|
Post by Jim on Jul 14, 2017 10:24:31 GMT
jenlyn's mummy lkes this. Are you sure he has one? It appears not! But then neither do I, but the thought of what she might say makes me try to restrain my sharp and nasty tongue, or typing finger.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 15:50:34 GMT
Looks like CRT are again looking to rid the waterways of boats, by limiting mooring availability.
Copy and paste from Hackney citizen;
"Proposals to stop canal boats mooring in narrow parts of the River Lea used by rowers have hit a wave of criticism.
The Canal and River Trust (CRT) says its plans, which would see boats barred from parking up in sections of the river less than 60 feet or 18 metres wide, will “improve navigation” for rowers.
CRT mooring ranger Alexander Gudmestad said: “The idea is to ease congestion so that the rowers can use the river with reduced risk. Most of the proposed changes are what we at the Trust deem as navigational improvements on this part of the river.”
He said the Trust had “concluded that the width of navigation needed for boats and rowers to pass each other without risk is 18 metres”.
The areas mentioned in the CRT’s proposal include sections of a stretch of water, between Old Ford Lock in Hackney Wick and Tottenham Hale Lock, used by Lea Rowing Club (LRC).
In an email, seen by the Citizen, to Marcus Trower of the National Bargee Travellers Association (NBTA), LRC’s general manager Stephen Mitchelson states: “The point of rowing is to win races and therefore to go as fast as possible. Slowing down or stopping interferes with training programmes.
“Ideally we would like to be able to continue training without having to stop every few minutes.”
Mitchelson, who lives by the river, says there are more than 350 regularly moored boats on the stretch covered by CRT’s proposals, up from around 30 just five or six years ago. He added: “The number of collisions and near misses is substantially on the rise. I have experienced it first-hand as a rower and a coach.
“Sooner or later there will be a serious accident. Think a large truck hitting a small cyclist but with the added hazard of drowning.”
Mitchelson revealed a 75-year-old club member, who has been rowing most of his life, was taken to hospital recently with broken ribs after colliding with a boat. He is now back on the river.
Dr Ben Bowles, a research assistant at London School of Economics, said: “In light of claims made by LRC, myself and two assistants undertook a pilot study to ascertain if the club’s estimation of boat traffic on the stretch of the River Lea downstream of the club’s location at Springfield was accurate.
“Boats were counted at a location on the proposed stretch over four summer days. When these four days of observation are averaged, there are 20.25 boats per day, or an average of 1.125 boats per hour.
“It is clear that boat traffic is infrequent on this stretch when described using any reasonable measure.”
But Mitchelson said Bowles has “missed the point”, adding: “We are referring to the change in the number of moored boats which has increased from 35 to 350 in the last five or six years, not to moving traffic.
“We hope the mooring proposals will allow rowers and boaters to pass safely past one another. All we are looking for is a shift in mooring at a few pinch points so we can share the river with the barges, as we have done for 150 years, be safe and train effectively.
“We are really keen to have a shared understanding of the issues and have offered to meet Marcus from NBTA a number of times to talk. The offer still stands.”
Commenting on CRT’s proposal, NBTA spokesperson Graham Ryder said: “It goes too far. Parts of the River Lea are not even 60ft and demanding this much is unrealistic. It is a policy which only serves to evict people, and waterways are for everyone.”
Helen Delmar, who lives on her boat and travels up and down the River Lea, said of the plans: “Taking up 60 feet of the canal doesn’t sound like sharing to me, it sounds like rowers getting priority over those living here, be that boaters.
“Let’s dispel this myth that the CRT proposal will be for the benefit of sharing – it is a river grab and would leave beautiful stretches of the river inaccessible to boat dwellers wishing to moor up. It’s completely unacceptable and I won’t stand for it.”
Gudmestad went on to say: “The overall aim of the proposal is to ensure that the river is navigable for boaters and rowers, reducing near misses and improving navigation on some of our busiest stretches.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:47:52 GMT
Ouch !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:54:29 GMT
Funny how CRT are bothered about a twat rower colliding with a steel canal boat (minimal injury potential) but don't give a remote shit about a twat cyclist hitting a child on the towpath (hospitalisation potential).
What the hell is going on with all this fast moving shit anyway it is a canal for fucks sake. If rowers need more space get some damn lottery funding and build a reservoir.
Tossers.
