Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:12:30 GMT
That's another minor annoyance. They say "Oh sorry, don't worry about it, it's not important" and you're left thinking that if it's not important, why cause me the grief in the first place! And breath Rog
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 30, 2017 17:20:18 GMT
What sort of ice thickness would you call "impossible to navigate?" I'd put my limit at any ice at all. The thinnest will still make a hell of a racket and possibly cause damage. Yes, you can force your way through it, but it is just plain silly to expect leisure boaters to be on the move through ice. Slightly thicker than the thinnest will make your boat veer off from the straight, endangering other boats and their occupants. CRT insist on the BSS and insist they are concerned about safety; having you bash into other boats and canal structures is reckless. I have been told (no personal experience) that it is the thin ice that does the most damage to wooden and GRP hulls. where thick ice might make more noise and "bang" more it's the thin stuff that cuts in like a knife blade.
|
|
|
Post by Delta9 on Jan 30, 2017 17:28:48 GMT
We had a similar notice last year, saying our boat had been spotted in the same place for 'too long' and to contact CRT. The marina office said that if only the CRT-spy had asked them, they could have told him that we were 'one of theirs' (paying rent for a parking spot), but gathering the facts seems like too much trouble for some. Guilty before proven innocent. They don't care that you are paying for the mooring, or that the mooring is not under their control, they still count it as overstaying. My friend left his boat inside a marina for a few months whilst he went away and still got a letter. Apparently he was supposed to call them and tell them he had got a home mooring, then call again on his return to let them know he was back to CCing. I have no idea what purpose this is supposed to serve.,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:33:19 GMT
I was told that it has been known for steel or possibly iron hulled boats to be sunk by ice. The story was about a tug on the Thames which was navigating through ice and was holed. Not sure if its a true story but I suppose if it was nackered and very thin its possible.
The possibility of holing a grp or wooden boat raises questions about whether these boats should be moored on a navigable waterway during winter. If they are at risk then they have an effect on other peoples' choices about whether to navigate in ice.
Another thing I was once told is if you do have a GRP or wooden boat on the cut its worth having some scaffold boards to float alongside in case of ice as they provide a buffer of sorts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:42:48 GMT
What pisses me off is that we are almost 5 years into CRT now, yet they are still making the same mistakes over and over again, and have been since the outset. It's ridiculous, and frankly, in my view just shows an incompetent and failing management team. This today was just silly, and so uneccesary. The fact that a number checker didn't notice the ice 500 metres either side of a vessel, and then had brain failure over the circumstances he was looking at is unacceptable.
It's really time for the trustees to take a good look at where the trust is presently, and evaluate the direction of going forward.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jan 30, 2017 17:48:41 GMT
What pisses me off is that we are almost 5 years into CRT now, yet they are still making the same mistakes over and over again, and have been since the outset. It's ridiculous, and frankly, in my view just shows an incompetent and failing management team. This today was just silly, and so uneccesary. The fact that a number checker didn't notice the ice 500 metres either side of a vessel, and then had brain failure over the circumstances he was looking at is unacceptable. It's really time for the trustees to take a good look at where the trust is presently, and evaluate the direction of going forward. Erhaps a more succinct reply along the lines of "fuck off you're wrong" and put the ball back into their court without immediately showing your hand.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:48:41 GMT
I always assumed the CRT thing was designed to fail in order to privatise but I know nothing about it and probably got that totally wrong anyway. I suppose there is no money in it or maybe there is if the shares are cheap enough.
There does seem to be a lot of discontent generally about the present arrangement. Maybe a consortium of marina owners should make an approach to CRT with a view to taking over management of some parts of the system. For areas busy with residential vessels it seems to me that local authorities should be running it but I doubt they would want to touch it with the proverbial large pole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:51:53 GMT
What pisses me off is that we are almost 5 years into CRT now, yet they are still making the same mistakes over and over again, and have been since the outset. It's ridiculous, and frankly, in my view just shows an incompetent and failing management team. This today was just silly, and so uneccesary. The fact that a number checker didn't notice the ice 500 metres either side of a vessel, and then had brain failure over the circumstances he was looking at is unacceptable. It's really time for the trustees to take a good look at where the trust is presently, and evaluate the direction of going forward. Erhaps a more succinct reply along the lines of "fuck off you're wrong" and put the ball back into their court without immediately showing your hand. Luckily, it was not Debbie figgy who contacted me. That would have seen a completely different response from me, probably going along with your suggestion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 17:53:34 GMT
I always assumed the CRT thing was designed to fail in order to privatise I am fast coming to the conclusion you may have a valid point.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jan 30, 2017 17:54:26 GMT
CRT don't receive missives from the general public along the lines of "I saw some pretty boats today, keep up the good work".
