Review of Environment Agency navigation

[boatone]

Following has been received from the EA regarding the discussions taking place with C&RT:

Review of Environment Agency navigation

In February we told you that the Environment Agency (EA) and Canal and River Trust (the Trust) had established a joint working group to explore different options for running the 640 miles of EA-managed river navigations.

We wanted to let you know that work is continuing and, following an initial information-gathering exercise carried out by the joint working group, the Boards of the Environment Agency (EA) and Canal & River Trust have agreed to continue with further work to explore the basis for this potential transfer of river navigations from the EA to the Trust.

Both Boards believe the move, subject to agreement, has the potential to create a more integrated national inland waterway network, and a sustainable future for the river navigations, to the benefit of the people who use and enjoy them.

We’re looking at this thoroughly, in the best interests of the navigations, and we will speak with our people and our stakeholders should agreement to transfer be given.

 

[Sandyman]

Or in other words, we are working out how we can get away with screwing them for more money.

 

[rotrax]

Or in other words, we are working out how we can get away with screwing them for more money.

A rather cynical view methinks.

I suggested recently-June perhaps-that Thames boaters might be looking at a change of admin at some stage and not to worry too much.

Losing the Navigation side of rivers should enable the EA to concentrate on their real job.

IMHO,of course........................

 

[TrueBlue]

Perhaps 'one' shouldn't rise to either of the above, but ---

You won't have to pay more money just for maintenance - just for Registration

Any transfer won't happen quickly and possibly even some primary legislation and that will take for ever...
Pure supposition, of course because Nobody Knows (and probably never will)

 

[oldgit]

A suggestion .

It would be preferable if all the individual revenue and regulation regimes in force at the moment could be brought under one system.
The different methods of calculating boat size for a start.
The Thames method ie. cubic capacity was probably a sensible scheme when cargo was the main purpose for all that infrastructure on the river.
However things have changed,leisure and (whisper it) craft used for accommodation now mainly benefit from the ability to navigate the river.
With the considerable increase of longer vessels and with only so much length of moorings to go round,perhaps now would be to time to charge for the linear amount of river bank your boat will be using when not on the move.ie. Most of time.
Time for people taking up the scarcest resource, mooring space,to pay the most,as per on the Medway. ?
This may result in smaller day type boats berthed in a marina paying a little less but larger boats more likely to be out for longer using visitor moorings more frequently paying a bit more.

 

[Newbroom]

Re: A suggestion .

It would be preferable if all the individual revenue and regulation regimes in force at the moment could be brought under one system.
The different methods of calculating boat size for a start.
The Thames method ie. cubic capacity was probably a sensible scheme when cargo was the main purpose for all that infrastructure on the river.
However things have changed,leisure and (whisper it) accommodation now mainly benefit from the ability to navigate the river.
With the considerable increase of longer vessels and with only so much length of moorings to go round,perhaps now would be to time to charge for the linear amount of river bank your boat will be using when not on the move.ie. Most of time.
Time for people taking up the scarcest resource, mooring space,to pay the most,as per on the Medway. ?
This may result in smaller day type boats berthed in a marina paying a little less but larger boats more likely to be out for longer using visitor moorings more frequently paying a bit more.

+1

 

[boatone]

Re: A suggestion .

It would be preferable if all the individual revenue and regulation regimes in force at the moment could be brought under one system.
The different methods of calculating boat size for a start.
The Thames method ie. cubic capacity was probably a sensible scheme when cargo was the main purpose for all that infrastructure on the river.
However things have changed,leisure and (whisper it) craft used for accommodation now mainly benefit from the ability to navigate the river.
With the considerable increase of longer vessels and with only so much length of moorings to go round,perhaps now would be to time to charge for the linear amount of river bank your boat will be using when not on the move.ie. Most of time.
Time for people taking up the scarcest resource, mooring space,to pay the most,as per on the Medway. ?
This may result in smaller day type boats berthed in a marina paying a little less but larger boats more likely to be out for longer using visitor moorings more frequently paying a bit more.

May surprise you to know that as recently as the 1970s charges for the registration of pleasure boats on the Thames were still based on length alone and that was the case right back to the Thames Conservancy Act 1932.
Not sure exactly when the change was made to square metres or for what reason/purpose.

 

[oldgit]

Re: A suggestion .

