LAst night at RUG 8

boatone

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 Jul 2001
Messages
12,845
Location
Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
www.tmba.org.uk
Last night at RUG 8

I attended the meeting last night as a representative of the TMBA but I thought you would all like to hear my observations as the issues raised affect every one of us.

The meeting was well attended by various interested parties and there was a remarkably strong presence from the EA including Matt Carter, Andrew Graham who has responsibility for the volunteer programme, the new Team Leader for the Teddington to Bell Weir stretch, Jim Overy and several others including at least one lock keeper ( although not from the RUG 8 stretch).

Matt Carter gave an illuminating report of the trials of managing the river during the last year or so under the worst sustained flood conditions that have been experienced in recent memory. Many boats have finished up on weirs. A narrow boat sank and blocked Godstow bridge but was finally removed last weekend and navigation has now been restored. There have been numerous incidents involving boats navigating under extreme conditions and even people getting into difficulty and actually swimming in the vicinity of the weirs. A rowing eight and an accompanying coaching boat got into difficulties at Sunbury, the rowing eight itself and one of its crew were swept over and through the weir - thankfully all the people were recovered safely although the craft was destroyed. Considerable anger was evident from the floor that this happened in red board conditions.

The police and the EA reported on progress relating to illegal mooring and licence evasion and there have been many notices served both by local authorities and the EA as well as arrests for drug and other offences. Last year the EA claim to have inspected over 9000 boats and discovered an average licence evasion rate of approximately 10% although it would appear the rate is considerably higher in marinas. Those who complain about the congregation above Teddington lock cut will be pleased to know that there has been a major combined operation by the Met Police Marine Unit, the local authority and the EA including inspection for Boat Safety Certificate infringements.

MIchael Shefras reported briefly that the Lock House Study has been given a further 12 months to gather information so that will not now report until spring 2014.

There were several other matters including interesting input re hydropower, fisheries and progress re Walton Bridge.

However, the most sobering information was that the EA Thames budget for next year will be further reduced. The capital programme will be maintained but the revenue and maintenance budget, primarily staff costs and essential maintenance, is facing a cut of some £700k or more in government funding and grant in aid.
 
Last edited:
Not exactly unexpected !
Doubt will be last reduction in funding for rivers that will be seen over the coming years
Basically the river will have to cut its cloth to suit its reduced circumstances unless funding can be found elsewhere.
Not sure what the effects will be down here.
 
It's very sad. In my opinion EA have pulled out many stops (perhaps not quite a full organ) in recent years with:-
  • out of hours "confuse the boater" self service power system
  • improved and lengthened laybys
  • improved moorings
  • bank works - to protect the same but act as overnight moorings as well
  • repaired and improved locks

I've only been on the River for twelve years and most of the above has happened in that time.
As with most public authority works,
  • good stuff is done,
  • the money dries up,
  • maintenance stops,
  • and the whole thing falls apart

This time it's likely that the Authority walks away and some charity steps in and tries hard, but just hasn't got the wherewithall to keep it up to any standard.
 
However, the most sobering information was that the EA Thames budget for next year will be further reduced. The capital programme will be maintained but the revenue and maintenance budget, primarily staff costs and essential maintenance, is facing a cut of some £700k or more in government funding and grant in aid.

it will be interesting to see how the EA manage this situation. That level of reduction in funding will, in my opinion, be impossible to absorb by efficiency savings and they have no current alternative sources of income capable of generating that level of funding. Even if they could achieve 100% licence fee enforcement it would not raise half that !
 
'The police and the EA reported on progress relating to illegal mooring and licence evasion and there have been many notices served both by local authorities and the EA as well as arrests for drug and other offences. Last year the EA claim to have inspected over 9000 boats and discovered an average licence evasion rate of approximately 10% although it would appear the rate is considerably higher in marinas. Those who complain about the congregation above Teddington lock cut will be pleased to know that there has been a major combined operation by the Met Police Marine Unit, the local authority and the EA including inspection for Boat Safety Certificate infringements.'

Well having been past the Teddington/Ham floating squat today the result of all above is precious little. The great unwashed river polluters are still there.
 
Well having been past the Teddington/Ham floating squat today the result of all above is precious little. The great unwashed river polluters are still there.

And there is little doubt that at least some of them may well be there for some time to come. Serving notices is the beginning of a legal process that can take many months if not years to bring to a conclusion.
We do not live in a society that permits summary justice of the type you would like to see. The end result of the process may be that people will have their boat seized, and either sold to help recover costs or destroyed, and will then be rendered homeless and the local authority may then have a duty to house them. Even if they are taken to court and ordered to pay they may have no money and be unable to pay.

