Could the EA do this on the Thames?

[ianc1200]

http://www.canaljunction.com/news/liveaboard-boaters-change-neighbourhoods-every-2-weeks/1601

A way to ensure liveaboards move their boats some distance within set periods of time.

 

[Actionmat]

Good to see someone doing something. If home moorings were a requirement in order to get an annual licence it would save a lot of by-law changes.

 

[Big John]

An excellent proposal but who on the Thames is going police it? The Lock Keepers, the enforcement officers on patrol launches? Not only that most of the liveaboards moor on private land with very little chance of the land owner turning them away.

With all the cutbacks in budget and proposed staff reductions there are not enough "hands" to go around as the EA is structured today.

If there was a full independent review as to how the EA functions and "root and branch" trimming was carried out then you may see some positive changes and man power re allocated to give the correct level of service that we the licence fee payers contribute to.

 

[TrueBlue]

Canals and the River are different.
CaRT owns the track and towpath side. EA doesn't
EA can and are said to police their moorings - of which there are few.
Where liveaboards congregate the land is owned by many and various and it's their choice whether to take action or not.
Other wise it needs a sea-change in legislation to do anything else.

 

[boatone]

As I believe I might have said before (?) only key priority for the Thames at the present time is trying to arrest the downslide in government funding and find new ways of financing the river - both as a resource and as a recreational venue.

Scroats congregating on private land are not the EA's problem except with regard to licences and Boat Safety. The EA are trying to do something about overstayers on EA moorings and are currently running a pilot scheme but with limited resources don't expect any miracles.

 

[Actionmat]

Scroats congregating on private land are not the EA's problem except with regard to licences and Boat Safety.

No permanent mooring - no licence. Then the land owner is taken out of the equation and all offending boats can be dealt with by the EA. The licence was changed before (no BSS - no annual ticket) so what's stopping them? It wouldn't cure the problem, but I'm sure it would remove the hardcore that have been in occupation for months or years.

 

[boatone]

At the present time legislation is not in place to permit the EA to take that stance. It took over ten years to get the most recent IWO legislation approved. Using the road analogy, your car is not required to have a permanent parking place but just to be "legal" - i.e. MOT, Road Fund Licence, Insurance etc.
Also, as some of us keep trying to get across, legislation without resources to enforce is pretty damn useless.

 

[ianc1200]

I was thinking more in terms of Local Authority Planning enforcement.

 

[Actionmat]

Licence application, question 15 'usual mooring'. I presume that some declare 'permanent cruising' in the box, which doesn't answer the question. It's also a false statement if the boat doesn't move from one licence period to the next and in the case of the vessels in Ham with rooms rented out, would require a different licence for boats with paying passengers?
What additional resources would be required to check licences, which they do anyway? Or has 'permanent cruising' been declared a civil right?

 

[boatone]

I was thinking more in terms of Local Authority Planning enforcement.

http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/...law_application_approved_by_Richmond_Council/

That report is from 2012 but the problem persists. And if they are moved on, where do they go? Straight on to someone else's patch so the problem just moves around. This is not a river management problem, it is an antisocial behaviour problem which "society" seems to be incapable of addressing.

 

[hartcjhart]

I was thinking more in terms of Local Authority Planning enforcement.

no real chance of that,If the LA make the people homeless they are then resposible to find alternative accomodation,

and as Boatone says if they move them from one spot they will go to another,

better leave em alone BUT enforce certain standards of appearance/upkeep,as a local councile would do to its tennants

 

[Actionmat]

better leave em alone BUT enforce certain standards of appearance/upkeep,as a local councile would do to its tennants

It would turn into a free for all, effectively legalising squatting on the river. I was talking to someone who is a genuine permanent cruiser and the general opinion is that those that go nowhere will end up spoiling it for everybody else.

 

[TrueBlue]

It's a growing problem and not only on the Thames.

