[HN Gopher] Waterway Map
___________________________________________________________________
Waterway Map
Author : wcedmisten
Score : 403 points
Date : 2024-01-23 21:51 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (waterwaymap.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (waterwaymap.org)
| jkubicek wrote:
| The "Navigable by canoe" filter seems to filter out everything,
| which is a bummer, because I've always wondered how far up into
| the Sierras I could drop a canoe and still be able to paddle back
| to the bay area.
| ioseph wrote:
| It showed one path in my area which is a portage trail for
| canoes connecting two waterways
| reaperducer wrote:
| _The "Navigable by canoe" filter seems to filter out
| everything_
|
| Selecting "Rivers" shows an awful lot of dry gulches and
| alluvial fans that haven't had water in them in half a century
| or more.
| Affric wrote:
| Yep.
|
| Navigable by canoe leaves Australia with about 50 km of two
| rivers in Gippsland to be navigable.
|
| It shows the Hunter and the Nepean as a single system.
|
| Connectivity between ephemeral waterways which are joined by
| ephemeral lakes is poor.
|
| All in all I think it speaks to the ownership of the market
| by private interests and the lack of utility of water
| navigation for most people.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Is there a "drag canoe" option?
| ghaff wrote:
| You have both hills and urban areas blocking about the whole
| east side of San Francisco Bay. Hard for me to imagine being
| able to get through that. And further north you've got the
| Central Valley.
| cowsandmilk wrote:
| I'm not sure how hills or urban areas block the ability to
| canoe... Waterways always are locally low and canoe trips on
| rivers will typically have hills on either side of you. And
| I've been on plenty of canoe trips that went through the
| downtown of a city. Most older cities are built in some place
| navigable by boat.
| ghaff wrote:
| The parent was asking about getting down to the SF Bay from
| somewhere in Sierras. I'd have to study a map in detail but
| I doubt there are much in the way of east/west routes in
| that area. Also, while there are navigable waterways in
| cities they tend to be very limited. There's often one
| river in older cities that flows through the center
| somewhere.
|
| It really depends on the watersheds. You can get to Boston
| from pretty far north but you would have to cheat by going
| down the coast from the mouth of the Merrimack River which
| I think captures all the rivers in southern NH/northern MA.
| chad_oliver wrote:
| San Francisco owes its growth as a city to the fact that
| the Bay provides a connection between the Sierras (and
| their goldfields) and the Pacific Ocean.
|
| Regarding Boston, the interesting thing is that it used
| to be connected to the Merrimack via the Middlesex Canal.
| My understanding is that this is silted up now (which you
| presumably already know) but it shows how many more
| connections we used to have.
| callalex wrote:
| There are many dams and gigantic underground pipes that
| carry the water through the area. It works fine for the
| water but not for kayakers. For example the Briones
| Reservoir is upstream of the San Pablo Reservoir connected
| by huge gravity-powered pipes under the mountains between
| them. They are in fact redoing them right now.
| jkubicek wrote:
| There are a significant number of canal systems to the east
| of the bay. I have no where boating is allowed, but the ones
| we frequently drive past are ~100 feet wide and extend at
| least out to Stockton and Sacramento. I have no clue if you
| can get past those cities, though.
| jjav wrote:
| Even cargo ships go all the way to Stockton and Sacramento.
| ghaff wrote:
| Looking at a map more closely I don't know how much is
| practical in a canoe, but the answer to up thread is
| probably however far you can up towards Lake Tahoe then
| down through Folsom Lake to (most of the way?) to
| Sacramento then Stockton (or just directly to the bay) and
| probably to the Bay from there.
|
| Not sure you can do the equivalent further south but it
| looks like you could do a lot of it that way--at least in
| theory.
| marssaxman wrote:
| There's no blockage - in fact oceangoing cargo ships can
| travel all the way to the Port of Sacramento, thanks to a
| thirty-foot-deep channel maintained by the Corps of
| Engineers.
| ghaff wrote:
| There are a ton of rivers and sections thereof that are easily
| navigable flatwater in MA which don't show up.
| timeon wrote:
| Compared to Europe, US is sparsely mapped in OSM. But even in
| Europe there are not many waterways tagged with canoe.
| jjav wrote:
| > how far up into the Sierras I could drop a canoe and still be
| able to paddle back to the bay area
|
| I've thought of doing this, I wonder if there are any good
| resources on best paths to take.
| bravefoot wrote:
| In the valley, we talk about the Cosumnes and Clavey rivers as
| "undammed" but they may still have flood control and irrigation
| equipment in them.