And there are two or possibly three different jurisdictions involved. The EA licence fee enforcement, BSS infringement and the landowners eviction procedures. As long as the EA get their licence fee they will be happy (and that means the BSS certificate must be valid). The landowner, be they private or local authority, doesn't give a damn about the EA licence fee. The people on the other side of the river who think they are spoiling the view just want rid. Some will move on when served with a notice, but where to? The problem will just shift to another place on the river, witness the Maidenhead experience where boats have simply moved off the RBWM territory onto the Buckinghamshire bank where enforcement seems less of an issue.

It is encouraging that the moorings sub group of the River Thames Alliance, which includes most of the local authorities, appears to be finally accepting that they need to agree on a river wide approach to these problems.
 
Last edited:
With regard to enforcement, tt was also stated by the EA that under some circumstances they are now prepared to consider proceedings based on photographic or video evidence of offences even where their enforcement staff have not witnessed an infringement themselves. However, there must be a second witness and adequate details must be available - name of boat , time, place etc etc.
 
And there is little doubt that at least some of them may well be there for some time to come. Serving notices is the beginning of a legal process that can take many months if not years to bring to a conclusion.
We do not live in a society that permits summary justice of the type you would like to see. The end result of the process may be that people will have their boat seized, and either sold to help recover costs or destroyed, and will then be rendered homeless and the local authority may then have a duty to house them. Even if they are taken to court and ordered to pay they may have no money and be unable to pay.

And there are two or possibly three different jurisdictions involved. The EA licence fee enforcement, BSS infringement and the landowners eviction procedures. As long as the EA get their licence fee they will be happy (and that means the BSS certificate must be valid). The landowner, be they private or local authority, doesn't give a damn about the EA licence fee. The people on the other side of the river who think they are spoiling the view just want rid. Some will move on when served with a notice, but where to? The problem will just shift to another place on the river, witness the Maidenhead experience where boats have simply moved off the RBWM territory onto the Buckinghamshire bank where enforcement seems less of an issue.

It is encouraging that the moorings sub group of the River Thames Alliance, which includes most of the local authorities, appears to be finally accepting that they need to agree on a river wide approach to these problems.

Tempting though it might be I wouldn't condone summary justice. Unfortunately there will never be a satisfactory outcome to this. The legal system plays into their hands. The coordinated partnership approach in front of cameras is in reality little more than a publicity excercise. It would be easier to extradite a terrorist!!
 
Tempting though it might be I wouldn't condone summary justice. Unfortunately there will never be a satisfactory outcome to this. The legal system plays into their hands. The coordinated partnership approach in front of cameras is in reality little more than a publicity excercise. It would be easier to extradite a terrorist!!

It's not all bad news. Every exercise results in some of those served with notices falling into line. Quite a high percentage of those caught without EA licences pay up straight away - perhaps 80% or more, although many of those were not deliberately delinquent. How many have paid this year but not yet been down to the boat to place the licence in the window?
Those that do not cough up get targeted again a few weeks later and are given "14 days or else" notices which usually results in some more falling into line. That leaves a hard core which have to be pursued more formally through to court action which is time consuming and expensive. The EA have stated their immediate objective is to get the delinquency rate down to the 5% mark which is roughly on par with the canals.
Illegal mooring is more difficult but overstaying can certainly be better controlled.

I don't think it will be long before we start seeing "pay-by-phone" on some moorings.
 
Last edited:
What is sporty about the EA?
Marlow Rowing Club gave us Sir Steve Redgrave and his haul of Gold medals in various Olympics ...

The Thames provided him and the rest of the club with waters on which to train ! The lottery is for good causes - do you not consider the Thames to be a good cause?

Considering the annual subscriptions levied, and happily paid, by their members, the contribution paid by British Rowing to the EA nationwide is derisory.
 
Last edited:
"the contribution paid by British Rowing to the EA nationwide is derisory"
As is the circa one million rumored to be paid by the water companies, more info on this would be interesting eg when do the contracts come up for renewal?
 
"the contribution paid by British Rowing to the EA nationwide is derisory"
As is the circa one million rumored to be paid by the water companies, more info on this would be interesting eg when do the contracts come up for renewal?

None of the water companies monies ends up in the hands of the Thames region coffers....
 
Top