Stoke Bruerne Visitor Moorings

[alan_fincher]

Heres another blog, (from the rose tinted glasses side).

 

http://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/blog/a-warm-but-fair-welcome

 

Looking again at the big "Welcome" Boards they don't indicate the short limits are to be relaxed for the winter. Neither do the totems or tiles.

 

It is looking horribly to me that Jeff Whyatt's last minute changes to what we had agreed, and which we then had to fight so hard to get reinstated, have after all currently won the day.

 

Or at least that is what I'm seeing from the signs.

 

I will be bloody annoyed if, after a wide consensus at the workshop, that any restrictions must be restricted to "seasonal", if they have still gone ahead, and tried to put in something where the deterrent signs are in place all year, and there is no indication you don't have to pay charges after two days "out of season".

 

Of course the answer may be "those signs have still to be added", but at the moment it is not hard to imagine that they are still trying to do what they always wanted, despite the vast majority of people telling them it was bonkers.

 

Anybody else fancy raising it? I don't imagine I'll get far, given recent experiences, but I do want to see an explanation for yet another anomaly.

[Tuscan]

I had an email quite a while ago when I raised this with my NABO hat on ( I don't have it with me) which inferred if i recall that this would be reviewed once they have assessed the introduction of the new rules but hopefully it would still go ahead.

 

Despite being agreed at the workshops this was taken out at the final draft stage and then put back in as a result of protests. The surveys of boaters who are using the VM's post introduction (as opposed to those that now chose not to) will not doubt support the changes and i suspect be used as a reason as why no relaxation is needed. Does anyone really think they will go to he expense of yet more signage for the winter I don't think so. Consultations are fine if the give the right answer if not have another one....

 

I will also raise again as should others.

[DeanS]

Surely in winter, all they have to do is put a bag over the existing signs. tadaaaa!

[paddy r]

Surely in winter, all they have to do is put a bag over the existing signs. tadaaaa!

Surely you are using common sense there Dean...................there in lies the problem

[Leo No2]

 

 

Anybody else fancy raising it? I don't imagine I'll get far, given recent experiences, but I do want to see an explanation for yet another anomaly.

 

Alan - as per our discussion last night - just tidying up my letter and will add the 'Winter Moorings' issue bit.

[GeoffS]

That's true , we have stopped there a couple of times now.

 

There used to be visitor moorings on the church side but they now look like LTM's. Does anyone know why they disappeared.

I have just spoken to a friend who is on the Long Term Moorings there who confirms there is still 14 day visitor moorings there, about 4 boat lengths. There was a boat that stayed for 12 months but has now moved so maybe it looked like it had changed.

 

Its one of my favourite stopping places.

[Kwacker]

 

Looking again at the big "Welcome" Boards they don't indicate the short limits are to be relaxed for the winter. Neither do the totems or tiles.

 

It is looking horribly to me that Jeff Whyatt's last minute changes to what we had agreed, and which we then had to fight so hard to get reinstated, have after all currently won the day.

 

Or at least that is what I'm seeing from the signs.

 

I will be bloody annoyed if, after a wide consensus at the workshop, that any restrictions must be restricted to "seasonal", if they have still gone ahead, and tried to put in something where the deterrent signs are in place all year, and there is no indication you don't have to pay charges after two days "out of season".

 

Of course the answer may be "those signs have still to be added", but at the moment it is not hard to imagine that they are still trying to do what they always wanted, despite the vast majority of people telling them it was bonkers.

 

Anybody else fancy raising it? I don't imagine I'll get far, given recent experiences, but I do want to see an explanation for yet another anomaly.

 

Consensus on here seems to be that there are already too many signs .... why complicate it by adding more?

[alan_fincher]

 

Consensus on here seems to be that there are already too many signs .... why complicate it by adding more?

Because they ultimately agreed after all their "consultation" that they would relax these mooring restrictions outside the peak months.

 

It would be bonkers not to, because if you don't you then only have two choices.....

 

1) Continue with daily policing of it, even though there are almost no visiting boats. Clearly a considerable cost assosciated with this, for absolutely no benefits.

