Re: Continuous cruising (corrected)
- From: essjay001@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 14 Jul 2005 16:11:27 -0700
Angela
You should know by now that when ever a topic starts with the words
'Continuous Cruisers' the chances are that the poster is against
CCer's.
The Marina Moorer in the main fails to understand the philosophy or the
history behind the practise. BW came about through an act of
parliament. They were charged with the maintenance of the system and
the levying of charges on those who use the system. Sometime ago back
in the ninties (I think) due to the demand by people who wanted to
retire and CC the system the 'law' had to be changed to allow that to
happen. From that time on a CCer was not required to have a permanant
mooring on the proviso that he kept moving. Genuine CCer's do this.
Not for you Angela, but those who need to understand, it is simple. A
CCer with a 60ft NB pays exactly the same licence fee as a MMer with a
60ft NB. For their licence fee both have exactly the same access to the
system as each other. There is no imbalance. At this point all is fair.
The MMer, who because of his circumstances cannot cruise the system all
the time, has to pay for the Marina mooring that he needs to park his
boat when he is working. The MMer perceives that the CCer is getting
something for nothing. This is clearly not the case. The MMer has
chosen to buy a boat which he cannot fully utilise. This can only be
described as a folly or bad decision.
The CCer, either because he has made some good choices in his life or
has been lucky, is able to take full advantage of his licence.
Probably all boaters would be CCer's if they had the opportunity.
Methinks there is a lot of jealousy among MMer's. The reason BW are
looking to hike licence fees for CCer's is because MMer's are voicing
their ill-conceived thoughts louder than the few Genuine CCer's.
Put the boot on the other foot and righteous indignation would emanate
from the CCer's but rightly so. Let me explain.
Assume that all boaters pay the same fee, but some, who because of
their commitments need a marina mooring, get this mooring for free. The
CCer's would be right to complain and expect a reduction in their fees.
MMer's would be saying that CCer's are just jealous.
It is not our fault that MMer's made bad decisions. It is neither right
nor fair that CCer's should pay more for their licence than MMer's. It
is however right that a MMer should pay for his 'off the cut'parking.
No one forced him to buy a boat that he cannot fully utilise.
Boating must be divided two ways. First there is the actual boating for
which everyone pays their licence fee. Secondly there is the 'Boat
Parking' issue. This has nothing to do with boating it is merely
something that some boaters need because they cannot commit to being on
the water all the time. Take away the mooring fee and the CCer argument
will go away. I know that it is not possible to remove the marina fee,
but at the end of the day the marina fee is the problem.
BW is simply not in a position to provide all boaters with a marina
mooring even if the boaters wanted them.
BW ask CCer's to sign to the effect that they will be cruising the
system continuously. In the same way BW should ask MMer's to sign to
the effect that if they don't continuously cruise the system there will
be extra charges if they use a marina. This would go some way towards
to illiminating the problem in that they knew there would be marina
charges so they can't complain.
The Genuine CCer is an unusual animal. He choses to do without all the
trappings of the marina, mainly because he doesn't need them. It is
stupid to ask a GCCer to pay for something he doesn't need. More stupid
is to say that he should pay a business licence as a private owner.
Business boaters pay business licences because they are businesses.
Private owners pay for private licences because they are private
owners.
CCer's tend not to 'do' the ring in a week at breakneck speed and as
such do not do the same damage to the cut as holiday boaters or MMer's
who have a limited time to get round. CCer's take life at the leisurely
pace that all boaters should do. A CCer is more likely to stay as long
as it takes to help someone in trouble than someone who "can't stop I
only have a week". CCer's are more likely to be the ones to report
faults and problems on the cut simply because they are there.CCer's are
an integral part of the canal system and probably give more to the
system than others because they have the time. I know there are those
that will have an anecdote about CCer's who do nothing but in the main
Genuine CCer's are needed, they are an unofficial workforce who want
the best for the canals and put in a lot of their own free time. If BW
insist that CCer's pay the rumoured massive hike in their fees I
wouldn't be surprised if the CCer sits back when there is a tree in the
water and waits for the 'cavalry' to arrive to clear it instead of
helping.
The Genuine Continuous Cruiser should not be targeted in such a manner
just because others are really, just jealous.
There are boaters that have CC licences that use them to avoid certain
costs. Please remember that as soon as a CCer overstays his welcome he
ceases to be a CCer. He becomes a fraudster (for those of you that
don't know fraud is a criminal offence). It does no good to call these
parasites CCer's and it is to BW's detriment that they do so.
Almost certainly there will be a hike in licence fees for CCer's, many
will be priced off the water. That will be a sad day for boating.
People like Motor and Victor often make statements that are at best
plucked out of thin air at worst the rantings of loony's. They are a
blight on the boating fraternity and should be given a wide berth. They
are born out of jealousy and will only result in the canals becoming
less than they are.
When the fees hike comes, and it will, what will these people do then.
Simply find something else to whine about. Maybe they wont like blue
boats or cruiser sterns are not in keeping with the spirit of the
waterways. A 35 ft boat owner on another site has suggested that boats
over 35 ft should be taxed off the water (I wonder why he chose over 35
ft to tax off the water). Where will it all end?
The MMer has to understand that both he and the Genuine CCer has
exactly the same access to the system for the fee paid. He also has to
understand that his need to have a marina mooring has nothing to do
with mainstream boating other than being a place to park his boat
because he needs to be elsewhere. The need to pay marina fees should
never be in the licence equation.
Looking towards to the day when the CCer pays the higher fee, remember
this, MMer's will have to pay to moor outside their marina. Your marina
fee is so you can leave your boat in relative safety when you are not
there. It will not/should not allow you to moor when out on a cruise.
In the same way that a motorist with a garage at home is not exempt
from parking charges when he is away from home. BW will have no choice
but to charge all boaters for overnight stops or none.
Ciao
Maffi
(Not a boater yet)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Continuous cruising (corrected)
- From: Michael Wooding
- Re: Continuous cruising (corrected)
- From: Drifter
- Re: Continuous cruising (corrected)
- References:
- Constant cruising
- From: Motor
- Re: Constant cruising
- From: Angela Jefferies
- Constant cruising
- Prev by Date: Re: Constant cruising
- Next by Date: Re: Fitting a Rev Counter
- Previous by thread: Re: Constant cruising
- Next by thread: Re: Continuous cruising (corrected)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
