The first meeting of the Local Mooring Strategy steering group for the western Kennet and Avon took place on 26 August in County Hall, Trowbridge. As you will see from the documents below which BW circulated before the meeting, most of the changes that BW want to make, that will have a big impact on our lives, will not be up for discussion in the local mooring strategy. Instead, they are in the new policies for mooring on all of BW’s waterways which BW have drawn up following the consultations and intend to finalise by 13 September. They will affect you wherever you are on BW’s waterways.
These new policies include the following:
- charges for overstaying longer than 14 days
- the imposition of ‘no return within’ time limits
- a so-called transient mooring permit to remain within a limited geographic area, costing more than a BW mooring
The local mooring strategy steering group has been given the task (among others) of defining what is a ‘neighbourhood’ on the K&A so that it can define how far a boat without a mooring should move to comply with the Mooring Guidance for Continuous Cruisers.
Needless to say, we think that all of the above proposals are unlawful because they conflict with Section 17 (3) (c) ii of the 1995 British Waterways Act or are beyond what the Act requires boats without moorings to do. Read these documents carefully, because we all need to know what we’re up against. Send your comments to
sally.ash@britishwaterways.co.uk
The policy documents are here:
BW background and explanatory notes to moorings policies 2010
BW policies implementation plan 2010
BW 2009-10 mooring consultation report
Tags: British Waterways, continuous cruising, mooring policy, Sally Ash, Section 17
[…] 31st article BW say policy changes won’t be up for discussion in Local Mooring Strategy for BW’s draft policy […]
Do BW seriously expect boaters to just sit back and passively accept this? It is flawed on so many levels. They are going to come out of this looking so shoddy. Bring on mass civil disobedience I say!
Re the transient licenses:
“They will be charged at no less than the average for BW’s directly managed moorings in the same area.”
They are also described as ‘optional’. All this sounds a bit dodgy to me, even ignoring the conflict with existing legislation. It’s all too easy for BW to abuse it should they wish to.
These proposals are unfair. The 1962 Transport Act certainly permits BW to set terms and conditions as they see fit. However, these must be reasonable and lawfull. Setting penalty charges is highly questionable, and relying upon the CC guidelines that do not have the force of Law where other options permitting proper and safe management are available is clearly outside the scope of 1962 or any other Act.
A transient license? Who is this aimed at? People who can afford to pay more than BW already charge for their moorings?