Wolseley Bridge, a blogging encounter, and a bit of a rant

First the cruising; we've come on down to Wolseley Bridge in a fairly straightforward run. Things were a bit chaotic at Great Haywood, mainly because someone was trying to reverse off the water point as the same time as we came through the bridge and Golden Eagle came off the Staffs and Worcs. Otherwise, there wasn't much of a hold up at any of the locks, and I was able to get a paper as we waited for Haywood Lock.

A bit before that, we'd stopped for coffee with Carol, George and Molly on Rock 'n' Roll. We had a good old natter, especially once we discovered that Carol and I were working in the NHS in Meirionnydd at the same time, though we'd never actually run into each other at that time.

A couple of day boats were having a mega hen party when we got here, but I managed to squeeze Sanity Again in behind them. They were certainly enjoying their outing in fine spring weather, always good to see.

You can tell it's spring by a number of signs, one of the less welcome ones being the appearance of whinging letters in the waterways press about the fact the continuous cruisers don't pay mooring fees. This is, of course, because they don't have moorings (the clue is in the term "continuous cruiser"), but this often seems to escape the understanding (if that's the word for it) of Disgruntled of Braunston.

Lesley on Yarwood did a good riposte in her blog the other day, whilst Maffi was rather more forthright in his. I've written a letter to Canal Boat in reply to the ones they've published; anyone who wants to do the same is welcome to borrow from what I said:

Spring is here; the birds are singing in the early morn, sunshine and showers accompany our cruising...  and envious folk whose commitments prevent them from boating all the time write whinging and badly informed letters to the magazines demanding that continuous cruisers should pay more for their licences (vide Mr Haines and Mr Lawson last month).

How often does it have to be said? The BW licence allows the holder to keep a boat on BW waters, and, if he or she is lucky, the water's there and the cut's not stopped, to boat it about. The mooring fee pays for permanent use of a mooring, online, offside, in a marina, whatever. Since continuous cruisers don't have a permanent mooring, they don't pay a mooring fee. There is no "continuous cruiser" licence, there is no "mooring licence".

BW (and hopefully CRT in due course) needs to do three things. Firstly, they need to enforce the mooring rules much more firmly, so that it doesn't pay to loiter in one area all the time without buying a mooring permit. Much of the legitimate annoyance comes from the sight of bridge hoppers lurking about on the towpath, neither cruising nor paying for a mooring.

Secondly, the charge that BW makes to most but not all private mooring operators (I believe 9% of the mooring fee?) should be taken off there and added to all our licences.

Finally, boats moored in all marinas and off line basins connected to the system should be required to have a BW licence, no matter what the ancient history of the location may be.

That way, everyone pays for what they get, and no one subsidises the others.

The email address to use is editor'a'canalboat.co.uk, replacing 'a' with @