers.

 

I have seen measures that would affect those whose use of their boat is not in accordance with their licence.

To break the rules and then cry "persecution" when challenged is not, in my book, a tenable positon.

[mayalld]

Please could you provide direction to last week's figures? The figures referred in my post I linked to above were from several years ago. If there is new evidence happy to consider it... Nabo has figures from BW from a recent WUSIG meeting which we are looking through at present but haven't commented on yet.

 

You also said in a previous post that what I said before was 'de-bunked' - again can you direct me to the detailed arguements offerred cos I ain't seen them?

 

But for the fact that I'm a little busy clearing my desk before going boating, I'd try to find the stats (assuming they aren't in a deleted thread).

 

They were, however not really stats at all. Essentially, somebody who hadn't got a clue what he was asking for got some numbers, and discovered that they didn't actually tell him anything, so applied a liberal dose of guesses and rules of thumb to arrive at an answer he liked.

 

The debunking of those stats will likewise be burried deep within a thread that I haven't the time to find.

 

You should also be aware that I have made a comprehensive FOI request that may add light to the subject with new data.

[Redeye]

Nah........ I find the feathers get stuck in my teeth

 

Hobgoblin......

 

Nah..............I feel about a gallon of Black Sheep may be required

[Grace and Favour]

Nah..............I feel about a gallon of Black Sheep may be required

 

Malton Nectar

[mrsmelly]

 

 

As to your second point, I simply don't accept that BW persecutes CCers.

 

I cannot see evidence of a single measure that BW has implemented that would adversely affect genuine CCers differentially from moorers.

 

I have seen measures that would affect those whose use of their boat is not in accordance with their licence.

 

I am completely in agreement with you on this one. Over the last 22 years I have had moorings and played the game and have at other times CONTINUOUSLY cruised as is everyones right and played the game as I am again at present. I have never had any problems with bw in all that time, in fact quite the reverse they have always been helpfull when needed.

Mines a guinness !!

Edited June 9, 2011 by mrsmelly

[cotswoldsman]

I am completely in agreement with you on this one. Over the last 22 years I have had moorings and played the game and have at other times CONTINUOUSLY cruised as is everyones right and played the game as I am again at present. I have never had any problems with bw in all that time, in fact quite the reverse they have always been helpfull when needed.

Mines a guinness !!

 

I completely agree. I have CCed for four years and have never had a problem with BW. I should also say I rarely have a problem finding anywhere to moore, I just cruise until I find a good mooring spot, might not be my first choice but hey who cares. Thing is I do not know where the hotspots are!!!

I personally am getting very pissed off with all these CC'er threads I just do not see the problems, yes in the last month going down to London and back on The GU I have seen the same boats moored on 14 day moorings on the way back that have not moved, but it has not stopped me mooring nor has it impacted my enjoyment of the canals. I was personally accused of overstaying, though it pissed me off I could not understand the guys problem as he managed to moor 3 boats further up and after that there was space for another 4 boats at least. Why are some people so obsessed with CC'ers under whatever guise?

[blodger]

We are indeed waiting for the stats. I merely question whether the stats that Simon refers to are the ones that were waved around here last week, which very clearly didn't say what they were claimed to say.

 

As to your second point, I simply don't accept that BW persecutes CCers.

 

I cannot see evidence of a single measure that BW has implemented that would adversely affect genuine CCers differentially from moorers.

 

I have seen measures that would affect those whose use of their boat is not in accordance with their licence.

 

Sorry my shorthand is misleading; I do not think that BW persecutes CCERs either but it seems from the threads vocal on here there are plenty that feel they should and are encouraging that they do so. As I say another driver not acknowledged by the OP.

[David Schweizer]

Am I alone in not having a clue what this thread is about? Well obviously something to do with Continuous Cruisers but beyond that and i am lost.

[cotswoldsman]

Am I alone in not having a clue what this thread is about? Well obviously something to do with Continuous Cruisers but beyond that and i am lost.

 

Who cares it is about Continuous Cruisers so get stuck in.

[Spesh]

Sorry my shorthand is misleading; I do not think that BW persecutes CCERs either but it seems from the threads vocal on here there are plenty that feel they should and are encouraging that they do so. As I say another driver not acknowledged by the OP.

Grrr, I've been dragged back in.

 

Having actually read the words people write I've not seen anybody say they feel CCers should be persecuted. It would be more accurate to say there are some on here who believe that boaters should be required to abide by the terms of their licence/relevant statutes, and engage in reasoned debate as to exactly what the terms of the licence/relevant statute are.

 

This is never however accepted by some posters who refuse to participate in reasoned debate and instead reply (both vocally and repeatedly) with something along the lines of "you hate all CCers, you think BW should force CCers to never moor for more than 15 seconds at a time, you blame CCers for all and every problem suffered by not just the waterways network but also the universe as a whole and you think CCers arranged for Lord Lucan to shoot JFK whilst using Shergar as a getaway and simultaneously faking the moon landings". Thus is created and perpetuated the pretty much entirely incorrect view that people on here want CCers to be persecuted. Read what is actually written by the alleged persecutors and you'll discover it's not the case.

[madcat]

must admit that I thought it was a sensible request for well thought out views ,I personally believe that BW needs to look for alternative sources of income rather than just constantly asking boaters to pay more and more.

[cotswoldsman]

must admit that I thought it was a sensible request for well thought out views ,I personally believe that BW needs to look for alternative sources of income rather than just constantly asking boaters to pay more and more.

 

They are they have just appointed a Fundraiser.

[blodger]

Grrr, I've been dragged back in.

 

Having actually read the words people write I've not seen anybody say they feel CCers should be persecuted. It would be more accurate to say there are some on here who believe that boaters should be required to abide by the terms of their licence/relevant statutes, and engage in reasoned debate as to exactly what the terms of the licence/relevant statute are.

 

This is never however accepted by some posters who refuse to participate in reasoned debate and instead reply (both vocally and repeatedly) with something along the lines of "you hate all CCers, you think BW should force CCers to never moor for more than 15 seconds at a time, you blame CCers for all and every problem suffered by not just the waterways network but also the universe as a whole and you think CCers arranged for Lord Lucan to shoot JFK whilst using Shergar as a getaway and simultaneously faking the moon landings". Thus is created and perpetuated the pretty much entirely incorrect view that people on here want CCers to be persecuted. Read what is actually written by the alleged persecutors and you'll discover it's not the case.

Persecution is a red herring?

 

Yes but in the previous threads it was agreed that overstaying was the problem that needed to be addressed and all boaters from whatever designation were responsible. Reading what was actually written it is obvious that those with home moorings were being more sanctimonious about it and blaming CCERs to a great extent. The OP is suggesting the reasons for BW's interests in CCERs is pecuniary and I am saying they are aided in that, or a driver is, the misconceptions of those who are blinkered by their own exemplaryness pushing BW to do something.

 

Is that any clearer?

Edited June 9, 2011 by blodger