Canal livaboards and " Continuous cruising"

[rotrax]

Jeremy Vines programe today had a section devoted to this, which as an ex narrowboat owner and canal enthusiast was of interest.

Unfortunatly I missed the middle bit- I had to fit a door trim to a dishwasher for a tenant.

What I did hear was little sympathy for those who choose the livaboard life but dont want to pay for it with a permanent or residential mooring.

Was what I gathered, in fact, how it went?

 

[Lyndsey Doyle]

Hello another ex-narrowboat person here.. things have changed a bit since the 80's when I was a London Waterbus skipper!

The Continuous Cruising licence conditions, which have been the same since the BWB era, are very clearly explained on the licence application forms, so there's no excuse for people being surprised when the CRT get stuffy about bridge-hopping.


The problem isn't going to vanish and there's no easy solution, someone needs to get a grip of the situation. I don't blame young people for wanting to live on the canal, it's a fantastic lifestyle, but the infrastructure is totally overwhelmed.

 

[Tranona]

Things have changed significantly in the last few years and particularly since the CRT took over. BWB was very lax in enforcing licence conditions which allowed the growth of residential use (or rather people living permanently on their boat) but holding only a continuous cruising licence. No doubt some of the enforcement might have been heavy handed, and inconsistent as CRT tried to reflect local conditions which gave those who wish to challenge the system plenty of ammunition. To make matters worse, the housing crisis in many of our urban areas, mainly in the south, has meant many more people looking for alternative ways of living.

CRT has the unenviable task of both managing the resource for the benefit of all users, living within its means and complying with government (both central and local) policy on such matters as planning. They will never satisfy all those conflicting needs.

 

[Giblets]

Jeremy Vines programe today had a section devoted to this, which as an ex narrowboat owner and canal enthusiast was of interest.

Unfortunatly I missed the middle bit- I had to fit a door trim to a dishwasher for a tenant.

What I did hear was little sympathy for those who choose the livaboard life but dont want to pay for it with a permanent or residential mooring.

Was what I gathered, in fact, how it went?

You can listen again to the show here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0784xb8

 

[Seajet]

Like others here I have sympathy for ' genuine ' boat owners, but not for water-pikeys.

It strikes me as yet another situation where a lot of decent people are now suffering thanks to greedy selfish gits who take the pee; ' you can't get a mooring you haven't paid for in the middle of London ' - no, really ?

 

[rotrax]

You can listen again to the show here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0784xb8

Thanks.

 

[ProDave]

This is a topic that always gets my attention.

I have no time for those that just want a cheap houseboat and see moving it periodically as an inconvenience.

One of the things on our bucket list when we retire is to buy a narrowboat and spend a couple of years exploring the whole canal and river network. Genuinely continuously cruising. It worries me that by the time we get to achieve that, the river pikeys will have spoiled it and the continuous crusing licence will no longer be available.

 

[Tranona]

Don't think there is any danger of that. it is only the really densely used bits of the system where there is a problem which leaves an awful lot of unspoiled canal for you to explore.

 

[Bru]

Don't think there is any danger of that. it is only the really densely used bits of the system where there is a problem which leaves an awful lot of unspoiled canal for you to explore.

If only

The problem has become widespread and serious and affects almost the entire system to a greater or lesser extent

Leaving London aside, as indeed C&RT are doing for the time being, almost every popular mooring location is partially or completely clogged up with boats in breach of the licence terms and conditions and as often as not ignoring the mooring time limits

For example, my brother and his friends recently encountered a boat on the Leeds & Liverpool Canal that had created a garden on the towpath. And it was moored, and had clearly not moved for some considerable time, on a 24 hour overnight mooring. That boat had effectively sequestered a stretch of canal and towpath as if it was their own to the detriment of legitimate canal users (not just boaters but walkers, anglers etc.)

