Lock keepers face uncertainties with cuts at the Environment Agency

[CJL]

Well Big John, at last someone appears to understand what's the main problem with the EA, the best thing that could happen is that an external audit
of the organization is carried out asap.

Excellent idea externally audit the EA and most of the functions will come out shinning. Income matches expenditure for the large majority of the work they undertake.

The departments that don't - enforcement (funded by Grant in Aid from Central Government) and navigation (Propped up by flood defences). Before you all know it you'll be working locks yourself and cruising down river with a guy walking in the river in front of your boat with a red flag and a spade digging a trench!

You guys make me laugh!!

CJL

 

[apollo]

Excellent idea externally audit the EA and most of the functions will come out shinning. Income matches expenditure for the large majority of the work they undertake.

The departments that don't - enforcement (funded by Grant in Aid from Central Government) and navigation (Propped up by flood defences). Before you all know it you'll be working locks yourself and cruising down river with a guy walking in the river in front of your boat with a red flag and a spade digging a trench!

You guys make me laugh!!

CJL

ha ha, spot on!

 

[oldgit]

To make the claim you need to feel the pain!

"Your new club mooring cost you circa £800 per annum" .and a 5 year wait.

Any quick search would have revealed a licence contribution to the Medway Harbour Authority.

We do not get a lock keeper and assistant plus volunteers manning some 45 locks. Each giving a you reassuring smile while taking your bits of string and helping you ancient old sea dogs through all those scary locks which it appears from some posters comments would cease to function without a lockkeeper.
We do not get to enjoy a considerable number of free EA moorings

Count em,
Lechlade - Riverside (managed by the Environment Agency)
Pinkhill (managed by Thames Water)
Bablockhythe (managed by Bablock Hythe Caravan Park)
Eynsham (managed by the Environment Agency)
Oxford - East Street (managed by the Environment Agency)
Sandford Lock (managed by the Environment Agency)
Sandford-on-Thames (managed by the Environment Agency)
Abingdon - Abbey Meadows (managed by Vale of White Horse District Council)
Abingdon - Town Moorings (managed by Vale of White Horse District Council)
Abingdon (managed by the Environment Agency)
Wallingford (managed by Nexus)
Goring (managed by the Environment Agency)
Child Beale Wildlife Park (managed by Child Beale Trust)
Pangbourne Meadows (managed by National Trust)
Reading - The Promenade
Reading - Christchurch Meadows
Reading - Kennet Mouth (managed by the Environment Agency)
Sonning (managed by the Environment Agency)
The Great House, Sonning
Wargrave (managed by the Environment Agency)
Henley - Mill Meadow (Managed by Henley Town Council)
Henley Bridge - Singers Wharf (managed by the Environment Agency)
Henley - Fawley Meadows (managed by SRB on behalf of Henley Royal Regatta)
Remenham - Hambledon Lock (Managed by SRB Moorings)
Medmenham Meadow (managed by SRB moorings)
Marlow (managed by the Environment Agency)
Marlow - Higgingsons Park (fees collected by Court Garden Leisure Centre)
Bourne End - Spade Oak (managed by local authority)
Cookham
Cliveden Reach (managed by National Trust)
Maidenhead
Boveney (managed by the Environment Agency)
Windsor - Bath Island (managed by local authority)
Windsor - Road Bridge (managed by the Environment Agency)
Windsor - Towpath (managed by Eton School)
Datchet Wharf (managed by parish council)
Runnymede (managed by National Trust)
Staines - Lammas Park (managed by local authority)
Staines (managed by the Environment Agency)
Egham (managed by the Environment Agency)
Laleham (managed by the Environment Agency)
Towpath at Dockett Eddy (managed by local authority)
Chertsey (managed by the Environment Agency)
Chertsey Bridge (managed by local authority)
Chertsey Meads (managed by local authority)
Weybridge (managed by the Environment Agency)
Walton (managed by the Environment Agency)
Kingston - Charter Quay
Kingston - Stevens Eyot below Kingston (managed by the small boat club)
Kingston Railway Wharf (managed by the Environment Agency)
Desborough - Desborough Island, old river (managed by the Environment Agency)
Shepperton - Church Square (managed by local authority)
Sunbury Lock Towpath (managed by the Environment Agency and local authority)
Molesey Hurst Park (managed by local authority)
Hampton Court (managed by local authority


Or 120 miles of navigable river.
You get what you pay for, well actually,what the UK taxpayer has been prepared to pay for in the past.
Not bad for £1.65 a day.
Time perhaps for all those hiding up lock cuts to pay up and maybe to lift the limit on contributions from large craft over a certain size.
How many on here know that some large craft enjoy a cap on their license fee ?

 

[Flynnbarr]

Somebody with more time may like to repute some if not all of the above quoted moorings,most you pay for,EA Windsor road bridge is 2small boats,1 large. Chertsey EA is full of liveaboards
The last 2sentences totally agree with,who ok'd that,a certain organisation must have had an exceptional lobbyist

 

[boatone]

The charge per square metre for 2014 is £18.26, with a minimum charge for five square metres.
* If your boat exceeds 80 square metres you will then be charged £10.00 per square metre there after.

