|
11 Mar 15 - 06:39 AM (#3693013) Subject: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Richard Bridge Disgraceful. Until the change of law these are NOT "illegally moored boats". The change of law is more rule by the posh for the posh. http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/local/11802346.Riverside_protected_by_bylaws_on_illegally_moored_boats/ |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:27 AM (#3693040) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Bee-dubya-ell The article states,"...it will be a criminal offence to moor on council-owned or managed land." I never cease to be amazed at the differences between US and UK legal thinking on some issues. In the US, navigable waterways belong to everyone. The fact that a waterway runs through a property doesn't give the property owner any rights over it. Property rights end at the water's edge. With the exception of some restricted areas around military installations and the like, it's legal to moor a boat anywhere as long it is not a hazard to navigation. Having said that, it's quite possible that in a similar situation, boats moored on a US waterway might be evicted under claim of their posing a hazard to navigation, that being a rather broad concept. But no local governing body could ever pass an ordinance banning mooring just because the boats aren't as pretty as they'd like. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:36 AM (#3693042) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome Property rights end at the water's edge. Yes, Bee, but to moor a boat as referred to here means to fasten the boat to the bank by means of a rope. How can you tether the boat or get on and off it to, for instance, empty the chemical toilet, without going beyond the water's edge? Not justifying one or the other side of this argument. I just think you have got the wrong end of the stick here. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:36 AM (#3693043) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Greg F. With the exception of some restricted areas around military installations and the like, it's legal to moor a boat anywhere.. Not quite, B- if the boat is tethered to the shore(moored) on private property, that's trespassing. As you say: Property rights end at the water's edge. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:44 AM (#3693045) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Richard Bridge Trespass, in general, is not a crime. It is a tort. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:47 AM (#3693047) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Greg F. In the UK, Richard. In the U.S. it can be a violation, a misdemeanor or a felony, depending upon the circumatances involved. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 08:51 AM (#3693048) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: EBarnacle As one who was a liveaboard in the '80's, we fought this fight against both the City of New York and the Coast Guard and won. The battle was both for those who anchored out and lived in marinas. Unfortunately, in Blighty, I suspect you are looking at a precedent going back to the enclosures, when people were kicked off the land, so it will be harder to fight. That does not mean that the fight should not be fought. Start with "We have been living here for X years without disturbance. As such, we have precedent/squatter's rights." There must be an MP who would champion you. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 09:05 AM (#3693049) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Greg F. As one who was a liveaboard in the '80's, we fought this fight against both the City of New York and the Coast Guard and won. That's maritime, B- fresh water is a different story, I believe. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 09:16 AM (#3693053) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Bee-dubya-ell Sorry, I interpreted "mooring" to mean tied to a permanently anchored mooring buoy, not tied to a structure or anything else on land. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 09:19 AM (#3693054) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome There must be an MP who would champion you. Not unless he could somehow line his pockets in the process :-( |
|
11 Mar 15 - 12:27 PM (#3693106) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: EBarnacle Perhaps, Greg. Even so, several of the marinas in question belonged to the city and were in city parks, including Dykeman Street and 79th Street on the Hudson. That's brackish water, not salt or fresh. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 01:05 PM (#3693113) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Greg F. I think we're talking at cross-purposes, EB. The East River & Hudson River (until at least upstream of where it is tidal, and perhaps as far as the Port of Albany), fall under maritime law. Bodies of fresh water, stream, river, or lake, mostly do not. Now, what the definitions & regulations are in the U.K., i don't have a clue. Best, Greg - |
|
11 Mar 15 - 01:50 PM (#3693130) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Mr Red There is a distinction between boats where people live on them and stay indefinitely. They are using community resources, without participating in the funding of the resources. And visitors, who are largely welcomed in a lot of towns. But in the dormatory town for stinking rich London this is not a wanted intrusion. Regardles of your opinion, you have to look to the facts. These are some pertinent ones. On the Kennet & Avon in Bath there is a big issue with permanently moored boats who don't pay live-on licences that fund the maintenance of the canal. The clutter of motor scooters and such on the towpath is only a bit of a mess, but it ain't a manucured tourist attraction. And I have to say their boat names lack imagination. I collect amusing names (aka puns) - if I ever have a boat it will be called..... Titan Nick. I'll get my sou'wester. |