When hirers have spent £1,200 a week or more on the boat hire alone, they don't expect to find that they can't get moored overnight within a mile of a canalside pub. Nor do they expect to encounter a rubbish dump on the towpath nor yet to have abuse, and worse, hurled at them by illegal liveaboards. And I'm afraid that the reality is that all of these things happen and happen routinely

The same applies with bells and whistles on for the legit boat owners who are shelling out upwards of £1,000 a year for a licence and the thick end of £2,500 a year, or more, for a mooring (based on a fifty foot boat, about average). Not unreasonably, they are less than happy to encounter people who simply take up permanent residence on short term visitor moorings without paying a penny in mooring fees and, worse, clogging up the most popular spots to stop overnight

The situation, as I've said before, should never have been allowed to get out of hand in the first place but British Waterways dropped the ball. I fully support the Canal & River Trust in it's drive to deal with the situation and despite the hype and the emotive social media output, they are doing their level best to treat people decently whilst enforcing the rules

We too have a long term plan to move back onto the cut in our dotage. When we reach the point where sailing a yacht in coastal waters becomes too much for us, either physically or mentally, there's significant parts of the canal system I never got to see in my twenty odd years on the cut. And I'd rather like to be able to tie up within staggering distance of the occasional pub from time to time!

 

[oldgit]

The Thames is under some considerable pressure as well .On my last trip, the the banks of the river between Shiplake and Sonning were dotted with moored canal boats tucked away on the more isolated stretches.
Judging from appearance many appeared to have been left for quite some time, presumably awaiting the return of their owners.
It is becoming very difficult to find a mooring on any of the public Thames moorings.
It would also help if narrowboat skippers attempted to moor their boat with only the part of the boat required for to access riverbank alongside as opposed to taking up an entire mooring.
Two decent sized NBs can effectively take up 30 metres of mooring.

 

[seafarer2]

If only

The same applies with bells and whistles on for the legit boat owners who are shelling out upwards of £1,000 a year for a licence and the thick end of £2,500 a year, or more, for a mooring (based on a fifty foot boat, about average). Not unreasonably, they are less than happy to encounter people who simply take up permanent residence on short term visitor moorings without paying a penny in mooring fees and, worse, clogging up the most popular spots to stop overnight

/QUOTE]
And, these water-pikey's don't pay a penny in council tax nor any other fees yet they are the first to take advantage of all the facilities provided for bona fide users. The C&RT should bite the bullet and get tough with these types and tow their craft to a point where they can be lifted out and crushed.

 

[Bru]

And, these water-pikey's don't pay a penny in council tax nor any other fees yet they are the first to take advantage of all the facilities provided for bona fide users. The C&RT should bite the bullet and get tough with these types and tow their craft to a point where they can be lifted out and crushed.

To the extent that they are able within the legal framework and having due regard for genuine need, that's exactly what the Trust is doing

They are somewhat between a rock and a hard place because many of the illegal liveaboards they need to remove have genuine social and / or medical issues and despite genuine efforts to address those issues as best they can they've come in for some serious bad publicity

However, it is not part of the remit of the Trust to be a social care organisation and despite the bleatings to the contrary the intent behind the Continuous Cruising licence was clear from the start

They have, as far as has been possible, finding suitable moorings for boat owners in breach of the CC licence conditions however, of course, many of those boat owners do not want, or cannot afford, to pay for a mooring

 

[Seajet]

One interesting point - I didn't know - someone mentioned in the Jeremy Vine radio discussion was that the ' 14 days then clear off ' is in fact an ages old Parish Law from on land; the idea being small parishes didn't want unsupported scroungers descending upon them & staying; the waterways board just took on the old Byelaw, and only now is it having to be enforced.

I know a roundabout on a busy road, handy for shops & pubs, where a small group of squatters seem to have been living among the small trees for months.

They're not too bright about furthering their cause, the place is a horrible mess with plastic rubbish strewn around, there are no public toilets anywhere near and there's also a confrontational insulting little effigy of a policeman.

I can see a huge similarity there with the water - pikeys...