My information is that this concession only applied to about 50 boats in 2012 with an average chargeable area of about 100sq metres. So concession would be worth (100-80) x 50 x £8.26 = approx £8,260.
Hardly going to solve the funding crisis, is it? However it still begs the question as to why there should be such a concession at all?

 

[DogsBody]

My information is that this concession only applied to about 50 boats in 2012 with an average chargeable area of about 100sq metres. So concession would be worth (100-80) x 50 x £8.26 = approx £8,260.
Hardly going to solve the funding crisis, is it? However it still begs the question as to why there should be such a concession at all?

"Every little helps" as a well known brand says in their adverts. If all these little extra few pounds were added together at least it would show they (EA) were trying to get additional income, rather than just targeting the easy option of MotorBoat licences.

 

[boatone]

"Every little helps" as a well known brand says in their adverts. If all these little extra few pounds were added together at least it would show they (EA) were trying to get additional income, rather than just targeting the easy option of MotorBoat licences.

I agree completely but it is easier said than done. As an example, my understanding is that EA accounting practice leads to the square metre charge being rounded DOWN to the nearest full square metre i.e 12.6 sq. mtrs. is charged as 12 rather than 12.6. Calculations suggest that this practice loses some £80k or so of potential annual licence fee income.
British Rowing have a block payment agreement with the EA which last year resulted in income of around £65k to cover all craft registered through rowing clubs including support and safety boats and the 6 digit "ABC123" codes are allocated by British Rowing which relieves the EA of the task of issuing licences. I suspect that any attempt to increase this income will be fiercely resisted.

 

[apollo]

I suspect that any attempt to increase this income will be fiercely resisted.

no sh!t, well we are all in this together.

Regaining that £80K + £60K demonstrates that there is not a funding issue. Time they grew a pair and started doing their job like the rest of us.

 

[boatone]

no sh!t, well we are all in this together.

Do you honestly believe that a few thousand motor boaters have anything remotely approaching the influence exerted by British Rowing? How many Olympic Gold medals did mobos collect in 2012. How many boat clubs are affiliated to public schools? Since when can £100k or so of "adjusted income" replace more than £1million of reduced public funding?

Just read on the Beeb that there could now be a £100million scheme to combat flooding on the Somerset levels:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-26447005

Lets see whats on offer for the Thames, shall we?

 

[apollo]

Do you honestly believe that a few thousand motor boaters have anything remotely approaching the influence exerted by British Rowing? How many Olympic Gold medals did mobos collect in 2012. How many boat clubs are affiliated to public schools? Since when can £100k or so of "adjusted income" replace more than £1million of reduced public funding

Well lets give up, bend over and take it then!

 

[apollo]

One thing Tony, as entertaining as you are, I have heard you mention that boaters are not joining TMBA in the numbers you would like and are fairly apoplectic in their attitude.

When you have an answer for everything, and dismiss any other view immediately- it does tend to generate a "whatever" state of mind.

There "are" other sources of funding, there "is" always a way - what seems fairly obvious is that the current EA management are "not" going to get off their backsides and explore these or even attempt to fight for any change.

So I will join the other (8000-100) boatowners and utter "whatever"

 

[boatone]

When you have an answer for everything, and dismiss any other view immediately- it does tend to generate a "whatever" state of mind.

Never claimed to have the answers. Just, perhaps, a better understanding of the problems than you and many others seem to have.
I will leave it there. Perhaps it would be better if I cease to engage in any threads regarding the EA and the management of the river.

 

[Aquafan]

From what I can see there is noone better informed about EA's management strengths and weaknesses, their costs and their funding than BoatOne. And he has good connections to make sure our voices are heard. What is certain is that service levels on the Thames are going to deteriorate fast and I have no doubt that within a year or two we will have self service at many locks, locks will break down for days at a time, trees will be a problem to navigation and the depths will claim many a prop etc etc.
Do we care what happens, should we try and do something about it? if we don't we can hardly complain later. May be we should brainstorm some ideas and not shoot down any idea. At the real risk of being flamed I will kick the ball off ...this is not new stuff
1) Why can't we challenge the payment Water Companies make to the River every year so that at least some of it comes back to Navigation or I think as Boat One suggested take a small percentage of their profits.
2) Why couldn't we franchise the locks, weirs, camp sites, mooring fees to the Resident Lock Keepers, they could manage one lock either side of their lock easily
3) Increase license fees to the rowers including unpowered boats, charge the many regatta's for the work EA puts in at every event.
4) Outsource the collection of fees from unlicensed boats, there are many more unlicensed boats than we all think
That's all I can think of at the moment.