May surprise you to know that as recently as the 1970s charges for the registration of pleasure boats on the Thames were still based on length alone and that was the case right back to the Thames Conservancy Act 1932.
Not sure exactly when the change was made to square metres or for what reason/purpose.

Thats interesting everything I can find on google indicates that canal and river freight such as coal or wood was charged per ton,and to calculate that would have thought the carrying capacity of any lighter or barge would have to be calculated.
Did spend some time trying to unearth early BW commercial rates but nothing came up.
Still interested to know why they are different and what the rest of the waterways use.

 

[Bru]

Carrying narrowboats (and wide boats, barges etc) were measured in gauging docks by loading weights and measuring the freeboard

Tables were sent out to gauging stops around the system where each passing boat had its freeboard measured and thus the weight of the cargo could be looked up and a toll ticket issued based on that weight and the type of cargo (different cargos had different tolls)

Tolls, on the BW waterways, were abolished in the 1967 British Waterways Act and replaced by, essentially, the modern licensing regime based on length and category of usage

 

[oldgit]

Thanks for that..
Suppose real question is when CaRT get lumbered with the Thames how will they charge leisure craft,by volume or by length as the rest of their system. ?
Would seem a bit daft to have two methods in single unified regime.

 

[Bru]

Thanks for that..
Suppose real question is when CaRT get lumbered with the Thames how will they charge leisure craft,by volume or by length as the rest of their system. ?
Would seem a bit daft to have two methods in single unified regime.

Good question!

It was always one of the (many) sticking points in discussions years ago about British Waterways taking over the EA navigations

Then again, EA already have different charging schemes. The Thames is charged by "area" (length x beam) but the East Anglian waterways are charged by length alone

I suspect it would, in practical terms, be easier to keep the existing Thames charging regime as any changes to it would be bound to cause complaint

 

[oldgit]

I suspect it would, in practical terms, be easier to keep the existing Thames charging regime as any changes to it would be bound to cause complaint

However a system that added some perceived fairness to income contributed towards up keep of river, perhaps from the amount of public mooring gobbled up by any particular craft, would have the odd supporter.
The apparent growth in the numbers of monster barges will impact on the Thames alone as no other navigation can accept these seagoing monster into their upper reaches.

 

[Bru]

However a system that added some perceived fairness to income contributed towards up keep of river, perhaps from the amount of public mooring gobbled up by any particular craft, would have the odd supporter.
The apparent growth in the numbers of monster barges will impact on the Thames alone as no other navigation can accept these seagoing monster into their upper reaches.

Trouble is, anything based on measurements other than length and beam is going to be problematic, those being the only measurements that are always readily available and which can be easily verified by staff. I think "area" is as good as you're going to get

 

[djm]

Re: A suggestion .

It would be preferable if all the individual revenue and regulation regimes in force at the moment could be brought under one system.
The different methods of calculating boat size for a start.
The Thames method ie. cubic capacity was probably a sensible scheme when cargo was the main purpose for all that infrastructure on the river.
However things have changed,leisure and (whisper it) craft used for accommodation now mainly benefit from the ability to navigate the river.
With the considerable increase of longer vessels and with only so much length of moorings to go round,perhaps now would be to time to charge for the linear amount of river bank your boat will be using when not on the move.ie. Most of time.
Time for people taking up the scarcest resource, mooring space,to pay the most,as per on the Medway. ?
This may result in smaller day type boats berthed in a marina paying a little less but larger boats more likely to be out for longer using visitor moorings more frequently paying a bit more.

Isn't this precisely one of issues that was supposed to be addressed by the EA's Harmonisation Plans and the years of work and enormous expense that went into the 2010 EA Inland Waterways Order?

In fact, in May 2010 they even prepared and published the details for a new harmonised charging regime - based on LENGTH alone (except for houseboats) - which was supposed to come into effect in 2012. The paper was described by the EA's Head of Navigation as "a culmination of work over five years and is the final proposal."