 

[Bru]

The fourteen days being linked to old laws is, I'm afraid, a total myth

The law itself does not specify any time limits or in any way define what Continuous Cruising is because the licence category was a rushed last minute amendment

That left it up to BW and user groups to work out what was and what was not "continuous cruising"

The fourteen days in any one parish is one of the ad-hoc definitions that resulted and relates to the then longest period of time limited moorings BW operated (mooring elsewhere being subject to no time limit). It was, effectively, a number plucked out of thin air

The choice of parish as the definition of an area is also entirely coincidental. It's simply the smallest administrative area that is legally defined and depicted on OS maps

One of the major issues faced by C&RT is the lack of a clear legal definition which leaves them arguing that they have the power to impose licence conditions as they see fit and to vary them* but this is then open to challenge in court. That said, apart from a few special cases and the odd perverse judgement the courts usually find in the trust's favour

* That said, whilst it's been clarified and made less susceptible to misinterpretation, the basic understanding of what a continuous cruiser is, and what he or she is not, has not fundamentally changed in two decades or more

 

[Seajet]

Bru,

thanks; shame as it seemed to make sense to me.

Having worked as deckhand on the French canals on a hotel barge, I'm struck with the idea that anyone trying to grab residence where it suited them there would be treated very robustly indeed; and in a way the British canals ARE still ' working ', for holidaymakers, tour boats ( try living on the restored bits of Wey & Arun near here ! ) and paid up residents...

 

[Richard10002]

Whatever the actual meaning of "bona fide navigation" required of Continuous Cruisers, if you need to remain at, or near, a place where you work and/or your children go to school, it would be almost impossible to comply.

In addition, if you actually need some clarity over what bona fide navigation means, in terms of the distances you need to travel over a particular period of time, you are almost certainly not continuously cruising.

 

[rotrax]

Whatever the actual meaning of "bona fide navigation" required of Continuous Cruisers, if you need to remain at, or near, a place where you work and/or your children go to school, it would be almost impossible to comply.

In addition, if you actually need some clarity over what bona fide navigation means, in terms of the distances you need to travel over a particular period of time, you are almost certainly not continuously cruising.

That is understood. If you have a job or children at school you need to have a platform to support this.

A canal boat with a "continuous cruising " licence-the terms of which are quite clear when applied for-is not a platform for the above.

No different to taking an annual berth in a Marina which does not allow permanent residence and subsequently living aboard permanently. The Marina would put a stop to it.

 

[Seajet]

That is understood. If you have a job or children at school you need to have a platform to support this.

A canal boat with a "continuous cruising " licence-the terms of which are quite clear when applied for-is not a platform for the above.

No different to taking an annual berth in a Marina which does not allow permanent residence and subsequently living aboard permanently. The Marina would put a stop to it.

More like taking a visitor's berth in a marina then trying to stay forever for free !

 

[Martin999]

We often cycle the tow path on the river lea into London, and it is now an almost continuous line of narrow boats, many in dreadful condition which never move. So how do they pump out their holding tanks? In fact the smell in some locations would indicate the don't! It took years to clean up the rivers and canals of London and other urban areas and these people are destroying them again!

 

[Lyndsey Doyle]

We often cycle the tow path on the river lea into London, and it is now an almost continuous line of narrow boats, many in dreadful condition which never move. So how do they pump out their holding tanks? In fact the smell in some locations would indicate the don't! It took years to clean up the rivers and canals of London and other urban areas and these people are destroying them again!

Hi Martin, I know that stretch well, and in relation to the number of liveaboards, the facilities for sewage disposal (or garbage either) are almost non-existent, and frequently vandalised. Sadly you are right about things being tipped in the cut, and draconian action is needed. What form that would take I have no idea!
The CRT could maybe put a temporary stop on issuing CC licences, and start enforcing their own rules properly? I have no desire to see draconian slum-clearance operations but the current state of affairs can't go on!
Do you ever have a beer in the Anchor and Hope? If not, do!