 

[boatone]

I keep coming back to Treasury Rules and Legal Statutes - what the EA are actually permitted to charge for.
1) Why can't we challenge the payment Water Companies make to the River every year so that at least some of it comes back to Navigation or I think as Boat One suggested take a small percentage of their profits.
Laid down in the various Thames Conservancy Acts - would need legislation changes which take forever. EA also been instructed by government - as have all departments - not to do anything that would increase burden on business, hence freeze on licence fees for commercial/hire craft.
2) Why couldn't we franchise the locks, weirs, camp sites, mooring fees to the Resident Lock Keepers, they could manage one lock either side of their lock easily
Sounds great but not really practical - and would the lock keepers wish to do that anyway - probably means they would need to become self employed? Camp sites and mooring fees etc already being collected
3) Increase license fees to the rowers including unpowered boats, As I've suggested earlier there would undoubtedly be huge resistance from the rowing lobby and even if the fees were doubled it wouldn't bring in that much extra revenue.
charge the many regatta's for the work EA puts in at every event.EA only permitted to recover actual costs so no significant opportunity to increase income. I do know that are looking at ways to produce income from other events such as swimming.
4) Outsource the collection of fees from unlicensed boats, there are many more unlicensed boats than we all think EA claim not that many and that most pay during the year if fingered. I would love to have some hard evidence but in spite of many requests no-one has ever provided factual information re boats that appear to be unlicensed. When faced with assurances from the EA that they "checked every boat on the river in 2012" how do you counter that?

 

[Flynnbarr]

I keep coming back to Treasury Rules and Legal Statutes - what the EA are actually permitted to charge for.
1) Why can't we challenge the payment Water Companies make to the River every year so that at least some of it comes back to Navigation or I think as Boat One suggested take a small percentage of their profits.
Laid down in the various Thames Conservancy Acts - would need legislation changes which take forever. EA also been instructed by government - as have all departments - not to do anything that would increase burden on business, hence freeze on licence fees for commercial/hire craft.
2) Why couldn't we franchise the locks, weirs, camp sites, mooring fees to the Resident Lock Keepers, they could manage one lock either side of their lock easily
Sounds great but not really practical - and would the lock keepers wish to do that anyway - probably means they would need to become self employed? Camp sites and mooring fees etc already being collected
3) Increase license fees to the rowers including unpowered boats, As I've suggested earlier there would undoubtedly be huge resistance from the rowing lobby
charge the many regatta's for the work EA puts in at every event.EA only permitted to recover actual costs so no real opportunity to increase income
4) Outsource the collection of fees from unlicensed boats, there are many more unlicensed boats than we all think EA claim not that many and that most pay during the year if fingered. I would love to have some hard evidence but in spite of many requests no-one has ever provided factual information re boats that appear to be unlicensed. When faced with assurances from the EA that they "checked every boat on the river in 2012" how do you counter that?

Point 4 proves that for that reason alone the EA should be hounded.
Utter b#ll#cks,I can show you a boat moored mainstream maidenhead!not hidden!used most sunny weekends that has a 2010 licence on it.
If they are saying that to your face b1 they are liars.

 

[boatone]

Utter b#ll#cks,I can show you a boat moored mainstream maidenhead!not hidden!used most sunny weekends that has a 2010 licence on it.

If you are that certain, have you reported it?

 

[CJL]

3) Increase license fees to the rowers including unpowered boats, As I've suggested earlier there would undoubtedly be huge resistance from the rowing lobby and even if the fees were doubled it wouldn't bring in that much extra revenue.
charge the many regatta's for the work EA puts in at every event.EA only permitted to recover actual costs so no significant opportunity to increase income. I do know that are looking at ways to produce income from other events such as swimming.

This is something that could be looked at carefully and could be brought into line with the PLA who charge for staff time (including overtime at weekends!), equipment loaned and even Notice to Mariners (£1500 each!). Doing it overnight isn't going to happen but a gradual increase is fair.

Last time I heard for some of the rowing events on the Tideway they are charging £35/head for a race so there is room to increase the cost quite easily.

CJL

 

[Flynnbarr]

If you are that certain, have you reported it?

No.
I have given up with the EA.i have tried.
One reach of the river.....liveaboards,sewage,unlicensed boats,lack of depth,trees.
It is not good for my blood pressure
Go to the seaside or bend over and take it to quote apollo

 

[CJL]

Point 4 proves that for that reason alone the EA should be hounded.
Utter b#ll#cks,I can show you a boat moored mainstream maidenhead!not hidden!used most sunny weekends that has a 2010 licence on it.
If they are saying that to your face b1 they are liars.

You really should report it not moan about it!

CJL

 

[boatone]

This is something that could be looked at carefully and could be brought into line with the PLA who charge for staff time (including overtime at weekends!), equipment loaned and even Notice to Mariners (£1500 each!). Doing it overnight isn't going to happen but a gradual increase is fair.

From the AINA site: http://www.aina.org.uk/port-of-london-authority.aspx

The Port of London Authority is a public trust established in 1908 to ‘administer, preserve and improve the Port of London’. Currently it is constituted under the Port of London Act 1968 and Harbour Revision Orders of 1975, 1992, 1999 and 2003. It has no equity capital and all its operations are financed from revenue with no outside support. Finance for capital works comes from internally generated funds, supplemented by commercial loans and leasing.

Sounds like a completely different financing regime to the one the EA operate under.