Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-03-2010, 17:36   #151
Registered User
 
bastonjock's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Lincolnshire UK
Boat: Mac 26x
Posts: 169
we have this problem her in the UK on our inland water ways,the Authorities are removing derelect craft and unlicensed craft,the decent ones are sold of at Auction and the poor ones broken up.This is all done by way of a licensing system,you need a boat safety cert,insurance and then you get a license,the license must be displayed or they haul your boat out.

It is still cheap to live on the river system,the licensing works out at 700.00 GB pounds for a 50ft boat,you do however have to move every two weeks,the license fees are then reinvested into the rivers and canals,there is one area where you can even escape paying for the licensing fees and liveaboard for zilch.So the system allows for the really poor yet keeps the scenic areas clear of rotting old boats

Ive only seen livaboards on the Scottish west Coast,there is not a great many of them and the boats are kept up to Colreg standard,if your boat is considered a danger then its fix it or loose it,if you loose it you are then classed as homeless and the local council has to by law put you into accomodation.Our goverment gives you at least 65GBpounds a week if you are out of work.you can get a six month mooring for 45 pounds in the winter.
__________________

__________________
bastonjock is offline  
Old 09-03-2010, 22:40   #152
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 230
11 pages of this nonsense from Mr Swain and all I see is the ramblings of a left wing conspiracy theorist. And I thought all the conspiracy nuts were right wing crazies!

Mr Swain, saying something happened because a friend of a friend of a first cousin on your mothers side, twice removed, told you about it, does not make it true.

If a nuclear submarine left a 3 mile wide oil slick, it would be in the newspapers, Do you have a link to prove it? If the navy keeps shooting holes in the boats, do you think it would continue to be covered up, when sailors lives are at risk? In today's political climate? Not likely. Another poster to this thread discussed the safety protocols used in testing torpedoes, yet you chose to ignore that completely. Care to comment on that?

I am not saying there have not been issues or problems, or that I think charging for anchoring is right. I am saying you are doing yourself no favours with the outlandish statements you post.
__________________

__________________
rallyman1122 is offline  
Old 10-03-2010, 14:24   #153
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The boat lives at Fidalgo Island, PNW
Boat: 36' custom steel
Posts: 992
Brent has some very good points, but unfortunately he's the wrong messenger.

It's almost like he works undercover for the government, single handedly torpedoing the best arguments against the government's actions. I smell a devious plot.







A guy could get really tangled up in his underwear in this thread.
__________________
John, sailing a custom 36' double-headed steel sloop--a 2001 derivation of a 1976 Ted Brewer design.
Hiracer is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 15:13   #154
cruiser

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by rallyman1122 View Post
11 pages of this nonsense from Mr Swain and all I see is the ramblings of a left wing conspiracy theorist. And I thought all the conspiracy nuts were right wing crazies!

Mr Swain, saying something happened because a friend of a friend of a first cousin on your mothers side, twice removed, told you about it, does not make it true.

If a nuclear submarine left a 3 mile wide oil slick, it would be in the newspapers, Do you have a link to prove it? If the navy keeps shooting holes in the boats, do you think it would continue to be covered up, when sailors lives are at risk? In today's political climate? Not likely. Another poster to this thread discussed the safety protocols used in testing torpedoes, yet you chose to ignore that completely. Care to comment on that?

