Illegally moored boats moved from the Thames

[duesouth68]

Sir, I don't want you making yourself ill over this.

If you are referring to me Sir, i quite enjoy the cut and trust of debate....

 

[Flying Penguin]

Oh come on ... Sir. Surely Dale Farm is about our law and planning permission, not about who owns the land or the purpose for which it was once used. The residents of Dale Farm used the laws of the UK for their appeals for 10 years. They constructed illegally The planning laws applies to all property owners who may wish to build something. Now Dale Farm people need to abide by the laws that they have been using these last years. Use the law - then bide by its decision. And as we now know many of these people have brick and mortar homes in Ireland: they do have homes to go to.

The only difference is the precise law which governs the activity (planning law vs. mooring permissions) and the length of time it was used for (10 vs. 50) which has been used to justify the continued occupation. The logic used to defend them is identical, and imho, equally as wrong.

As far as Maidenhead is concerned I think others have put it more eloquently than I could. It doesn't matted how the authorities found out. If there was wrong doing then they are entitled to deal with it.

If there was not wrong doing then the chances are that the moorings (that are clearly dear to your heart .. and quite rightly so) would probably still be there.
As Tedd Lock put it - another case of a few spoiling it for the rest.

It might have been OK in a slower post war Britain, but in today's world we cant just have people doing what they want, where they want, and we cant turn a blind eye just because the problem will/might appear elsewhere.

Life just isn't like that any more. And as far as maritime freedom is concerned ... well the nature of our rivers and their usage have changed ... the sea is out there ... that's where you can please yourself.

Sir, I don't want you making yourself ill over this.

Agree 100%

 

[ms1]

Dale F v Maidenhead

No that's not right .. surely

Dale Farm is people on their own land being subject to planning permissions. Its not about their right to be on their own land, its about what they do with it and the manner of its usage.

Maidenhead is people on/using someone else's property in such a manner or without permissions such that they are asked to leave.

 

[Flying Penguin]

Dale F v Maidenhead

No that's not right .. surely

Dale Farm is people on their own land being subject to planning permissions. Its not about their right to be on their own land, its about what they do with it and the manner of its usage.

Maidenhead is people on/using someone else's property in such a manner or without permissions such that they are asked to leave.

In both cases a body with rights to dictate the time and manner of usage (Maidenhead Council and Basildon Council) are telling people to stop using the land in a particular way. The legislation is different, but the broad principle, that you can only use yours and other peoples land within the constraints of the law of the land and if you don't you can be forced to stop using it in that way, as to fail to enforce it would incite eventual chaos, is identical.

 

[ms1]

OK so your message seems to be that these are the same

You cannot build that on your property and then live there.
and
You cannot that attach yourself to my property and stay there

well OK, if that's how you want it, but I see absolutely no parallel (even broad principle) tween Dale F and Maidenhead. And I doubt whether the man on the Clapham omnibus would see a parallel.

And now I leave the debate .... enough.....

 

[Flying Penguin]

OK so your message seems to be that these are the same

You cannot build that on your property and then live there.
and
You cannot that attach yourself to my property and stay there

well OK, if that's how you want it, but I see absolutely no parallel (even broad principle) tween Dale F and Maidenhead. And I doubt whether the man on the Clapham omnibus would see a parallel.

And now I leave the debate .... enough.....

An exercise in advanced point missing. You can do what you like within certain legal boundaries, you break them and you should expect to face consequences irrespective of the amount of time you have been doing the unlawful act. There, I don't think it can be put more clearly.

It's really not that hard The man on the Clapham omnibus is not generally assumed to be hard of thinking

 

[dash300]

There are those words again REGULATED AND ENFORCED that is just the trouble to many regulations.

You would have us living in a very sad world.

There are countries where there is little in the way of law and order,perhaps you would be happier there.

 

[duesouth68]

Missing Maidenhead Moorings

I am afraid you gentleman can argue these technical points of law till the cows come home....but the sad fact remains you have lost an amenity to boat owners in Maidenhead for good these moorings will never be put back.


And all because of strong lobbying by residents along the river front ,so the same attitude , That stooped the lock keepers wife hanging her washing in the lock garden at Boulters has one the day...........

 

[duesouth68]

There are countries where there is little in the way of law and order,perhaps you would be happier there.

Perhaps that type of country would suit you more you seem like the bulling type...

 

[teddington_lock]

Well doesn't that sound a little crazy to you what is the use of a tender hanging in the davits...i think and i stand corrected if i am wrong coastal harbours tenders are exempt if the are carried on the parent vessel and not left on the mooring.

I understand now .

We aren't in a coastal harbour , we are on a waterway administered by the EA , and the rules on the Thames are that once it is in the water , it needs a licence.

 

[cereal tiller]

I understand now .

We aren't in a coastal harbour , we are on a waterway administered by the EA , and the rules on the Thames are that once it is in the water , it needs a licence.

the tenders used at maidenhead were 20 or so foot cruisers,and not dinghies.

i was told today that one of the larger vessels that was moved on from the island has simply moved a short distance down river to the old skindles frontage.

removal has not actually occured.

what is suprising is that the boulters lock keeper has not managed to police this situation?

 

[duesouth68]

t

i was told today that one of the larger vessels that was moved on from the island has simply moved a short distance down river to the old skindles frontage.

removal has not actually occured.

what is suprising is that the boulters lock keeper has not managed to police this situation?

