Tender Words for the Environment Agency

[boatone]

If anyone from the EA lurks on here I would like to suggest that some common sense be applied to the situation regarding licensing requirements for tenders carried by licensed power craft or 'launches' as the EA quaintly continue to call them.
Current regs require a non powered dinghy to pay an annual feee of £19. Add a little outboard motor and full power craft rates apply eg a typical inflatable 2.5 x 1.5metres would be around £47.
Now, wouldnt it make sense to allow a registered power craft owner to add a 'Tender Endorsement' for say £10 flat rate or even allow use of one tender in conjunction with mother ship within main licence?
What does the panel think?

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boatsontheweb.com/> Website, Photo Gallery, Chat Room, Burgees</A>

 

[PGD]

with you on this one Tony fully support your stand point.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.mssa.org.uk>http://www.mssa.org.uk</A> Marine Service Standards Assistance

 

[byron]

Tony, I am surprised at you. After all your years of experience do you really think the E.A. to apply any rationale to their thinking? Remember these are the same people who drove lord knows how many boats off the river with the nonsense of the BSS and then claim they don't know why numbers of boat users are down. These are the same group that set an unneccessary speed limit based in Kilometers Per Hour instead of Knots then put original signs up that signified Knots. C'mon Tony mate... get real.

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[BarryH]

eh! waht you on about. Its not just a licence. You do go into things with your eyes closed. Wake up man, they also give you a big puncture patch as well. Self adhesive, peel off the backing and slapit on. Brilliant in emergencies.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[boatone]

Whilst reality dictates that, at our tender years, cynicism has become 'de rigeur', I still seem to harbour just a tad of that 'hope springs eternal in the human breast' attitude to life/forums/images/icons/laugh.gif.

Anyway, c'mon, you 'get real'. You know as well as I do that a £10 flat rate Tender Endorsement would probably increase their cash take!

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boatsontheweb.com/> Website, Photo Gallery, Chat Room, Burgees</A>

 

[JEG]

Do they charge for liferafts?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mike_kolling]

No

No, I still wouldnt license mine.

As long as it goes through the locks stored somewhere on the main boat, I am not buying one.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[boatone]

Only if you put them in the river and use them!

Interesting question....I wonder if one could just get a visitors licence for the day of use? /forums/images/icons/smile.gif


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boatsontheweb.com/> Website, Photo Gallery, Chat Room, Burgees</A>

 

[byron]

<font color=green>You know as well as I do that a £10 flat rate Tender Endorsement would probably increase their cash take</font color=green>

Aha! That is the very reason they wouldn't do it. (i) Because it is so easy (ii) Because it is so logical

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[ChrisP]

An interesting thought unfortunately not an original one. Many years ago in my lock tending days. Under the Thames Conservancy there was indeed a tender licence for craft registered as “Tender To XXXXX”. Such a licence was at a lower rate than that of a launch licence. Unfortunately as with all reasonable by-laws, this was flaunted by the few to the point where people weren’t bothering to licence at all, or we got 30 foot tenders to the Ark Royal etc. The management got the hump and abolished the tender registration.

Now as you so rightly point out, it’s an offence to go afloat in any kind of craft (including tree trunks and lilo’s) without a licence. We have only our wide-boy fore-fathers to thank for what is now a ridiculous situation.


ChrisP ;o(


<hr width=100% size=1>What do you mean the sea gull in front's walking !!!

 

[boatone]

Aaahhh, so there is a precedent.........OK then, lets have a concerted campaign for the return of common sense in the interests of the public purse (RCSITIPP), Peeps are much more intelligent these days and Learner could let the EA have a spreadsheet to keep track of the mother/baby craft relationships.
Saw a lockie politely checking whether a narrowboat owner had a Thames licence last weekend......'Yes, so Naff off ' or something similar was the charming response.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boatsontheweb.com/> Website, Photo Gallery, Chat Room, Burgees</A>

 

[duncan]

as long as the licence fee for stolen Plastimo's is in excess of 1000 p.a. I will support you........../forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[byron]

I think your first step is to drop a line to Eileen Mckyver {sp?} or John Redmond. When they reject the suggestion, then do a small piece for MBM & MBY. This can be followed up with letters to the various 'RUGs' that exist.

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[PGD]

BSS

You mention the BSS, true the EA did bring it in and many parts didn’t follow any form of logic, take petrol fuel pipe protected by steel braid – can’t have them, must have kitemarked rubber ones. But who was left to interpret the regulations? Who took the decision to approach this from a “lets fail boats” rather than a “how do we pass Boats” stand point?

Yours truly the Marine Workshop. Instead of trying to help the dear customer they decided to operate a licence to print money, fail as many boats as possible then charge too much money to make them comply.

So the EA handed it to the Marie industry on a silver platter and they said thank you.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.mssa.org.uk>http://www.mssa.org.uk</A> Marine Service Standards Assistance