Ordered to Return to Moorings

[carlt]

 

Does it appear that though ?...

 

Fair point.

 

It would be nice to know where CRT stand on this point.

[Hawkmoth]

 

I'd say very few moorers have 'issues' with CCers.

 

But this ignores the third category - boaters who license their boat as having no home mooring but who instead of CCing choose to moor in one spot on the towpath for as long as they possibly can until spotted by CRT and moved on/ticketed. Especially those whose possessions have spilled out onto the towpath and into the hedge thereby illustrating how long they have probably been there. These are the boaters towards whom some moorers have a hostile attidude.

 

MtB

 

 

P.S. Actually I would imagine objection to this type of 'boating' comes from all quarters rather than home-moorers specifically.

Agreed, have a greenie

Bob

[cotswoldsman]

Fair point.

 

It would be nice to know where CRT stand on this point.

I guess you could always ask them

[alan_fincher]

Fair point.

 

It would be nice to know where CRT stand on this point.

 

It would also be nice to know their real attitude about Lime Green Boats!

 

I'd rather discuss things they are definitely doing wrong than hypothesise about something that never actually seems to have happened.

[bassplayer]

Is it reasonable to say that, though ?We do not live aboard, but each of our boats are "moored up most of the time on the same permanent mooring".We typically cover about 1000 miles a year, even though up until now that is done fairly intensively as our circumstances permit.From what I have see the vast majority of continuous cruisers, even those about which there are no doubts about "compliance", don't tend to do any more than this, and most of them a whole lot less.Trouble is it is easy to categorise people, and jump to conclusions, but quite a bit of the time you will be wrong. Does it appear that though ?This thread started with that assertion in respect of two boats, it got challenged, and quickly dismissed by the OP themselves as having been misinformation.I agree the thread has gone all over the place since, and I have not studied it throughout, but I have not noted anything that, having seen the original claim backed down on, actually says CRT were trying to do this at all!If we stick to the original claim, have we yet got a jot of evidence it is ever true?

Ok so I've read too much between the lines and jumped to a conclusion. Just a thought though, if were all really living the true spirit of the canals (whatever that means) we'd all be CCers. There would be more temporary moorings for everyone and we wouldn't have to pay for a mooring. I suppose CRT would start up a parking meter system if that happened. Sorry, I'm dreaming again...

[carlt]

I guess you could always ask them

I could but any questions I might have for my current enforcing body would be aimed at the Broads Authority.

[cotswoldsman]

Ok so I've read too much between the lines and jumped to a conclusion. Just a thought though, if were all really living the true spirit of the canals (whatever that means) we'd all be CCers. There would be more temporary moorings for everyone and we wouldn't have to pay for a mooring. I suppose CRT would start up a parking meter system if that happened. Sorry, I'm dreaming again...

Not sure about dreaming but you have completely lost me!!!

[alan_fincher]

Just a thought though, if were all really living the true spirit of the canals (whatever that means) we'd all be CCers.

Well if you don't know what it means, please don't expect me to guess!

 

What would you say is "the true spirit of the canals"?

 

When the canals were first built, by the way, there was generally no real concept of people living on board. Boats were worked by people living in normal housing with their families, who generally went home at the end of the day, and were (by standards of the day) very well paid for their labours.

 

Only with the coming of the railways, when rates were cut, and they could no longer have this lifestyle, did whole families move on board, with other family members effectively unpaid full time labour.

 

So what "true spirit" says one does have to live aboard full time, or not?

 

If you want the "true spirit", maybe get rid of all mod cons, and put a bucket in the engine room as your sanitary facilities.

[bassplayer]

How so? I know that my "definition" of a CCer accurately describes the cruising pattern of a number of people who legitimately CC. Others may have a different pattern. My point remains. If you actually researched the "use" that the different groups make of the canal system you wouldn't find the evidence to support your opinion. Indeed, not all that long ago when calls were made for a higher licence fee for CCers, because "they use the system more", a number of CCers made the exact same point as I made to show that it isn't the case. You appear to be off message!

I don't need to research it Dave as I talk to so many CCers as I'm cruising around the country. I've seen the way CRT collect data. You may have a point though, perhaps we should pay more the more we use the canal system. We don't do that for cars yet although you could argue we do in fuel tax. Bugger, I don't want to give them ideas..

[bassplayer]

Well if you don't know what it means, please don't expect me to guess!What would you say is "the true spirit of the canals"?When the canals were first built, by the way, there was generally no real concept of people living on board. Boats were worked by people living in normal housing with their families, who generally went home at the end of the day, and were (by standards of the day) very well paid for their labours. Only with the coming of the railways, when rates were cut, and they could no longer have this lifestyle, did whole families move on board, with other family members effectively unpaid full time labour. So what "true spirit" says one does have to live aboard full time, or not?If you want the "true spirit", maybe get rid of all mod cons, and put a bucket in the engine room as your sanitary facilities.