|
11 Mar 15 - 05:03 PM (#3693177) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Richard Bridge These boaties have not been liable to various sorts of rates - but have offered voluntarily to pay them, and there is no option to pay for a live-on licence. This is purely and simply nimbyism - spearheaded by the loathsome Zac Goldsmith. |
|
12 Mar 15 - 01:42 AM (#3693236) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST It is indeed Nibyism as evidenced by the quote: Councillor Pamela Fleming, cabinet member for environment, said: "Some of these boats cause a great deal of distress for people living in and visiting the borough. "We hope that we will soon see the end of these boats mooring with no permission along our beautiful stretch of the Thames. Crumbs, "distress", that sounds serious! I'd really like to know how these boats are causing "a great deal of distress"? Ah, here's the clue, these people see it as "OUR" private bit of Thames rather than publicly owned land that is "everyone's" bit of Thames, and the people who live there in houses don't like sharing "their" river, with those people who also live there in boats. I suspect it must indeed be distressing for some of the people who live there, to have to witness other - poorer - people (who also live there, though you wouldn't guess that from the exclusionary language), living near to where they take their dogs for their morning crap. |
|
12 Mar 15 - 02:28 AM (#3693242) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Musket I pay mooring fees (and licence fees) for my narrowboat. In return, The Canal and River Trust maintain the canals and rivers under their jurisdiction including lots of refurbishment of locks and towpaths. Sounds sensible to me. Mind you, I rarely see the thing and my family use it far more than I do. I had a ten year fascination but hardly use it now. The dog doesn't get on with it. |
|
12 Mar 15 - 04:22 AM (#3693257) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Thompson Mr Red, if you read the excellent comments under the article, people who live on these boats are saying that they do pay council tax, and work. This sounds to me like the kind of snobby local council politics JK Rowling satirised in A Casual Vacancy. |
|
12 Mar 15 - 02:23 PM (#3693394) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: bubblyrat Strictly speaking,and in a purely nautical and seamanlike sense, none of the vessels in question are "moored" . They can be said to be "tied up" or "secured alongside" or " lying alongside" , that is to say secured fore and aft by means of ropes or cables. A "mooring" ,on the other hand ,usually constitutes a buoy to which a vessel can be secured,from ,generally and ideally , the bow ,by means of a "bridle" or cable led through the hawse-pipe.Such buoys are usually two or three -span, in that there are two or three chains ,attached to various types of anchor ( ie "mushroom " anchors or "Single Fluke " anchors,depending on the sea-bed ( rocky,sandy muddy etc ) .At the point where the mooring chains meet,there is a swivel (to allow the vessel to change direction with the tide) from which ascends a single "Riser" which is itself attached to the mooring buoy. I have helped to lift (and lay ) comparatively small (for yachts) "moorings ", mainly three-span ,in Poole Harbour whilst employed by Parkstone Yacht Club and the Royal Motor Yacht Club , and it is FUCKING HARD WORK !!! (nautically speaking,of course ). |
|
12 Mar 15 - 02:44 PM (#3693399) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Musket You moor on canals and rivers, The word "nautical" is something to do with the sea, which has fuck all to do with this thread... You don't need buoys on canals and rarely on non tidal rivers 😴 |
|
12 Mar 15 - 03:00 PM (#3693403) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST so what do you call it when you're sat in the bath with a toy boat tethered to your bell end ? |
|
12 Mar 15 - 03:18 PM (#3693407) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,van Kinky? |
|
12 Mar 15 - 03:57 PM (#3693415) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Musket Make sure its a slip knot just in case... |
|
13 Mar 15 - 05:11 AM (#3693523) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Mr Red but have offered voluntarily to pay them, and there is no option to pay for a live-on licence the Canal & Rivers Trust have decided that there is a disticntion between live-on and moored boats that only get lived on for touring. That's what it said in "Towpath", the august respected broadsheet. With respect to K&A in Bath. Free at any chandlers or canal visitor centre. On the Gloucester & Sharpness there are local by-laws that cleary state that you cannot stay more than 2 weeks in the parish. Seasonal workers/volunteers do move parishes to comply with that. It is clearly not academic. Nimby or no. And all boats on canals are liable to the terms and conditions. By putting a boat on a canl you are subject to them. Now what is the legal distinction that says they can't levy what charges they deem appropriate? In my young days they had signs on the towpath that clearly stated that riding bikes was against their rules. It did not necessarilly stop cyclist of all ages but it obviously dated from days when horse drawn butties were common. They were not unknown when I was young, and in the 70's Caggy Jones was still using Joe to tow. |
|