I enjoyed Henley Regatta but its a big river up there. Some of these rowers seem to come from a particular wanker species with some sort of entitlement issue. Nobody needs to climb into a 1ft wide boat with 12ft long oars and take up 30ft on a small river. Its just dickhead behaviour. I like seeing different boats about but for rowers to have priority over moored boats on a canal navigation makes me want to throw hand grenades at them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:02:01 GMT
It really hacks me off that the dozey twats row backwards, and have no idea where they are going.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:20:15 GMT
I have seen one or two with mirrors but due to lineage and hereditary issues, which I don't really think it is appropriate to discuss further, some of these twat rowers have severe intelligence deficiencies.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 14, 2017 17:36:02 GMT
Funny how CRT are bothered about a twat rower colliding with a steel canal boat (minimal injury potential) but don't give a remote shit about a twat cyclist hitting a child on the towpath (hospitalisation potential). What the hell is going on with all this fast moving shit anyway it is a canal for fucks sake. If rowers need more space get some damn lottery funding and build a reservoir. Tossers. I enjoyed Henley Regatta but its a big river up there. Some of these rowers seem to come from a particular wanker species with some sort of entitlement issue. Nobody needs to climb into a 1ft wide boat with 12ft long oars and take up 30ft on a small river. Its just dickhead behaviour. I like seeing different boats about but for rowers to have priority over moored boats on a canal navigation makes me want to throw hand grenades at them. No, it's a canalised river! hmmm, so priority is being given to boaters who want to use the canals and rivers for navigating. People who want to use the canals and rivers to plonk their residences on are getting a lower priority. Outrageous! What ever next!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:42:08 GMT
I have seen one or two with mirrors but due to lineage and hereditary issues, which I don't really think it is appropriate to discuss further, some of these twat rowers have severe intelligence deficiencies. I've been caught out by rowers a couple of times on bends. They are just not visible under my bows.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:44:22 GMT
Telemachus I know its technically a canalised river But it is in fact a canal in most of the area mentioned, which is why I used the term canal navigation. It is a man made canal between Old Ford Locks and Springfield Park. Its river fed but not a river.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:47:50 GMT
Funny how CRT are bothered about a twat rower colliding with a steel canal boat (minimal injury potential) but don't give a remote shit about a twat cyclist hitting a child on the towpath (hospitalisation potential). What the hell is going on with all this fast moving shit anyway it is a canal for fucks sake. If rowers need more space get some damn lottery funding and build a reservoir. Tossers. I enjoyed Henley Regatta but its a big river up there. Some of these rowers seem to come from a particular wanker species with some sort of entitlement issue. Nobody needs to climb into a 1ft wide boat with 12ft long oars and take up 30ft on a small river. Its just dickhead behaviour. I like seeing different boats about but for rowers to have priority over moored boats on a canal navigation makes me want to throw hand grenades at them. No, it's a canalised river! hmmm, so priority is being given to boaters who want to use the canals and rivers for navigating. People who want to use the canals and rivers to plonk their residences on are getting a lower priority. Outrageous! What ever next! The suggestion appeared to be that no mooring would be allowed, on a canal, because rowers are using it. I saw no information indicating any discrimination between floating residences and people out on a cruise.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 14, 2017 17:50:25 GMT
No, it's a canalised river! hmmm, so priority is being given to boaters who want to use the canals and rivers for navigating. People who want to use the canals and rivers to plonk their residences on are getting a lower priority. Outrageous! What ever next! The suggestion appeared to be that no mooring would be allowed, on a canal, because rowers are using it. I saw no information indicating any discrimination between floating residences and people out on a cruise. Well my point really is that it's wrong to disparage rowers. They are boaters after all, and far more skilled at going backwards very fast than you are! I would imagine that a very large proportion of the boats moored in that area are live-aboard. Am I wrong?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 17:52:44 GMT
You are correct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 18:05:02 GMT
Telemachus I know its technically a canalised river But it is in fact a canal in most of the area mentioned, which is why I used the term canal navigation. It is a man made canal between Old Ford Locks and Springfield Park. Its river fed but not a river. If they come hurtling down through there backwards, in belief there will be no boats, an accident will soon be in the making. The liveaboard boats that have made the area a bit more towpath friendly should be congratulated. Many areas between Camden and Tottenham lock were completely wild until liveaboards started to use it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 18:10:33 GMT
Rowers and Cyclists are the same breed, holier than thou attitude.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jul 14, 2017 18:31:02 GMT
Rowers and Cyclists are the same breed, holier than thou attitude. Well that's as may be, but IMO cyclists don't really have any natural "claim" on the towpath, but rowers do have a natural "claim" on the waterways just as much as you or I do.
|
|