 

or

 

2) Don't police it daily, which then opens up the possibility of a load of signage which it will come to be known is not actually being enforced, and hence will be "abused".

 

We were firmly promised we had the seasonal exemption, and also that what had been would not get reverted after the workshops.

 

They have already tried to rescind this exemption once, by circulating a doctored version of what they planned to do to only a limited audience. We hoped we had fought that off.

 

I will be VERY unhappy if they are now simply ignoring what was agreed again. This is about trying to establish"trust" - very hard if you are told you have an agreement, but the reality proves otherwise.

 

The solution to "too many signs" was clearly don't put them there in the first place! Unfortunately in that we did not succeed! It's a bloody shame we didn't!

[Mike Tee]

Surely in winter, all they have to do is put a bag over the existing signs. tadaaaa!

No, use the posts as fire wood.

[Tuscan]

Because they ultimately agreed after all their "consultation" that they would relax these mooring restrictions outside the peak months.

 

It would be bonkers not to, because if you don't you then only have two choices.....

 

1) Continue with daily policing of it, even though there are almost no visiting boats. Clearly a considerable cost assosciated with this, for absolutely no benefits.

 

or

 

2) Don't police it daily, which then opens up the possibility of a load of signage which it will come to be known is not actually being enforced, and hence will be "abused".

 

We were firmly promised we had the seasonal exemption, and also that what had been would not get reverted after the workshops.

They have already tried to rescind this exemption once, by circulating a doctored version of what they planned to do to only a limited audience. We hoped we had fought that off.

 

I will be VERY unhappy if they are now simply ignoring what was agreed again. This is about trying to establish"trust" - very hard if you are told you have an agreement, but the reality proves otherwise.

 

The solution to "too many signs" was clearly don't put them there in the first place! Unfortunately in that we did not succeed! It's a bloody shame we didn't!

I am sure that the thought of making you "VERY unhappy" has now got CRT rapidly changing their minds. However I agree with everything you say with regard to what was agreed.

 

They could just cover them up like parking meters out of service. But I suspect there position will become more entrenched as it is already viewed as a success so why change...........

[Leo No2]

I decided to continue the graph on from the data that was collected in August so there is some continuity to the information being presented. I do have a 'September only' graph if anyone particularly wants to see it in isolation.

Space tonight for 8 x 70' and 1 x 40' - all towards the 'top' of the mooring line between the Woodland Walk and the tunnel mouth.

Some things to note:

• Stoke Bruerne will start to fill up from Monday in readiness for the Village at War weekend when the mooring restrictions are changed (see post 308).
• It seems as if boats are stopping during the day but moving on in the late afternoon or early evening. It's just a gut feel but borne out by others I have spoken to. Sadly, if the warden visits at say 12:00, they will still be clocked for spending a night here. I think CRT have got to do some lateral thinking as to how that type of anomaly is addressed because even if it doesn't lead to a £25 charge it is one day off their monthly allowance which may, or may not, be important to them.
• I have had correspondence with Jeff Whyatt - I didn't get an answer to the question about relaxation in the winter but will tackle that when, hopefully, I meet Jeff in the next couple of weeks.
• The graph will look a bit odd, especially for next weekend, because of the Village at War event. I have annotated the dates with 'Res' which is my shorthand for 'Restricted Mooring'. Restricted mooring comes in on Monday 9-September and continues until 20-September.

 

Edited September 7, 2013 by Leo No2

[paddy r]

thank you and keep going

[Leo No2]

Just a quick update to say that signs have gone up this afternoon to restrict the moorings between the Museum Green and the southern portal of the tunnel from tomorrow (9-September) until 20-September. The note advises that 'casual' moorings are available below Lock 15 (in the long pound). That's all in accordance with the advice given recently by CRT but it will effect the figures in the graph I expect.

 

Let's hope that the weather Gods smile on the Village at War weekend and that it is successful.

[bluegreencanal]

I have actually received at least one fairly firm rebuke when I asked what I thought was a very legitimate question on behalf of the several people that have raised it.