The get the type "stop that twat filling my flat with smoke".
From boaters they don't get "what lovely canals you maintain, keep up the good work"
They get "the locks broken, the canal needs dredging"
So, however you look at it boaters are a nuisance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 18:02:33 GMT
I always assumed the CRT thing was designed to fail in order to privatise but I know nothing about it and probably got that totally wrong anyway. I suppose there is no money in it or maybe there is if the shares are cheap enough. There does seem to be a lot of discontent generally about the present arrangement. Maybe a consortium of marina owners should make an approach to CRT with a view to taking over management of some parts of the system. For areas busy with residential vessels it seems to me that local authorities should be running it but I doubt they would want to touch it with the proverbial large pole. Over the last four years CRT has spent considerably less than it collected. (According to their own accounts submitted to the Charity commission.) This amount now stands at £54.6 million. So don't go thinking they are skint, it's just not the case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 18:05:22 GMT
What pisses me off is that we are almost 5 years into CRT now, yet they are still making the same mistakes over and over again, and have been since the outset. It's ridiculous, and frankly, in my view just shows an incompetent and failing management team. This today was just silly, and so uneccesary. The fact that a number checker didn't notice the ice 500 metres either side of a vessel, and then had brain failure over the circumstances he was looking at is unacceptable. It's really time for the trustees to take a good look at where the trust is presently, and evaluate the direction of going forward. Despite what CRT said in the letter to you, they are creating undue pressure and stress on boaters to move in dangerous conditions by being 'over enthusiastic' with enforcemnt. It's completely pointless in the winter and makes you think that pressure is designed to force us to get winter moorings. I was talking to a well known supplies boat operator on the GU Saturday who told me they ended up with 2 holes in the boat last year trying to braak ice. It does put stress on flaky boats as you go past too. Maybe boaters need to start co-ordinating this information now just in case this gets worse and crowd funded action is initiated. Out of curiosity, how long were you moored there in total?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 18:12:32 GMT
What pisses me off is that we are almost 5 years into CRT now, yet they are still making the same mistakes over and over again, and have been since the outset. It's ridiculous, and frankly, in my view just shows an incompetent and failing management team. This today was just silly, and so uneccesary. The fact that a number checker didn't notice the ice 500 metres either side of a vessel, and then had brain failure over the circumstances he was looking at is unacceptable. It's really time for the trustees to take a good look at where the trust is presently, and evaluate the direction of going forward. Despite what CRT said in the letter to you, they are creating undue pressure and stress on boaters to move in dangerous conditions by being 'over enthusiastic' with enforcemnt. It's completely pointless in the winter and makes you think that pressure is designed to force us to get winter moorings. I was talking to a well known supplies boat operator on the GU Saturday who told me they ended up with 2 holes in the boat last year trying to braak ice. It does put stress on flaky boats as you go past too. Maybe boaters need to start co-ordinating this information now just in case this gets worse and crowd funded action is initiated. Out of curiosity, how long were you moored there in total? We did overstay. We had been there for 20 days, of which 9 of those days we were iced in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 18:21:47 GMT
I really don't think it's a concerted effort or plan to get boaters to take moorings or anything else.
I think it's incompetence, coupled with loss of canalside staff (lock keepers, lengthsmen, maintenance workers) and any knowledge of how the canals work.
If you can talk personally with staff, they're fine.
The trouble is, increasingly they're all in offices and have no comprehension of where you are on the system let alone anything else.
Rog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2017 18:34:28 GMT
Despite what CRT said in the letter to you, they are creating undue pressure and stress on boaters to move in dangerous conditions by being 'over enthusiastic' with enforcemnt. It's completely pointless in the winter and makes you think that pressure is designed to force us to get winter moorings. I was talking to a well known supplies boat operator on the GU Saturday who told me they ended up with 2 holes in the boat last year trying to braak ice. It does put stress on flaky boats as you go past too. Maybe boaters need to start co-ordinating this information now just in case this gets worse and crowd funded action is initiated. Out of curiosity, how long were you moored there in total? We did overstay. We had been there for 20 days, of which 9 of those days we were iced in. That's hardly excessive and you have a good reason for overstaying. What I'm worried about is that certain people are being targeted. All they need to do before sending out that letter is look at your cruising pattern for the last year. I know you explore much further than many other 'CC'ers'. Maybe they are being a bit tougher on those inside the M25 border.
|
|