On 6/1/07, Anne Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >This is yet another poor excuse for continuous cruising, and I really > >wish BW could do more to control these boaters. People are using this > >loop hole to live where they like without paying for moorings, and not > >even really interested in the canals on which they live. > > I agree there are some people who live on boats, who are only there > because they are cheap housing, but not all continuous cruisers are > like that.
I agree, just look at the continuous cruisers on this list - they go all over the country. > Just because someone doesn't have a nice shiny boat which > they keep in a marina, doesn't mean they shouldn't be on the canals. I also agree - Shoestring is in a right state at the moment! :-) Kismet is currently an anonymous green boat, but we are busy using it while we are fitting it out. We moor on our own paid for mooring, and when cruising canals stay not more than 2 weeks in any one place (without permission of the local BW). The only reason we do this is because we have to work, and so occasionally weekend the boat. > To infer someone has no interest in canals from a short TV interview > is appalling hubris! This is just like middle-class caravanners > looking down on gypsies and wanting them moved on, because they live > in vans all year round and can't afford extortionate campsite charges > (even if they are allowed to use them!) I apologise if I made people think that this one person had no interest in canals - I was generalising at this point. My observation is based on several events around London (my only point of reference). > Why should continuous cruisers have to excuse themselves for what > they do? Surely they are the ones who are using the canals as they > should be used- not those who emerge from their marinas once or twice > a year and moan because they can't tie up where they would like? I agree, and I am quite happy to have more continuous cruisers, so long as that is what they do, and not just stay on the same pound year in, year out. What is wrong with these people, you pay for a licence that allows travel throughout the UK - why not use it! See another reason why these bridge hoppers have little interest in canals. > Again, to deduce that someone doesn't move much from their appearance > and the position of their boat is just plain WRONG! It's perfectly > possible the TV program arranged to meet them somewhere convenient > for the interviewer. I guess its possible, but I suspect that is not so. It's funny that Google Earth shows a similar length grey narrowboat moored in exactly the same point: 51°31'59.02"N 0° 6'5.22"W This photo was taken around March 2006 I think, judging by the state of several building projects in London. While the bloke may be on social, his daughter had just been to school, which I guess was in the area. Continuous cruising with location based dependency's (on a daily basis) is very hard to do properly. Suppose his cruising distance is between Waltham Abbey, London Ring, and Uxbridge. Is this still continuous cruising? Two days traveling distance does not in my mind constitute a legitimate profile. > Anne C > NB Movealong getalong go move shift Mike NB Enjoyboating Moorproperly -- Michael Askin http://shoestring_DOT_zapto_DOT_org/
