Anchoring fees

[Tranona]

The coast used to be free but now has the Crown as it's owner up to 12miles offshore.
We all know what the Crown likes to do and that is charge via a third party.

Not so. The Crown has always "owned" the foreshore and coastal seabed that is not owned by somebody else. Charges are inevitable when people want to use scarce resources and harbours are required to be self financing. If demand is low and maintenance of the facility is low then charges will be low or non existent. If the opposite is the case, as in many popular south coast harbours, charges will be higher. In some situations the owners may adopt a policy of not charging at all and paying the costs out of other revenue (such as taxes on other people) if for example their objective is to encourage visitors. Scotland, where there is no shortage of anchorages, limited demand and low cost of provision is an example where this happens.

It is perhaps interesting to look at the situation in other countries, where you will see the same pattern. In popular areas where demand is high, charges are high - irrespective of who "owns" the facility. Just basic economics really.

 

[robertj]

Not so. The Crown has always "owned" the foreshore and coastal seabed that is not owned by somebody else. Charges are inevitable when people want to use scarce resources and harbours are required to be self financing. If demand is low and maintenance of the facility is low then charges will be low or non existent. If the opposite is the case, as in many popular south coast harbours, charges will be higher. In some situations the owners may adopt a policy of not charging at all and paying the costs out of other revenue (such as taxes on other people) if for example their objective is to encourage visitors. Scotland, where there is no shortage of anchorages, limited demand and low cost of provision is an example where this happens.

It is perhaps interesting to look at the situation in other countries, where you will see the same pattern. In popular areas where demand is high, charges are high - irrespective of who "owns" the facility. Just basic economics really.

not so apparently as David Cameron returned the coast line to the Crown/Royal family only this year, with a proviso that a cap on £20m profit for the Royal Family

 

[sailor211]

not so apparently as David Cameron returned the coast line to the Crown/Royal family only this year, with a proviso that a cap on £20m profit for the Royal Family

Crown estate or Royal family. Different organisations

 

[prv]

not so apparently as David Cameron returned the coast line to the Crown/Royal family only this year, with a proviso that a cap on £20m profit for the Royal Family

It's been Crown Estate for the last few hundred years. Before that it was the King's own property, but then one of them agreed to create the "Crown Estate", hand all the profit from it over to the Government, and accept a direct "salary" from Government instead (the "Civil List"). So for most of our lives the Crown Estate, despite the name, was a Government thing with the money going to the same place as our taxes.

What changed recently is that they decided to swap back - the Civil List is going away and, in theory, the Crown Estate will pay for the Monarchy. What with all the wind farms popping up, though, the Crown Estate is suddenly making shedloads more than it used to, way more than it would be reasonable to give to the Monarch. So they're actually only getting about 10% of it - not sure if it's defined as a capped amount or a percentage.

(This from memory and probably wrong in detail)

Pete

 

[Tranona]

Pete is right. The latest arrangements for funding the Royal Family is just the latest phase in a long running process to both improve income from the Crown Estates and provide a much more direct link between the Crown property and the Crown. The Civil list was an allocation from general taxation and often subject to political controversy. The Crown Estate ownership of assets remains unchanged in principle although it does buy and sell some assets from time to time.

 

[robertj]

Does that mean then we can have free anchoring under some charter from henry?

 

[lenseman]

comerant hotel, where be that ??

50° 21.615'n 004° 38.366'w

 

[clyst]

50° 21.615'n 004° 38.366'w

Wish I never asked .