Ticket to Ride

[Chris Waite]

Every time we dive into winter

And thoughts turn to the next season, I question why it is so impossibly difficult to be 'street legal' on our myriad of inland waterways.  So I wrote to what I assume is the over-riding authority on these matters thus:

"I have an eleven foot six inch, non-motorized, rowing (and sailing) boat, that I keep on a trailer at home and would like to be able to use on the Inland Waterways.  I would be happy to pay one reasonable annual licence fee not to have to worry about who owns it and where I need to get permission from.  
However, there are a number of different authorities for various (groups of) waterways and this makes the whole thing so complicated that for the most part I just do not bother and spend most of my time afloat on inshore coastal waters.  Surely the Environment Agency can come up with one licence that would cover the UK and distribute the proceeds between the sub-groups?  I would have thought that those involved would appreciate the proceeds from such a scheme rather than all missing out, as increasing numbers of people like myself, find smaller boats are actually much more amenable to varied and frequent use.  While organizing this, it would be possible to add in third party liability insurance in the fee.

The British Canoe Union has such a reasonably priced (less than fifty pounds I believe) scheme with multiple use and insurance for a fair selection of Britain’s waterways, though not all.  And of course they do not accept vessels other than those that are paddle propelled and I think, pointed at both ends.

So folks, how about doing something really great, for the public and the waterways?"


This is the reply I received today:


"Thank you for your enquiry regarding a national waterways licence. The situation you explain is one I'm familiar with and I understand your view in referring to its complicated nature - I'll explain our position on this.
 
The Environment Agency is the navigation authority for 1000km of navigable rivers in England and Wales. This includes the non-tidal River Thames and the River Medway, Rye Harbour, the Great Ouse, the River Nene, the Stour in Suffolk, the Wye and the Dee conservancy.

We do offer a registration for an unpowered boat at £32.00, which will cover you for all our waterways.
 
A full list of the waterways we manage can be found on our website : http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/recreation/129910.aspx
 
As you mention, the rest of the UK waterways network has a mixture of navigation authorities, ranging from national bodies like the Canal & River Trust(CRT) to local authorities looking after very specific stretches of waterways. Overall, there are more than 20 UK navigation authorities.
 
There are also some waterways which have no public right of navigation, where local riparian landowners have to agree access.
 
As an organsiation we have made agreements with a number of national bodies to increase the ease of access to our waterways, for example with British Canoe Union (or Canoe England/Wales) and British Rowing. Another is with CRT, where we have in place the 'Gold licence' which covers both our and CRT's waterways, but admittedly this is for powered craft only.
 
But even with these agreements, they are still only limited to certain waterways and not the whole waterways network due to the complex situation of navigation rights. In addition the licence or registration costs and requirements can vary greatly between organisations, which can also prove problematic when attempting to make these agreements.
 
Looking to the future, the Government’s ambition is to transfer the navigation responsibility for our waterways to the Canal and River Trust. This will be subject to the performance of CRT, the willingness of its trustees and the affordability for Government.

The review of whether the transfer will be achievable is scheduled for 2014, with implementation of the outcome in 2015/16.

As a public body, the Environment Agency will do what it can to realise the Government’s ambition. We have set up an internal project, Future of Navigation (FoN), to help us prepare for the review and implementation.

Taking all of this into account, you'll see that a truly UK national licence is a tough ambition to fulfil - but it could well be that a future transfer of our own waterways to CRT would result in an arrangement covering more than 3000km of UK waterways.
 
I hope this explains our position on the complexities of a 'one licence for all', but if you have any further questions, please let me know."

It was signed by one Julian Kennard.


So there we have it; anyone holding their breath?

CeeDub

[Jeremy]

I'm impressed that you got such a comprehensive reply, to be honest.  It looks as if the chap from the EA genuinely tried to answer as best he could, rather than fob you off with a standard letter.

I know that the canoe people have been fighting for access to a number of waterways for many years now, yet AFAIK they haven't had a great deal of success.  In many cases it seems that fishing rights are treated as automatically being a bar to any other use of some rivers, despite their being little or no evidence to suggest that boating or canoeing harms fishing.

Still, if the canal network and the rivers currently under EA control are all merged under the C&RT then that goes a fair way to solving the main problem, although it would be much better if the Broads could also be included, as that would mean the majority of inland waters could come under a single licence.

The BCU membership thing isn't that specific as to the type of unpowered vessel, AFAIK.  I can't recall there being a definition of the type of boat that is covered by their membership and have always assumed that if it was relatively small and unpowered it was OK, even if not pointed at both ends.