 

(In fairness, I will also state that I since raised another valid question and received a more reasonable response).

 

It seems that in some quarters I am in some way seen as raising these questions about various anomalies out of some kind of self interest, rather than out of a genuine concern to sort out some of the things that are far less than clear or correct with the implementation of this scheme.

 

I have raised that I am unhappy with the treatment I received, and believe my concerns have been taken seriously.

 

However, it probably leaves me as not the best person to now be asking the questions, even though I am very interested in how they can (for example) guarantee that rangers operating at different times of the day don't end up recording a stay as longer than it was. I would also be asking why the relaxation of the rule outside the summer months is not explained on the only signs most people will ever read.

 

I can only suggest that others raise the questions themselves, and if those questions seem to be of interest to others, that they publish question and responses on here. I have not so far ever received a reply from Matthew Symonds who's name appears as the contact for this, so personally would direct questions straight at Jeff Whyatt - it is his personal baby. Perhaps if a few others start asking them directly, he might start to understand that it is not just a few activists worried by what he has done, but that actually a whole lot of boaters really don't understand the necessity, or how it will operate in practice.

 

Did I imagine it, or did I hear that even at Thrupp (Oxford) where the local cruising club desperately wanted such a scheme, there is some degree of chaos too? Someone suggested some of the new signage has already been removed? Anybody know?

I sold my boat earlier this year so am no longer a boater, is there anything a non boater can do to help? Seems utterly bonkers.

[matty40s]

Yes, complain about the lack of boats when you visit to come and look at boats.

[Leo No2]

I understand that the moorings at Blisworth are very full and this may be as a result of the new restrictions introduced at Stoke Bruerne. It would be interesting to understand if the result of the new restrictions at Stoke Bruerne have, in fact, just shuffled the issue a mile or two along the canal. Would anyone passing that way care to comment?

[alan_fincher]

I understand that the moorings at Blisworth are very full and this may be as a result of the new restrictions introduced at Stoke Bruerne. It would be interesting to understand if the result of the new restrictions at Stoke Bruerne have, in fact, just shuffled the issue a mile or two along the canal. Would anyone passing that way care to comment?

Should be coming down through Blisworth tomorrow, (or just possibly Friday). Will take note of the situation all the way down from Braunston.

 

Have you had your meet with Jeff Whyatt, yet, please?

[Leo No2]

Alan - will PM you.

[jenlyn]

We are heading that way, again. Don't want jeff thinking this is going through easily :-)

[cotswoldsman]

Just a quick update to say that signs have gone up this afternoon to restrict the moorings between the Museum Green and the southern portal of the tunnel from tomorrow (9-September) until 20-September. The note advises that 'casual' moorings are available below Lock 15 (in the long pound). That's all in accordance with the advice given recently by CRT but it will effect the figures in the graph I expect.

 

Let's hope that the weather Gods smile on the Village at War weekend and that it is successful.

Can I suggest you blank out the graph during SB at War actually it might just show that the only time the VM's have been full was when the new restrictions were suspended

[Leo No2]

Happy to do that John. I can have one (not published) that shows what happened and one that just excludes the Village at War data so we have it should that be deemed necessary in future which I think is very important. My question would be do we exclude the data for the period of the restrictions (9-Sept to 20-Sep) or just for the weekend (Friday through to the Monday).

[Tuscan]

Have sent you a PM

[cotswoldsman]

Happy to do that John. I can have one (not published) that shows what happened and one that just excludes the Village at War data so we have it should that be deemed necessary in future which I think is very important. My question would be do we exclude the data for the period of the restrictions (9-Sept to 20-Sep) or just for the weekend (Friday through to the Monday).

I would suggest the period of the restrictions for the main graph

Have sent you a PM

Secret?

[jenlyn]

Secret?

 

Mi 5

[RLWP]

Can I suggest you blank out the graph during SB at War actually it might just show that the only time the VM's have been full was when the new restrictions were suspended

 

I think that would be very wrong. We can't accuse anyone of fiddling the figures if we do the same ourselves. Just label that part up as 'special event' or something and let it stand

 

Richard