|
| Growing up near the Mokulumne, one day I'd like to go from
| Camanche to the sea. It's not that far but would still have at
| least one portage at Woodbridge
| r0m4n0 wrote:
| As a native Sacramentan and boater, you can definitely get from
| the Sierra to the bay. Would you take your boat out to get
| around dams? (Lake Natoma dam, Folsom's dam, etc). If you
| wanted and could do that, you positively could do the ride. The
| American is fed by snow melt from the top of the sierra and
| plenty of water in the spring to ride it down. Once you reach
| the delta the current would help you less so you better have
| some good oars. Also be ready to navigate some serious rapids
| in some spots on the American. Nothing that a little kayaking
| class wouldn't prepare you for.
|
| They used to have a few large riverboats that used to bring
| people from Sacramento to the bay. One called the Delta Queen
| and the other called the Delta King. Three presidents even rode
| on them including Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, and Jimmy
| Carter. They permanently affixed the Delta King on the docks in
| Old Sacramento where you can still eat at a restaurant or stay
| in an onboard hotel.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_King
|
| All that to say, plenty of boats in and around the Central
| Valley.
| rmc wrote:
| > _"The "Navigable by canoe" filter seems to filter out
| everything"_
|
| The data is 100% from OpenStreetMap. That map only looks at
| things with the `canoe` tag in OSM. There are a lot of
| waterways in OSM which do not have this tag. If you know of
| missing data, you can just edit OSM and it'll show up on
| WWM.org tomorrow!
|
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_
| macintux wrote:
| When I was young, my grandfather talked about the possibility of
| taking his boat from his home in central Florida all the way to
| the coast.
|
| 40+ years later, this fills me with delight. He could have done
| it.
| croemer wrote:
| Definitely not all of these waterways are navigable. There are
| even underground ones, essentially pipes.
| spot13 wrote:
| Right. Like trails in the woods, they shift and evolve.
| jschrf wrote:
| Bingo. Trying to map the flow of water is like trying to
| map the flow of time.
| yawpitch wrote:
| Kinda neat to turn on the Navigable By Boat filter and zoom in on
| England to find where I live, and all the 2500 miles of actually
| connected and navigable English (and Welsh) canals and rivers
| I've been on over the last seven years.
|
| Or course there's also a whole lot of "waterways" that sure as
| hell aren't navigable by any boat that can support a human, but
| might have been at some point.
| bemusedthrow75 wrote:
| Yep. The first one I went looking for was the Fleet, which is
| something of a ghost river at the end of its journey.
| s3krit wrote:
| I went straight into these comments hoping to find another HN
| (potentially narrow) boater!
|
| What's interesting and somewhat amusing is that this map has
| determined that the section of the Soar that joins with the
| Trent just north of Loughborough is apparently unnavigable.
| This time of year I'd generally agree.
| yawpitch wrote:
| It's got a lot of details wrong... it took us five real years
| (plus one fake pandemic one) to visit every nook and cranny,
| and they've implied things are navigable that sure as heck
| aren't -- just try and get on the Dee from Chester without a
| crane except in a lethally high flood, the lock was
| disassembled years ago -- and unnavigable that definitely are
| (it's got the Manchester Ship Canal on there, but not the
| Mersey we crossed to get to it).
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ The data is 100% OSM. You edit
| it to fix it yourself.
| Doctor_Fegg wrote:
| There's a difference between legally navigable and
| practically navigable. The Dee has a public right of
| navigation and therefore is tagged as boat=yes in
| OpenStreetMap. That's not to make any judgement as to
| whether or not you can get your boat through the Chester
| weirgate!
|
| The Mersey ought to be tagged with boat=yes, though. I'm
| now wondering about Walton Lock which I think still has a
| right of navigation though is very definitely impassable...
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_
|
| > _What 's interesting and somewhat amusing is that this map
| has determined that the section of the Soar that joins with
| the Trent just north of Loughborough is apparently
| unnavigable_
|
| The boat views only use the OpenStreetMap `boat` tag. If a
| section of river is missing from WWM.org, then it's likely
| the tag is missing from the OSM waterway. You can fix that!
| s3krit wrote:
| Hmm I investigated that and the missing sections on OSM are
| indeed tagged with boat: yes and motorboat: yes. I'll do a
| little more digging
|
| PS. Despite using OSM for many years, I've never looked
| into editing it. Thanks for giving me the impetus to start!
