Mooring limits

THE article by Bill Gill in narrowboatworld raises two interesting points and both warrant some discussion, writes Orph Mable.

The first and least controversial, in my mind, is the subject of mooring limits adjacent to businesses and facilities. At Oxley, we suffer with this problem of people mooring opposite us on signed ‘48 hours only' moorings but overstaying by days and, in some cases, weeks.

This is not a problem in winter but during the ‘high season' reduces the potential business that new visitors bring. So yes, I do believe that there should be a general rule that there should be no long term mooring in the ‘honey-pot' locations. However, rules without enforcement are pointless! The shortage of bank side staff to frequently patrol and enforce these ‘rules' will negate the rule.

More controversial

The second point of Bill's article is far more controversial! We see many true permanent cruisers throughout the year, and in the winter have call to bless them for the business they bring. It is very common for these cruising folk to be retired and on a fixed income, living their dream of freedom.

I do not honestly believe that they cause ‘excessive wear' on the fabric of the canal system and in fact ensure that the system is utilised as it was designed. The system was never meant to be a fair weather ‘toy', and to ensure it is well maintained, should be used throughout the year. This continual use will show those who wish to minimise maintenance spend that the system warrants the cost.

Forced off the cut

In the harsh economic climate that we find ourselves today, to ask that these good folk stomp up a further £500 (plus percentage increases every year) will ensure that they are forced off the cut. The knock-on effect of this to canalside businesses would be frightening. So please, from a business viewpoint and someone who dreams of just setting out and travelling the system, think long and hard before advocating heaping more cost on some boaters.