CaRT (canals) have an even larger problem. London is virtually a no-go area for anyone wanting to cruise their system, because anywhere to moor is taken up by permanent liveaboards. In some places where the canal is wide boats are often two or three deep. On a canal forum two or three newcomers a week enquire about moving down to London on the canals as it is seen as a cheap way of living. They have no affinity with boats or the water and absolutely no concept of the essentials of living on a boat.
Many folk who know the canal system and who would like to visit the City have posted to say they won't attempt to go as they know they are unlikely to find an overnight mooring. Facilities are poor - eight water points in the area for a population of 2,000 boats.

In comparison the Thames is a non issue (as yet). Many of the banks and edges make it impossible to moor - so it's not a wall to wall issue, just clusters where you can get a foothold. Because enforcement is a mishmash moorers know there's not a lot that the authorities can or will do so they wave a figurative two fingers an any enforcement attempt.

It's a big social issue and boils down to wage rates and the cost / availability of housing.

 

[Actionmat]

Nice little film made by former house squatters turned liveaboards. I like the water pump about 5mins in, if only as much thought had gone into the toilet.
It's like the 90's all over again, but the middle class crustys have swapped their camper vans for canal boats.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT1kt13MBNA

Also, how to live for £800 a year by living on a narrowboat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfBfoFDtJuw

My council tax alone is a lot more than that

 

[ProDave]

No permanent mooring - no licence. Then the land owner is taken out of the equation and all offending boats can be dealt with by the EA. The licence was changed before (no BSS - no annual ticket) so what's stopping them? It wouldn't cure the problem, but I'm sure it would remove the hardcore that have been in occupation for months or years.

I would HATE to see that implemented.

Because later in life when we retire I intend to buy a narrowboat, and live aboard for a few years slowly exploring the whole inland waterway network.

I can do that presently with a continuous cruising licence.

To have to pay for a "home mooring" that I would never use would just be silly.

It's the usual case of a few people being stupid and ignoring or breaking the rules, end up spoiling it for the majority of responsible boaters.

 

[Actionmat]

You could always rent it out while you're away

 

[TrueBlue]

I would HATE to see that implemented.

Because later in life when we retire I intend to buy a narrowboat, and live aboard for a few years slowly exploring the whole inland waterway network.
I can do that presently with a continuous cruising licence.
To have to pay for a "home mooring" that I would never use would just be silly.
It's the usual case of a few people being stupid and ignoring or breaking the rules, end up spoiling it for the majority of responsible boaters.

The issue is not about CC'ers, who revel in the lifestyle of cruising around the system and who have some feeling about their environment.
It's about folks who stay in one spot on short stay moorings who care little about the waterway. For them it's just about having somewhere to live.
So you should be OK, whether it's on EA or CaRT waters.

 

[ProDave]

The issue is not about CC'ers, who revel in the lifestyle of cruising around the system and who have some feeling about their environment.
It's about folks who stay in one spot on short stay moorings who care little about the waterway. For them it's just about having somewhere to live.
So you should be OK, whether it's on EA or CaRT waters.

My concern was making the issuing of a licence conditional on having a home mooring. As long as an exemption still applies to continuous cruisers then that would be okay.

 

[TrueBlue]

My concern was making the issuing of a licence conditional on having a home mooring. As long as an exemption still applies to continuous cruisers then that would be okay.

The original point was made about the rules that apply to boats on CaRT's waters and should the concept be extended to EA's waters. If you intend to be a genuine continuous cruiser, then you don't have a home mooring and declare that as such.
Don't worry.

 

[Glorfindel]

As I believe I might have said before (?) only key priority for the Thames at the present time is trying to arrest the downslide in government funding and find new ways of financing the river - both as a resource and as a recreational venue.

Scroats congregating on private land are not the EA's problem except with regard to licences and Boat Safety. The EA are trying to do something about overstayers on EA moorings and are currently running a pilot scheme but with limited resources don't expect any miracles.

Since the clampdown at Sonning moorings are now freely available and on the bank by Tesco at Caversham there seem to be far less river-wrecks so someone is doing something and, if they can read this, I hope that they realise that their work is appreciated