13 Mar 15 - 05:46 AM (#3693532) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Musket You can cruise the waterways without a mooring licence, (but you do need a boat licence) for up to two weeks before moving from any visiting morning or other place where stopping is allowed. Residential mooring permits give you a set place with CRT. I have a nice mooring at Yelvertoft, on the Leicester arm of the Grand Union Canal. I am not resident though, and there is no necessity to be resident. it is the boat that is resident, not necessarily the owner. |
|
13 Mar 15 - 07:24 AM (#3693561) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Leadfingers Only ONE HOUR stay ?? For God's sake , if you are touring by boat that gives you NO chance to shop , see the sights or ANYTHING . I can appreciate that No One should be free to 'park' their boat anywhere for LONG periods , but the new local ruling ids to say the least somewhat draconian . Any where else , a 24 hour stop over is NOT a problem , so what Richmond is doing is a plain example of Nimbyism . |
|
13 Mar 15 - 04:34 PM (#3693727) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Fossil There has been a lot about this matter on the Thames boating forum. http://www.ybw.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?66-The-Thames-Forum For those not in the UK, Richmond is one of the prettiest and most expensive housing areas in one of the most expensive cities on earth. Hence the landowners whose banks front the Thames - the creme de la creme of expensive properties in Richmond - very jealously guard their river frontages. Legal moorings are few and far between and command high prices. There are extensive stretches of the riverbanks which are owned by the local authorities and it is these areas which have been colonised by a number of permanently moored residential "boats", mostly converted barges, not capable of independent travel and owned, it would seem by some very dodgy figures who act as landlords. Cabins are let on a short-term cash basis. Conditions aboard are apparently rather primitive. These are not your cosy traditional narrowboats, with coal fires and painted kettles. More like steel tanks divided up with plywood partitions to make small cubicles just large enough for a bed. The inhabitants of the craft seem to be a wide range of people, ranging from those who genuinely can't find anywhere else to live in Richmond due to the high prices, together with others who live the opt-out lifestyle from choice. Needless to say, the owners of the craft do not pay rates or contribute in any way to the local economy. The general lack of sanitation, rubbish and general anti-social behaviour of some (by no means all, but some) of the boat people led to a large number of complaints to the local council, which previously didn't have any power to control the moorings. Hence the bye-law. That's the situation, really. Personally, I don't live in Richmond, or indeed in London, or the UK (although I used to) and have no axe to grind in this. But some posters here seem to be viewing the situation as being the nasty fascist council versus innocent boaties. Its not quite as simple as that, however. |
|
14 Mar 15 - 01:18 AM (#3693803) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,HiLo I dislike the word "nimby".It tends to characterize certain groups as being selfis or, god forbid, posh, when quite often they have legitimate concerns. |
|
14 Mar 15 - 08:57 PM (#3694097) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: EBarnacle Yes, they often have legitimate concerns. In many cases, they are like the people who move to the country and then object to the sounds and smells of the pre-existing farms. They seem to see life as wrapped in sterilized plastic which will allow them to live their image without intruding on them. Very often the communities or other entities, if not the individuals, were there first. |
|
15 Mar 15 - 10:21 AM (#3694199) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Greg F. In many cases, they are like the people who move to the country and then object to the sounds and smells of the pre-existing farms. And, in many other cases, they are like people who have been living in a place for generations and then some jackass decides to establish a pig farm, a tip, or a rolling mill next door. |
|
16 Mar 15 - 12:00 AM (#3694340) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,ollaimh decades ago I lived on a river boat moored near battersea bridge. I wonder about their legal status. we didn't obey most of the local rules. but did have water and electricity--at an unbelievably cheap rate. recently I was in London. the boats are still there and twice as many. the lorien and the 219 (I lived on both at different times) were still there, and much better maintained. now they have a security guard. I walked by and asked him several questions, about whether people in knew still owned boats. he never said a word, not a word. a real basil fawlty(kinda like prick bridges). they appear to have legal use of the moorage spots. chaynne walk on the other hand was run down and near demolition. they are probably going to tear down most of the nice old buildings and build a condo village. it's pretty near downtown nowadays. |
|
16 Mar 15 - 03:22 AM (#3694358) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: GUEST,DaveRo A year ago The Guardian did a piece about these these 'houseboats': My life in London's houseboat slums Not Richmond, I think, but similar vessels. The thread about this that Fossil refers to is here: Illegal-mooring-in-Richmond-Upon-Thames-new-bylaw |
|
16 Mar 15 - 04:23 AM (#3694364) Subject: RE: BS: Nimbies change law to evict boaties From: Richard Bridge Those who assert that the boaties are "won't pay"-ers who shit in the river ought to do a bit of checking. I repeat, they assert that they HAVE offered to pay rates and other proper local dues. They assert that they DO use proper disposal methods. The local council has NOT offered ANY sort of paying option, and has changed the law to remove the poor. "Go, move, shift". |