I was contacted this evening by a journalist who is writing a story about this he has a direct statement from Windsor and Maidenhead Council Today that the moorings will not go back...they want that stretch of the river free of any moorings....the natural look


that barge moored to skindles is on the boat brokerage Apollo Duck for sale

 

[oldgit]

"the natural look" ........ that would be sheet piling then ?

 

[teddington_lock]

what is suprising is that the boulters lock keeper has not managed to police this situation?

I'm not familiar with the area , being a downriver boy myself.

Are the boats in question on the lock moorings ? if not , then it's not down to him to police it. He can report it to the nav office if needed , but thats about it . Then it's down to the enforcement guys.

We have the same problem at Tedders , just off the top of our layby , we have a large encampment of itinerants. We don't police it , as we can't. Any complaints we log and forward to the nav office.

 

[duesouth68]

"the natural look" ........ that would be sheet piling then ?

Exactly !

I think there is another reason..the local district council have designated their island a bird sanctuary so all the local residents can rename their properties " Sanctuary View" and " Pippins Rest " " Kingfisher Island " all we really want is a family of Rooks or Crows to move in there and they soon change there tune.


I go to Henley there are boats down the front on both sides of the bridge the place looks alive i bet someone on this forum posts that " The boats at Henley are very unsightly" i went to Maidenhead yesterday looking over the bridge upstream it looks dead i am afraid it reflects the selfish attitude of the people living along that stretch of the river who complain.

 

[duesouth68]

I'm not familiar with the area , being a downriver boy myself.

Are the boats in question on the lock moorings ? if not , then it's not down to him to police it. He can report it to the nav office if needed , but thats about it . Then it's down to the enforcement guys.

We have the same problem at Tedders , just off the top of our layby , we have a large encampment of itinerants. We don't police it , as we can't. Any complaints we log and forward to the nav office.

But does anybody within EA patrol the river on a regular basis with the powers to do something about a breach of rules and in the upper reaches it would have to be done every week....

 

[Seajet]

I have to say, as an outsider looking at this forum ( the only time I've had a boat on the Thames was my Scorpion sailing dinghy as an instructor for the social club at BAe kingston upon Thames ) I'm struck by the separate cliques of boat owners, none seemingly too willing to get on with the other...

There are the rowing clubs; OK such a thing takes a wide space, with all but 1 person looking backwards, but at least it's healthy, non-polluting and traditional.

Then there are liveaboards, who vary greatly as individuals do, but in my experience the responsible ones are a treasure to be retained, as both custodians of the locality and keeping an eye on security.

Then we have classic mobo's, I suppose the ultimate example being Dunkirk 'Little Ships'; these MUST be preserved, hats off to those who do so.

There are the sailing types, rarer as one gets inland for obvious reasons, but trying to preserve skills and traditions a newcomer might find amazing - again, hats off.

Then we come across the modern mobo's, some of whom seem to think 'I've got a bit of money, everyone else should be off the river as I drive my waterborne car to restaurants and brag about prices paid'.

You lot need to join forces if you wish to preserve any of your leisures and healthy environment, let alone history; or money and 'developments / improvements' will see you ALL off; we salt water types learned to get on long ago, not least as Darwin takes a dim view on ill-prepared motor boats.

 

[duesouth68]

I have to say, as an outsider looking at this forum ( the only time I've had a boat on the Thames was my Scorpion sailing dinghy as an instructor for the social club at BAe kingston upon Thames ) I'm struck by the separate cliques of boat owners, none seemingly too willing to get on with the other...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
due south68
I agree totally with what you have just said... we have lost a great asset in Maidenhead by slight of hand...and only a very few people understand what has gone for good.........

 

[TrueBlue]

....Then we come across the modern mobo's, some of whom seem to think 'I've got a bit of money, everyone else should be off the river as I drive my waterborne car to restaurants and brag about prices paid'.

As behaviour last weekend indicates, the above is all too true. I can ignore the bragging, but boorishness and downright bad manners I find difficult to forgive. I get reports of and see verbal abuse to lockkeepers and their families. Totally unnecessary and spoils the character of the River

You lot need to join forces if you wish to preserve any of your leisures and healthy environment, let alone history; or money and 'developments / improvements' will see you ALL off; we salt water types learned to get on long ago, not least as Darwin takes a dim view on ill-prepared motor boats.

I wish that this could be possible or even practicable. There are a large number of associations who profess to represent River users, but they don't talk to each other or even meet in concert. That makes it extremely difficult for EA to find out just what their customers want. That's such a shame because we've seen a huge turnaround in EA's willingness to talk to their users and communications are getting better.

B1 is trying to pull things together by setting up the TMBA with a remit as wide as one dares. To date there are some 100 members - quite an achievement - but paltry when there are said to be some 20,000 boats licenced on the Thames.

Last month's Forum "knees up" generously hosted by MDL at Windsor (truly grateful thanks to Mike Gates for the facilities offered and B1 for a helluva lot of legwork) only managed to attract 15 boats.

So from the above perspective the future looks somewhat bleak.

 

[duesouth68]

As behaviour last weekend indicates, the above is all too true. I can ignore the bragging, but boorishness and downright bad manners I find difficult to forgive. I get reports of and see verbal abuse to lockkeepers and their families. Totally unnecessary and spoils the character of the River

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
duesouth68
Some of what your saying i agree with the EA and BW started of on the wrong foot it is to big and remit is to wide..and if your not care full this new Charity idea by the Tories will be even worse..you need a small grass roots organisation with clout and funding to deal with the problem...as for insulting lock keepers and there families i do not know we you get that from....