| There are bits and bobs I've noticed aren't entirely
| correct as we move around the country, and now I'll be able
| to fix them where necessary.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| There's a group of people who regularly sail a great circle up
| the Atlantic, down the St. Lawrence & the Great Lakes, through
| the Chicago River & canals to the Illinois River to the
| Mississippi, and east along the Gulf Coast & around Florida. I
| can't remember anything more about it than that. Anyone?
| dnlbyl wrote:
| I believe that is the Great Loop:
| https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/great-loop.html
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Sounds like a great trip (IF you like being on a boat).
| pomian wrote:
| What is maximum mast height? There are loops in Europe like
| this, but you need a mast that you can take down, which means
| you are limited in boat size - for sailboats anyway.
| topkai22 wrote:
| 19.6',limited by a bridge outside Chicago. Several routes
| require a maximum 15' height and others are 17'.
| https://www.greatloop.org/great-loop-information/great-
| loop-...
|
| I've been utterly fascinated by this since I learned about
| it a few months ago. It seems like a very approachable but
| still serious adventure and achievement once done.
| mcdonje wrote:
| Weird how so many streams end at the Massachusetts state line.
|
| Not the dev's fault of course.
|
| I've noticed a similar difference of how rock formations are
| recorded at state line boundaries on USGS maps.
|
| Dealing with different datasets from different bureaucracies is
| an intractable problem.
| tppiotrowski wrote:
| See: USGS 3DEP Program
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ The data is 100% from OpenStreetMap.
| I only have to deal with 1 dataset. I suspect people have
| imported data from Massachusetts into OSM, hence why you see
| the edge. You can edit OSM to connect things up yourself.
| mxfh wrote:
| Seems great for debugging waterway topologies.
|
| Some things I noticed after a few minutes:
|
| - A lot of smaller rivers system and tributaries seem not to be
| connected all the way through as seeing smaller disconnected
| systems with shorter total lengths.
|
| - small rivers that and at the shore geometry of larger rivers
| but are not connected to the main centerline
|
| - some streams are disconnected by other waterbodies where they
| should not be, as there seems to be little consensus on how to
| connect waterways through lakes and other waterbodies, having an
| unnamed waterway along the centerline connect through the named
| lake seems to be a good compromise to not mess up rendering but
| helps with linking up topologies.
|
| https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/52843/does-the-rive...
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ Yeah, it 's been very useful to make
| OSM data better.
|
| > some streams are disconnected by other waterbodies where they
| should not be, as there seems to be little consensus on how to
| connect waterways through lakes and other waterbodies
|
| Yeah, the OSM community is still discussing this:
| https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/should-river-lines-be-...
| tamimio wrote:
| Cool, brb selling my car and getting a boat!
| fanf2 wrote:
| Weirdly, in Cambridge, the River Cam is _not_ marked as a natural
| waterway (fair enough, it is canalized) but the entirely
| artificial drainage ditches around the college back gardens and
| Hobson's Conduit _are_.
| gerdesj wrote:
| The data on Open Street Map (OSM) doesn't materialise
| mysteriously out of the ether! It is the result of people like
| you and I doing recces.
|
| For just one effort to grab data there is a great app called
| "Street Complete" (SC) - give it a bash.
|
| You know how the Cam _is_ so why not tell us all? I live in
| Yeovil, Somerset and after a few sessions on SC, OSM has way
| more detail on my immediate surroundings than Google 's cars
| will ever gather. They (Google int al) will probably "steal" my
| work eventually but then it is public knowledge so not stealing
| at all.
|
| SC gathers a lot of information. For example it wants to know
| about accessibility, which has to be a laudable goal. OSM
| doesn't flog adverts so it is rather more inclusive than
| anything that the FAAANAAAANGS might contemplate. It isn't
| driven by financial profit, so you get back what you put in.
| inasio wrote:
| The Yucatan peninsula in Mexico is very interesting here,
| completely empty of waterways which would make one think it's a
| dessert area per other similar areas of the map, yet it's a very
| lush tropical jungle. A ton of water yet all of it runs
| underground, cenotes [0] are (mostly) undergound sinkholes,
| amazing to swim in
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenote
| ijustlovemath wrote:
| Fun fact about cenotes: most of them were formed from the
| geologic upset that followed the asteroid that wiped out the
| dinosaurs 65Mya
| southernplaces7 wrote:
| Exactly, and if you look at a hydrological map of cenote
| locations in the Yucatan Penninsula, a very obvious,
| concentrated majority of them align very closely with the
| ancient buried crater's curvature. It's fascinating, and
| especially when you consider that of the millions of tourists
| and locals who visit the cenotes annualy, very few realize
| what the scope and ferociously violent origins are of the
| lovely little "scattered" blue pools they play in..
