While not wishing to dilute the delicate subject of changing the management of the Upper Thames over several threads.A personal observation is that, those who now actually pay something towards the upkeep of the navigation via the registration fee,should have a greater voice in steering the changes,as opposed to those who would appear to wish to avoid contributing through arcane arguments ?
The future of the Thames...........
- Thread starter oldgit
- Start date
Andrew_Fanner
New member
I like the cut of yer jib young feller!
I'd add in "those that contribute by virtue of their jobs" as well. Lots of expertise in that community.
I'd add in "those that contribute by virtue of their jobs" as well. Lots of expertise in that community.
Them that pay the piper call the tune
or
No representation without taxation ....err or something like that.
Andrew_Fanner
New member
boatone
Well-known member
Though these may be admirable sentiments, we all know it will not happen!
The many and varied groups of users all have different agendas and different needs. Those who simply enjoy walking by the river, for example, do not require moorings or working locks. Rowers would be very happy to see a decline in the mobo population etc.
The reason we boat-owners pay anything at all is primarily because we are easily identified, charged and controllable as a user group and also clearly benefit from most of the services provided. To that extent, we are calling the tune as it is our needs which probably place the greatest demand on services and, to some extent, decide what those services need to be.
It could be argued that we are lucky that central government effectively contributes more than 60% of the cost of maintaining and running the river, but lets not forget that millions of people benefit that do not contribute directly, ranging from summer visitors just enjoying a walk by the river to those whose water supplies are involved.
The real discussion needs to centre on not who should call the shots, but where additional revenue can be raised to compensate for any loss of central funding. At the moment it seems to be largely argument by people who think they shouldn't pay, rather than identifying those that could and should help with the burden.
The many and varied groups of users all have different agendas and different needs. Those who simply enjoy walking by the river, for example, do not require moorings or working locks. Rowers would be very happy to see a decline in the mobo population etc.
The reason we boat-owners pay anything at all is primarily because we are easily identified, charged and controllable as a user group and also clearly benefit from most of the services provided. To that extent, we are calling the tune as it is our needs which probably place the greatest demand on services and, to some extent, decide what those services need to be.
It could be argued that we are lucky that central government effectively contributes more than 60% of the cost of maintaining and running the river, but lets not forget that millions of people benefit that do not contribute directly, ranging from summer visitors just enjoying a walk by the river to those whose water supplies are involved.
The real discussion needs to centre on not who should call the shots, but where additional revenue can be raised to compensate for any loss of central funding. At the moment it seems to be largely argument by people who think they shouldn't pay, rather than identifying those that could and should help with the burden.
Last edited:
Sticking my oar in (pun intended), I wonder how many unlicensed boats use the Thames on a nice summers day. Judging by the amount of obviously unlicensed boats flocking to our village slipway and the one at Cholsey on a nice day it must be dozens when multiplied along the length of the Thames. Of course being the longest stretch of the river we probably get more than our fair share.
boatone
Well-known member
I think, in line with The Big Society, we could appoint Byron the first honorary unpaid warden of the bank-sides of South Stoke and Cholsey - what say you ?
Andrew_Fanner
New member
Seconded.
I aso suggest a spiffy uniform, some form of blazer with brass buttons and a decent peaked hat with a white top?
H,mm wondered just how much spaggetti will be on that hat.
Perhaps we could buy an old cinema commisionaires uniform off Ebay.
Just felt tip out "The Ritz" and way we go
boatone
Well-known member
s'pose we could always call this fella in ?
No Regrets
Active member
- Joined
- 9 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 8,331
No trousers, just a Blazer with brass buttons and a decent peaked hat with a white top......
I have my uniform cap with the spaghetti removed. It was specially bought in the States and is great (Nazi Style) . However if I am going to be challenging Yobos on slipways they will not see it anyway as my challenge will be issued from behind a wall of heavy set security personnel, they'll just hear my voice saying "this is Tony off the boat Legacy, have you got a license?"
boatone
Well-known member
Guess you won't be wearing the hat at all, then, 'cos can't see you paying for 'minders' and the EA won't consider it priority expenditure!
Andrew_Fanner
New member
"You are surrounded by armed boaters, lay doen your arms and surrender"