Steve Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>> "BW is therefore considering workable policies to implement during 09/10
>> that will encourage the proportion of boaters without a home mooring but who
>> wish to remain within a specific area of the network to choose an
>> appropriate mooring option.  The option of a 'roving mooring permit' could
>> cater for those who like to have no fixed base and cruise short distances
>> between temporary moorings within easy reach of their work or other
>> land-based commitment.  By purchasing such a permit, they would no longer be
>> classified as continuous cruisers."
>
>This a REALLY BAD idea. By doing this BW would be condoning on line 
>moorings, something which they say they are working to eliminate. How on 
>earth are they ever going to get people to shift off time restricted and 
>honey pot sites if they have already charged them to stay there?

I think that depends on how much the charges are.  If they are
*higher* than the going rent for a long-term mooring in the vicinity,
very boaters will choose to pay them but will get a long-term mooring
instead.  Thus freeing up the public moorings, which surely is what we
want.

>Actually what is needed first is clarification, are BW trying to stop 
>overstaying or to raise revenue? I hope its the former but I fear it's 
>the latter.

I think it's both.  But (given my proviso above) I suspect there won't
be a lot of new revenue.

I like this idea.

Adrian
.

Adrian Stott
07956-299966

Reply via email to