I am not saying there have not been issues or problems, or that I think charging for anchoring is right. I am saying you are doing yourself no favours with the outlandish statements you post.
So the military spokesman is trying to suggest that we are dense enough to believe that every time they do an extremely embarrassing screwup, the first thing they do is report it to the media. He is suggesting that we are dense enough to believe that military personel are allowed to report any such screwups to the media, without any consequences to themselves or their careers. He is asking us to believe that the military never keeps secrets, and everything they screwup on is reported to the media. He is suggesting we are dense enough to believe that what was told to me directly by the former head of the RCMP marine division, is being reported by a friend of a friend of a first cousin on my mothers side. I am not in any way related to this person.
He is suggesting that the media has never reported any of their screwups, despite the fact that the ramming and sinking of the classic schooner "Moonglow " by the drunken crew of a submarine leaving the testing range, was widely reported in Pacific yachting, (" Sinking of the Moonglow "can be found in their archives) the Vancouver Province, the Vancouver Sun, the Victoria Times Colonist, all Nanaimo papers, CBC TV, CBC radio, CTV , Check TV and almost every other media outlet on the west coast and many elsewhere..
Yet after such military drivel, he us accusing ME of putting out drivel
Yet he is calling ME a liar. Do any of you feel insulted by his suggestion that we are actually gullible enough to believe him? Is this the best excuse maker the military has to offer? What is his job description? Military intelligence? Ya sure!
There is another good example of their secrecy.
The same ex mountie told me that when the first two new 800 hp engines arrived for the RCMP catamarans, the cop below him stole them and sold them.He wanted to charge him, but was blocked . They made the thief pay the money back then fired him, but wouldn't charge him. Why ? So the media and thus the public would be kept in the dark about the incident.
And you say the military doesn't keep any secrets from the public? Ya sure. Wanna buy some ocean front property in Alberta?
Boats moored in Cowichan Bay are almost entirely moored in over 100 feet of water , far to deep to be considered obstructing any useful anchorage, or useful for anything but a mooring.. Their mooring there is no skin of anyone's ass. Their is plenty of room for more moorings, without bothering anyone, except those who promote the tyrany of envy, or those who believe everyone should be forced to either support the real estate industry , or be forced to sleep in a dumpster or under a bridge, or only those who can afford exorbitant moorage rates should be allowed to own a boat..
Most of the real estate in Cowichan Bay can be considered "eyesores." far more so than any boats moored there. The only difference is they support the local parasites .
__________________
Brent Swain is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 19:52   #155
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Swain View Post
So the military spokesman is trying to suggest that we are dense enough to believe that every time they do an extremely embarrassing screwup, the first thing they do is report it to the media. He is suggesting that we are dense enough to believe that military personel are allowed to report any such screwups to the media, without any consequences to themselves or their careers. He is asking us to believe that the military never keeps secrets, and everything they screwup on is reported to the media. He is suggesting we are dense enough to believe that what was told to me directly by the former head of the RCMP marine division, is being reported by a friend of a friend of a first cousin on my mothers side. I am not in any way related to this person.
He is suggesting that the media has never reported any of their screwups, despite the fact that the ramming and sinking of the classic schooner "Moonglow " by the drunken crew of a submarine leaving the testing range, was widely reported in Pacific yachting, (" Sinking of the Moonglow "can be found in their archives) the Vancouver Province, the Vancouver Sun, the Victoria Times Colonist, all Nanaimo papers, CBC TV, CBC radio, CTV , Check TV and almost every other media outlet on the west coast and many elsewhere..
Yet after such military drivel, he us accusing ME of putting out drivel
Yet he is calling ME a liar. Do any of you feel insulted by his suggestion that we are actually gullible enough to believe him? Is this the best excuse maker the military has to offer? What is his job description? Military intelligence? Ya sure!
There is another good example of their secrecy.
The same ex mountie told me that when the first two new 800 hp engines arrived for the RCMP catamarans, the cop below him stole them and sold them.He wanted to charge him, but was blocked . They made the thief pay the money back then fired him, but wouldn't charge him. Why ? So the media and thus the public would be kept in the dark about the incident.
And you say the military doesn't keep any secrets from the public? Ya sure. Wanna buy some ocean front property in Alberta?
Boats moored in Cowichan Bay are almost entirely moored in over 100 feet of water , far to deep to be considered obstructing any useful anchorage, or useful for anything but a mooring.. Their mooring there is no skin of anyone's ass. Their is plenty of room for more moorings, without bothering anyone, except those who promote the tyrany of envy, or those who believe everyone should be forced to either support the real estate industry , or be forced to sleep in a dumpster or under a bridge, or only those who can afford exorbitant moorage rates should be allowed to own a boat..
Most of the real estate in Cowichan Bay can be considered "eyesores." far more so than any boats moored there. The only difference is they support the local parasites .
I rest my case regarding the left wing conspiracy theorist. See all of the above rant for further support of my statement.

By the way, when and where did I call you a liar? I simply asked you to provide links to prove your statements. This is a common courtesy on the internet when making broad statements such as you have. You provided some basic information (thank you) and I was able to find a little bit of information online regarding an incident that happened at least 16 years ago. An incident involving a Chilean submarine. Not a Canadian submarine, not a US submarine, but a Chilean submarine. The incident in question happened in the Juan de Fuca Strait.

Here is a link to the official report regarding the incident as investigated by the TSB;

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...8/m94w0078.asp

Holding a bit of a grudge are you?

I also asked for your comments regarding safety protocols for testing torpedoes but you chose to ignore that request. In place of a reply to my request for comment, you chose to rant on about the supposed theft (provide me more than the usual, "a buddy told me this" type of information and I might believe it) of engines for a police boat.

What does that have to do with mooring fees in Nanaimo?