[Chris Waite]

In view of the current general propensity to find others to blame for one's own personal incompetence, I actually phoned and asked the BCU about their Third Party insurance.  The first lady said that there was no problem for any small boat, but the second, more authoritative sounding matron, who was going to sign me up, was adamant that it had to be paddled and oars did not count.

For me, the doubly-pointy bit then faded into irrelevance

Chris

[Timmo]

On 13 Oct 2012, at 21:40, Jeremy [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

> I'm impressed that you got such a comprehensive reply, to be honest.  It looks as if the chap from the EA genuinely tried to answer as best he could, rather than fob you off with a standard letter.

Agree with Jeremy, while the reply said little of immediate use it did represent a personal effort on someone's part to respond informatively. Credit to them for that.
>
> The BCU membership thing is that specific as to the type of unpowered vessel, AFAIK.  I can't recall there being a definition of the type of boat that is covered by their membership and have always assumed that if it was relatively small and unpowered it was OK, even if not pointed at both ends.


I do remember posting some thoughts on the difficulty of defining 'canoe' for the purposes of the BCU Waterways licence and the opportunity that difficulty offers. Length - Dragon boats to playboats. Shape - almost round playboats, through square sterned canadians to traditional pointy ends. Power - paddle, sail, Mirage Drive, and what of those who row their canadian canoe or could you yuloh a square stern canadian?

This time I have sent an enquiry to the BCU (Canoe England) seeking a definition of what type, or range of types, of craft their agreement covers. I'll let you know what they say.

Tim.

[Timmo]

Sorry, Chris's post crossed my last one.

On 14 Oct 2012, at 09:52, Chris Waite [via UK HBBR Forum] wrote:

... the second, more authoritative sounding matron, who was going to sign me up, was adamant that it had to be paddled and oars did not count.

For me, the doubly-pointy bit then faded into irrelevance

Chris 

Did you ask what happens when you sail a canoe? Or would that have caused something to short circuit?

The e-mail Chris W got from the environment agency mentioned that 'British Rowing' have a similar agreement to the BCU. Is that useful, or do I remember rightly that it was somehow restricted to racing situations. If it is so restricted would there be room to renegotiate that deal to include more recreational rowing activity.

If The BCU and British Rowing can do this access agreement thing could the RYA be persuaded to play the same game. That would then sweep up a great many boats. Certainly all sailing dinghies, and since the world of sailing dinghies is at least as diverse as the world of canoes that would probably cover almost anything the HBBR can muster for an event.

Tim.

[Jeremy]

FWIW,  a while ago I did ask what was then British Waterways for advice on what constituted an "un-powered" boat.  They confirmed in writing that a small, trailerable, electric powered boat was classed as being un-powered as far as their licences were concerned.  

[Barney]

Timmo wrote

Did you ask what happens when you sail a canoe? Or would that have caused something to short circuit?

Sailing canoes are covered by the BCU licence, third party insurance, and by the optional fully comp insurance they offer.
Although I'm not sure how they define a canoe.

[simplesimon]

Jeremy wrote

It would be much better if the Broads could also be included, as that would mean the majority of inland waters could come under a single licence.

Don't hold your breath about the Broads - strictly speaking they are not an inland waterway, but a harbour ...


Simon

[Chris Waite]

Somebody's been forcing you to study the Greater Norfolk Book of Definitions, haven't they Simon?

The Thames has a tidal entrance to the sea, with docks and such and rivers flowing into it and in places is as wide as Sutton Broad, for instance.  The Broads similarly have locks, which apparently may have been why the Norfolk Broads Trading Wherry 'Albion' was carvel built, so that she had no clinker 'lands' typical of most wherries and thus would have been less likely to catch on the lock sides.

So does that make the Thames a 'harbour' as well?  Only below Teddington, I suppose.  And what of Cardiff Bay, mentioned in '2013 Planning' above?

CW

[Barney]

While it unlikely that the Broads could be put under the same control as the rivers and canals currently managed by the CRT and the EA, the separate authorities could sell a licence that covered them all and they could split the income. As the EA and CRT already do with the Gold Licence.

Probably the biggest obstacle to this happening at the moment is that the CRT is a new organisation, and their time is probably taken up by the plans to take over control of the navigable EA rivers. But if they and the other navigation authorities were to receive more letters along the lines of Chris', it may encourage them to do something.

[simplesimon]

Chris Waite wrote

Somebody's been forcing you to study the Greater Norfolk Book of Definitions, haven't they Simon?

More or less

I had occasion to research the legal status of the Broads Authority some time ago, and found they are appointed as Harbour Authority for the Broads which is what gives them the right to levy tolls. Hence the Broads are a harbour, not an inland waterway.

Simon