Sue
The continuous moorer problem will not be solved by this additional 
charge. The evidence is within Simon Salem's introduction to the BW 
proposals as chasing them off, whilst popular and wanted by all 
other users, doesn't produce a penny of income for BW to pay for the 
cost of doing it. There seem to be no financial sanctions for 
breaching their terms & conditions in reality. The only way it would 
work is for continuous cruisers to provide a Direct Debit 
arrangement that kicks in if they overstay on any mooring at (say) 
GBP 50 per day.

"7. Use only strengthened enforcement of mooring rules to 
prevent `continuous mooring [9.16, Option B)]

Our current enforcement strategy is to prioritise action against 
boats without a licence – this is financially
productive. We recognise that more rigorous enforcement of mooring 
rules is needed in the face of
strongly growing demand for casual extended mooring in a particular 
neighbourhood, because the
consequences of this mooring demand is to reduce the amenity for 
cruising boats. However, this
enforcement effort is not financially productive for us, and would 
require reduced expenditure elsewhere.
We continue to make judgements on competing budgetary claims, but 
believe that judicious use of
pricing to reduce demand for `continuous mooring' is a better long 
term solution. We therefore believe
that the impact of Option B would be marginal, and the extra income 
nil."


--- In [email protected], "Steve Haywood" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 2008/9/29 rb999sb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> >
> >
> > Continuous cruisers and continuous moorers are two separate 
species
> > and should be treated as such. Altering the charges for one to
> > control the other is ridiculous.
> > Sue
> 
> 
> This pithy contribution hits the nail on the head.
> 
> Over ensuing months continuous moorers will be demonised, part of 
BW's
> campaign to  raise additional revenue from continuous cruisers.
> 
> What they are doing though, is charging for something most of us 
believe we
> pay for already in our license. If we don't resist, take it from 
me that
> this will be just the start of it and there will be a whole host 
of charges
> levied on things we already think we pay for.
> 
> BW have already established a precedent at Llangollen. Maybe 
charges for
> overnight moorings will be seen as the next milch cow?
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply via email to