I am sure the residents of Cowichan Bay appreciate your comments regarding real estate.
__________________
rallyman1122 is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 20:07   #156
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver Island BC
Boat: 41' Morgan Classic
Posts: 105
Nanaimo is policed by RCMP, the mounties, Canada's national embarrassment and teflon Mafia

I am amazed that Brent is such a great friend of the RCMP and so trusted by them that they would share info such as the theft of engines etc. by officers considering he has such obvious distane for them as per his quote from post #88 copied in part above.
__________________
bytownboy is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 20:17   #157
Registered User
 
Stillraining's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Puget Sound
Boat: Irwin 41 CC Ketch
Posts: 2,876
I think this thread has outlived it purpose
__________________
"Go simple, go large!".

Relationships are everything to me...everything else in life is just a tool to enhance them.
Stillraining is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 20:32   #158
Senior Cruiser
 
delmarrey's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Now in Blaine, WA
Boat: Modified Choate 40
Posts: 10,702
Images: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stillraining View Post
I think this thread has outlived it purpose
Agreed!

It's come down to a pissing match.
__________________
Faithful are the Wounds of a Friend, but the Kisses of the Enemy are Deceitful! ........
A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves!

Unprepared boaters, end up as floatsum!.......
delmarrey is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 20:35   #159
Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vancouver Island BC
Boat: 41' Morgan Classic
Posts: 105
I agree, and if I was out of line, I apologize
__________________
bytownboy is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 21:03   #160
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver Island
Boat: 27ft catalina
Posts: 492
i think most of you have forgotten what brents rant is truly about. its about the nanaimo port authority violating our rights to anchor freely where we are. maybe he's gone off on a little bit of a rant but thats his choice. if we stop the pissing contest about submarines rcmp etc and just get back to the primary issue at hand i think we would all feel better.
__________________
michaelmrc is offline  
Old 11-03-2010, 21:36   #161
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by rallyman1122 View Post
I am not saying there have not been issues or problems, or that I think charging for anchoring is right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelmrc View Post
i think most of you have forgotten what brents rant is truly about. its about the nanaimo port authority violating our rights to anchor freely where we are. maybe he's gone off on a little bit of a rant but thats his choice. if we stop the pissing contest about submarines rcmp etc and just get back to the primary issue at hand i think we would all feel better.
Agreed, back to what started this thread. Up to you Mr Swain
__________________
rallyman1122 is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 16:14   #162
cruiser

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,167
After listing reasons why we should avoid Nanaimo this summer, I gave other reasons to a take alternative routes, one of which was to avoid having to wait while the rambos play war games in Georgia Strait, forcing us to wait out ideal weather for going north or south. Heading north via Silva Bay avoids both Nanaimo and the test range. In a westerly, one can still fetch Gibson's and Howe Sound on one tack, a far better place to wait out a westerly than Nanaimo, and with no reason to wait out good weather while the navy plays games . Going north via Vancouver has the same advantage, as well as providing everything Nanaimo has to offer in a city and more. From Vancouver it's a short trip into the relatively protected waters of Howe Sound, a great place to kill time during a strong westerly flow. The reason so many boats in the past chose Nanaimo was because of their relatively hassle free anchorage, and welcoming Harbour authorities. Now, Vancouver has become the better choice, for the same reasons. A rivalry between Nanaimo and Vancouver for cruisers dollars would definitely be in the best interest of cruisers. Lets start by avoiding Nanaimo this summer for Vancouver , get the rivalry started , and send them a clear message that they are not the only show in town. Cruisers have everything to gain and nothing to lose by doing so.
__________________
Brent Swain is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 17:35   #163
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver Island
Boat: 27ft catalina
Posts: 492
ive spent lots of time anchored out in nanaimo i have absolutely no problem heading out somewhere different somewhere where i can feel like i wont be hassled. havent been over howe sound way yet sounds like a good trip.
__________________
michaelmrc is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 20:30   #164
Registered User

Join Date: May 2008
Location: British Columbia, Mexico
Boat: S&S Hughes 38
Posts: 837
Images: 23
Gibsons is well worth the visit,although the supermarket is up a long steep hill.Its usually fine anchoring right off the pier.The dinghy dock charge is a bit steep also($5.00).still a fun place though.Make sure to visit Grammas Pub.Keats Is. and Gambier Is. have some fine anchorages.Bowen is nice also,but a little rolly and deep,nice marina there.Nice new Government wharf at Squamish,be sure to stay well to port when abeam the native reserve going in or you WILL get stuck,tides above 8ft.are usually safe for entrance/exit.Good stores close to dock,but no marine store there.
__________________
highseas is offline  
Old 12-03-2010, 22:48   #165
Registered User

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Victoria
Boat: S2 35c
Posts: 113
I agree with Brent and will be avoiding Nanimo this year and holding up in Silva Bay when heading north
__________________

__________________
Maggie-K is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
anchor, anchoring, fees

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 22:53.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.