| femto wrote:
| And its inverse: the watershed calculator:
|
| https://mghydro.com/watersheds/
|
| Edit: and river runner:
|
| https://river-runner-global.samlearner.com/
| rmc wrote:
| I made WaterwayMap.org. I wanna make a watershed map too!
| vvpan wrote:
| To those who are thinking about waterway travel I recommend the
| book "The Unlikely Voyage of Jack De Crow: A Mirror Odyssey from
| North Wales to the Black Sea".
| goatbrain wrote:
| Would also recommend "Travels by Narrowboat" available on
| Amazon Prime. The chug-chug of the diesel engine as John moves
| from one canal to another (with some sort of horrific/terrific
| can-based recipe thrown in every now and then) is great
| background TV to have on for that sort of occasion.
| throw0101d wrote:
| Bunch of rivers in/around Toronto (Canada), but we've also lost a
| few to history as well:
|
| * https://www.lostrivers.ca/disappearing.html
|
| * https://www.hiddenhydrology.org/toronto-lost-rivers/
|
| * https://www.blogto.com/city/2014/02/5_lost_rivers_that_run_u...
| pavon wrote:
| Who mapped these? In New Mexico we have a ton of dry arroyos that
| maybe have a couple inches of flowing water a few times a year.
| Zooming in at places I'm familiar with, a surprising number of
| them are mapped. I know of rez roads[1] nearby that aren't on OSM
| or any map I know of, but the ditch we used for cross country
| practice is. Wild!
|
| [1] Two-track dirt roads on the Navajo Reservation that are not
| regularly maintained, or officially numbered/named but which are
| actively used.
| RicoElectrico wrote:
| You can go to https://openstreetmap.org/ , zoom in and enable
| the map data layer. History is accessible from the object
| pages.
| pavon wrote:
| Thanks, that is helpful. It looks like for some of the larger
| ones the editors left comments that dataset was imported from
| USGS quads which makes sense, while other smaller ones don't
| list any source information - possibly mapped personally by
| hiking with a GPS?
| racnid wrote:
| I know I personally mapped one with a GPS and canoe.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| Sometimes waterway maps include calculated flowlines. These are
| algorithmically derived from digital elevation data and more
| accurately represent where water _would_ flow were there water
| flowing. That 's really important not just for New Mexico
| arroyos but for most of the surface of the earth; there are a
| lot more flowlines than perennial streams.
|
| I don't know the provenance of this data though. It's pretty
| spotty, I don't think someone just imported the NHD flowlines
| dataset or something.
| Mr-Frog wrote:
| In the USA, this is likely sourced from the National
| Hydrography Dataset:
|
| https://www.usgs.gov/national-hydrography/national-hydrograp...
| rmc wrote:
| Nope, it's 100% OpenStreetMap data.
|
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_
| matkoniecz wrote:
| OSM has some NHD imports.
| nightbrawler wrote:
| I'm in New Mexico too, there's some creeks I frequent that are
| considered "navigable waterways" and unless it's monsoon
| season, you barely get your ankles wet lol.
| devilbunny wrote:
| By the legal standards that I understand to apply, "navigable
| waterway" is any waterway that is, or _could be made_ ,
| navigable. So it doesn't take much.
| lmum wrote:
| I added a set of arroyos in New Mexico using USGS quadrangle
| sheets, which originate from digital elevation models and
| ground surveys in the 1980s. They're tagged as "intermittent
| streams" in OSM. There's a lot more work to do outside the
| national forests and major cities. One thing I noticed is that
| the dry beds shape road and settlement patterns, beyond just
| being useful for navigation.
|
| NM is undermapped relative to other states. I've wondered if
| this has to do with the complex governance and land claims
| (which can make it difficult to do bulk data imports).
| aqfamnzc wrote:
| It is from OpenStreetMap. (see header and footer.) You can fix
| any errors you see!
| yosito wrote:
| I'm in Thailand, and zooming in to places I'm familiar with, a
| surprising number of rivers and waterfalls are completely
| missing. I suppose there are quite a few factors that affect
| data quality in different regions around the world.
| marklit wrote:
| Add them in https://rapideditor.org/rapid
|
| There are usually several satellite image providers for
| anywhere that isn't a sea or ocean. You can trace over them.
| matkoniecz wrote:
| Asia has much lower number of OpenStreetMap editors than say
| Europe.
|
| Help is welcome! See https://www.openstreetmap.org
| rmc wrote:
| "Who mapped these?" All the data is from OpenStreetMap!
