Implications For Boatowners?

[JennyMorgan]

This article caught my eye. It concerns the land based traveler community and whether they can live on land that they own. In the non traveler community people also seek to live on land that they or their family own. There have been incidences at St Olaves where land owners have been told that they have no right to moor against their land, yet here travelers are told that they can live on land that they own.  Surely there can be no difference between a traveler on land and one on water. I won't be fighting this battle but it's an interesting thought! There is surely no doubt that our local afloat traveler community is poorly catered for, especially around Norwich. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54657913

[Ray]

One for the lawyers I think! Is there really a direct comparison in living on land you own and being tied up beside it?

[Patrickgtr]

Hi, I'm new here ( coming to find lots of info before our 1st Broads holiday next summer) but used to own a narrow boat.

I'm sure that this may not be relevant at all, but landowners by the non towpath side of a canal can have a "bottom of garden" mooring and landowners can rent out moorings on the edge of their land - typically farmers fields - but British waterways - now the canal and river trust are deemed to own the edge of the canal bank and consequently  the garden or field owner have to pay a fee to CRT, typically half of what a commercial mooring would cost in the location would be charged by CTR.

Does the broads authority "own" the 1st inch of the river bank?

 

[vanessan]

41 minutes ago, Patrickgtr said:

Hi, I'm new here ( coming to find lots of info before our 1st Broads holiday next summer) but used to own a narrow boat.

I'm sure that this may not be relevant at all, but landowners by the non towpath side of a canal can have a "bottom of garden" mooring and landowners can rent out moorings on the edge of their land - typically farmers fields - but British waterways - now the canal and river trust are deemed to own the edge of the canal bank and consequently  the garden or field owner have to pay a fee to CRT, typically half of what a commercial mooring would cost in the location would be charged by CTR.

Does the broads authority "own" the 1st inch of the river bank?

 

Please don’t give them ideas.............😯

[rightsaidfred]

No but somebody normally the Crown owns the riverbed over which you are moored on tidal waters so a tricky question to which I dont know the answer.

Fred

[Patrickgtr]

47 minutes ago, vanessan said:

Please don’t give them ideas.............😯

Oops!!

[JennyMorgan]

2 hours ago, Ray said:

One for the lawyers I think! Is there really a direct comparison in living on land you own and being tied up beside it?

I did refer to land owned by the boatowner. It has always been common practice to moor against one's own land on the Broads but that has been challenged by the Authority. In other words moorings can't just be created at will.

 

16 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

No but somebody normally the Crown owns the riverbed over which you are moored on tidal waters so a tricky question to which I dont know the answer.

Fred

The Crown has accepted that in many cases landowners do own the land under a river to the centre point.

 

1 hour ago, Patrickgtr said:

Does the broads authority "own" the 1st inch of the river bank?

Thankfully not!  By the way, Patrick, an interesting post and welcome to the forum.

[Upcycler]

It's well known that if you own land that backs onto a river, it does not always mean that you own the rights to moor up to it.

[Upcycler]

12 minutes ago, Upcycler said:

It's well known that if you own land that backs onto a river, it does not always mean that you own the rights to moor up to it.

Just to add to this, I have a friend who owns the river at the bottom of his property and the EA have implemented structures to help fish during the winter with no cost to himself! It made fishing for himself even better :)

[Smoggy]

14 hours ago, Upcycler said:

Just to add to this, I have a friend who owns the river at the bottom of his property and the EA have implemented structures to help fish during the winter with no cost to himself! It made fishing for himself even better :)

If fish need help during winter they'd be better off giving them wetsuits instead of structures.....

[Cheesey69]

Near my village in france you own the river bed up to the middle but you are also responsible for the bank and that includes any anti flood defences so you get to pay the cost per meter

[Upcycler]

On 31/10/2020 at 11:43, Smoggy said:

If fish need help during winter they'd be better off giving them wetsuits instead of structures.....

In this case the EA have installed log structures, so the fish have somewhere to stay outside the natural current flow of the river. If you think the EA are wasting their time and, ummm, wet suits are a better route for fish, I would like to hear your views!

[Smoggy]

So fish can't cope with flow on a tidal river, they may need wetsuits after all, maybe a rocking chair, blanket and slippers would help too.

Sorry about my sarcastic attempt of humour but I'm too stupid for highbrow humour.

[MauriceMynah]

I cannot believe the stupidity and ignorance displayed on this thread so far. The idea...no the concept of putting fish in "wet suits" defies belief. are you allk without any remains of intelligence?

I shall explain this is simple words so even you will understand. We, the humans, when entering water often put on wet suits to improve the experience of being submerged,

Common sense and basic logic therefore would prove to you that any fish leaving it's wet (under the water) environment needs no wet suit. What it needs is a DRY SUIT.

Hells teeth, sometimes I feel like giving up on you lot!.

 

Ps to Smoggy.   No you aint!

[Smoggy]

9 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

Common sense and basic logic therefore would prove to you that any fish leaving it's wet (under the water) environment needs no wet suit. What it needs is a DRY SUIT.

But it would only take one fish fart and it would be stuck on the surface forever!

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, Smoggy said:

But it would only take one fish fart and it would be stuck on the surface forever!

Is that why so many dead fish float upside down? They all have dry-suits on and we just don't know it!