I didn't know you'd been (so to speak) on my boat Alan...

[cotswoldsman]

I don't need to research it Dave as I talk to so many CCers as I'm cruising around the country. I've seen the way CRT collect data. You may have a point though, perhaps we should pay more the more we use the canal system. We don't do that for cars yet although you could argue we do in fuel tax. Bugger, I don't want to give them ideas..

Why does the present system where everyone pays the same need changing?

[Hawkmoth]

Why does the present system where everyone pays the same need changing?

I don't know. But let's not give them ideas about how to screw more money out of us.

[bassplayer]

Why does the present system where everyone pays the same need changing?

I'm all for leaving things alone that's why I have spent a lot of time trying to get CRT to justify the changes they have proposed. It's taken years to get to where we are, indeed why change things? It's pretty much change for changes sake much of the time.

[cotswoldsman]

I'm all for leaving things alone that's why I have spent a lot of time trying to get CRT to justify the changes they have proposed. It's taken years to get to where we are, indeed why change things? It's pretty much change for changes sake much of the time.

What changes are you concerned about?

[Hawkmoth]

What changes are you concerned about?

Changes to the SE mooring rules. Why change things? I still don't believe there was a need, and I wait with bated breath to see if it improves things.

I believe I have posted this before, but just in case:

 

I was on a 48 hr visitor mooring recently where a NCCC had been there, by his own admission several weeks, outside a CART office. To be fair he did say he'd been ticketed, but had no intention of moving. "They're not going to get a crane in here for me".

BTW no licence either.

I say live and let live, if he had been out on the country, getting in nobody's way, fine, but he was taking up a VM in a popular place.

[bassplayer]

I don't really want to get blamed for being off topic again but my views and contact with CRT regarding the SE mooring proposals (for example) can be found on this forum.

[carlt]

I don't really want to get blamed for being off topic again but my views and contact with CRT regarding the SE mooring proposals (for example) can be found on this forum.

Does that mean we have to go searching for them every time rather than you telling us, in the course of a discussion?

 

It may be tedious having to repeat yourself but it saves being dismissed because people can't be bothered to search your posts.

[bassplayer]

Does that mean we have to go searching for them every time rather than you telling us, in the course of a discussion? It may be tedious having to repeat yourself but it saves being dismissed because people can't be bothered to search your posts.

Frankly I don't care if I get dismissed...(by the way, if you click on the posters name you can see their previous posts).

[carlt]

Frankly I don't care if I get dismissed...

Not a lot of point joining a discussion then, surely?

 

"I'm not telling you what my opinion is because I've already expressed it in the past."

 

We could all just issue a personal manifesto then there would be no need for a forum.

[bassplayer]

Not a lot of point joining a discussion then, surely?.

Yes, you're probably right about that....

[bluegreencanal]

Is it not ok to have a permanent mooring, then take your boat elsewhere and moor it according to the rules, ie 14 days or 48hrs? How else is one supposed to go on holiday? I had a permanent mooring, and very occasionally(once or twice a year) I would move 100 yards onto a visitor mooring for a bit of sunshine and didn't feel even a tiny bit guilty. Equally, we would take off for a weekend, a week or a fortnight. How else would you enjoy having a boat? Just because you live on it doesn't mean you can't have holibobs.

[mayalld]

Why does the present system where everyone pays the same need changing?

 

It doesn't.

 

bassplayer, who apparently doesn't need to research anything because he talks to loads of CCers, appears to be in a hole and digging furiously.

 

For some reason that escapes me, having seen animosity that isn't there towards CCers, he trotted out a nonsense claim about CCers using the canals more.

 

It isn't factually accurate, and even if it was accurate it would be meaningless.

[JanB]

Be gentle with me too ... I'm new to this game and forum (just in process of buying a boat) .. what is a CCer??

[carlt]

Be gentle with me too ... I'm new to this game and forum (just in process of buying a boat) .. what is a CCer??

A Continuous Cruiser or a boater who has no permanent moorings so must comply with s.17(3)©(ii) of the British Waterways Act 1995:

 

©either—

(i)the Board are satisfied that a mooring or other place where the vessel can reasonably be kept and may lawfully be left will be available for the vessel, whether on an inland waterway or elsewhere; or

 

(ii)the applicant for the relevant consent satisfies the Board that the vessel to which the application relates will be used bona fide for navigation throughout the period for which the consent is valid without remaining continuously in any one place for more than 14 days or such longer period as is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

Edited July 9, 2013 by carlt

[paul68]

And there was me thinking all I had to do was get a river licence and insurance and just sail away..........