NATIONAL NAVIGATION USERS FORUM – 4TH MAY 2010
PAPER BY – HEAD OF RECREATION AND NAVIGATION
SUBJECT – HARMONISATION OF NAVIGATION CHARGING REGIMES
PROPOSED NEW CHARGING REGIME
3.1 The proposed regime (Appendix One) provides a simplified range of consistent charges. These are as follows for the different types of craft:
• annual private powered craft – based upon craft length, with minimum
(<5m) and maximum charging caps (>20m);
• visiting powered craft – proportions of equivalent annual fee;
• un-powered craft – flat rates based upon four durations of use;
• commercial craft (hire and passenger boats) – based upon craft length at a simple per metre rates;
• houseboats - based upon the craft area, as charged for 86 of the 96 houseboats currently registered.
3.2 The proposed regime provides a series of discounts to reflect differences between the Agency waterways and to encourage a range of craft and users onto the waterways. These discounts are as follows:
• dis-connected – provided for annual registrations on those waterways that are not connected to the wider waterway network (Ancholme, Medway, Stour Welland and Glen). The discount would be doubled for
the Stour, the most isolated and limited EA waterway;
• electric/low power engines – provided for environmentally preferable electric and low power craft with small engines (<4bhp);
• narrow craft – provided to craft narrower than 2.7m width to ease congestion through narrower bottle neck locks that cannot pass two wider craft side by side. Encouraging narrower craft will reduce the number of times locks are operated, speeding up passage, using less water and reducing wear and tear on navigation assets;
• boat clubs/youth organisations – provided favourable reductions to promote entry level boating and encourage wider participation. To qualify clubs will generally need to be registered with their Sports Governing Body.
3.3 The proposed regime is comparable to the British Waterways (BW) charging model which is familiar to the wider boating community and could enable future harmonisation across all Navigation Authorities 3.4 Consideration was given to incorporating a measure of the level of facilities provided. However, it was concluded that such a measure would be too complex to define and would lead to a stepwise change in charges as a result of improved facility provision. It was also difficult to balance the provision of facilities against the tranquil enjoyment afforded by the greater length of our less developed waterways.
3.5 Inevitably there will be winners and losers in harmonising the regimes whilst maintaining income. The proposed regime best minimises the number of affected boaters and scale of income changes compared to other potential regimes (Appendix Two). However a range of winners and losers remain which are described in greater detail in Appendices Three and Four. These boaters will have paid more/less than others owning similar craft on the other Agency waterways for many years.
4.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF HARMONISATION
4.1 In line with stakeholder advice, it is proposed to delay harmonisation until 2011 and to then progress over two years in order to minimise the impact on those boaters who will pay more. This delay will provide time to communicate the new regime to customers; to develop the necessary systems to support the new regime; to fully integrate the regime with other Agency charges and, to improve the efficiency of the registration process by looking at opportunities for online application and simplifying the process where possible.
5.0 RECOMMENDATION
5.1 It is requested that the Forum discuss and feedback on harmonisingnavigation charges to the proposed regime from 2012.

Appendix One - Proposed Charging Tariff (at 2010 rates)
1.0 Annual registration for private powered launches
Launches which will not be let or for hire at any time on Environment Agency waterways during the validity of the registration.
Overall craft length less than 5m = £144.00
Overall craft length exceeding 5m = £144.00 + £70.45 per metre over 5m
All craft exceeding 20m length (upper cap) = £1200.75 flat rate charge
2.0 Visitor registration for private powered launches
Proportion of relevant annual registration charge
31 days = 25% 15 days = 20% 7 day = 15% 1 day = 7%
3.0 Un-powered craft registrations (non-residential)
Annual = £30.50 31 days = £14.50 7 day = £8.25
Includes all un-powered tenders.
4.0 Un-powered residential craft (houseboats)
£7.75 per square metre (maximum craft length x maximum craft beam)
5.0 Commercial and Hire Craft
Commercial Powered craft:
Overall craft length less than 15m = £87.80 per metre length
Overall craft length exceeding 15m = £1317
Commercial un-powered craft charged at normal rates (section 3.0)
6.0 Discounts
For all powered craft less than 2.7m beam = 35% discount
Electric engine or less than 4 bhp = 25% discount
Tenders less than 5m length, named and linked to named mother vessel. One tender permitted per mother vessel = 50% discount
Sports club / Youth organisation powered craft = 50% discount
Sports club / Youth organisation un-powered craft = 75% discount
7.0 Dis-connected Waterway Discounts for annual registrations
Unconnected - Medway, Ancholme, Welland and Glen = 25% discount
Unconnected - Stour = 50% discount

 

[oldgit]

Re: A suggestion .

That was an interesting read.