|
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_
| timeon wrote:
| > dry arroyos that maybe have a couple inches of flowing water
| a few times a year
|
| As you can see they are tagged as 'intermittent'.
| https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380234870
| pavon wrote:
| Yes, sorry I didn't mean to imply that they were incorrect or
| shouldn't be mapped. I was just pleasantly surprised that
| someone had done that work.
| eudoraexplora wrote:
| Looks like I know what I'll be doing this weekend. Bravo to
| whomever put this together!
| s3krit wrote:
| I've been waiting for the day that HN would have something
| tangentially related to the English and Welsh canal system so I
| could gush about it. For those that don't know, we have around
| 2500 miles of (mostly) navigable canals around the UK. They were
| built during the industrial revolution prior to the invention of
| trains such that we could transport coal and other goods
| relatively quickly and without damage (consider trying to
| transport pottery, for instance, on the perilous roads of the
| late 1700s. If the bumpy roads didn't destroy your wares, the
| highwaymen might).
|
| These days, obviously, all that has passed and instead we have a
| community of almost entirely leasure boaters - some choosing to
| own narrowboats [1] purely for pleasure, but a significant amount
| of us choose to live on them. Some based in marinas but quite a
| few of us (myself included) preferring a much more nomadic
| lifestyle - being obliged by law to move every 14 days at a
| maximum to new areas and consequentially experiencing the
| richness and beauty of what is, in my mind, a living museum - a
| testament to our past.
|
| Life aboard a narrowboat is cozy. You never have much space but I
| don't find myself lacking. It gets cold in winter, but most of us
| have multifuel stoves which we stuff with coal and (often
| foraged) wood. Right now I'm sat listening to the wind and rain
| lashing against the boat (it's almost 4am so I should really get
| to bed), the boat gently rocking from the weather. And I can
| honestly say that there is nothing half so much worth doing as
| simply messing about in boats.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrowboat
| gavinhoward wrote:
| I only found out about narrowboats recently from [1] (found at
| [2]), and they sound so nice!
|
| I've wanted a tiny house or a skoolie, and I think if I was in
| Britain, I'd go for a narrowboat just as easily.
|
| [1]:
| https://qmacro.org/blog/posts/2024/01/09/battlestation-2024/
|
| [2]:
| https://lobste.rs/s/jrh1od/lobsters_battlestations_screensho...
| lostlogin wrote:
| > I only found out about narrowboats recently
|
| They make excellent walking and biking routes. They are flat,
| no cars, often have a pub, wildlife is frequently visible and
| they are usually quiet. Absolutely loves my time biking them
| in England.
| heads wrote:
| It's always baffled me how the regard that the average
| Englishman holds for itinerant folk is wrapped in a big if
| statement: if (boat) ... # All good
| else: raise TravellerAlert()
| mock-possum wrote:
| Double standards are practically a necessity to maintain
| bigotry. I'd be more surprised to find prejudice that _lacks_
| that kind of hypocrisy.
| JetSetWilly wrote:
| The narrowboaters thast stay near me don't seem to indulge
| in open air defecation everywhere around, they don't appear
| to litter and leave plastic and gas canisters in incredible
| quanties everywhere before buggering off, and they don't go
| door to door with dodgy schemes.
|
| The travellers that occasionally stay in the field next to
| my house do all of this and more.
|
| Pretending that this difference doesn't exist and that
| there's some "double standard" just means you have zero
| direct experience of the matter and just want to have some
| self-righteous "UK bad" moaning. Like it or lump it
| reputations are often deserved and caused by experience
| rather than by random prejudice.
| pachico wrote:
| Wow, all this escalated rather quickly...
| pasc1878 wrote:
| You obviously don't have travellers near you.
|
| Our local parks are now much harder to get into let alone
| if you are disabled as they all have a small rampart
| across any flat entrance to stop cars and caravans being
| driven onto the park.
| pachico wrote:
| I live in Spain, mate, I know a thing or two about this.
| sixothree wrote:
| Since we're on the topic, are there regulations about
| sewerage for longboaters? Are there "hookups" available
| at mooring spots or is it more of a "well it all gets
| diluted when we dump it in the river" kind of thing?
| s3krit wrote:
| You're not allowed to dump any human waste in any of the
| canals or rivers (ignore the fact that plenty of
| companies in the UK do this...).
|
| There are two common approaches to dealing with human
| waste aboard canal boats; cassette toilets which you can
| carry to 'elsan points' placed frequently along the canal
| to dump semi-regularly (I hear anything from a week to a
| month depending on how many aboard). They look like [1] -
| you remove the bottom bit and carry that to empty. And
| secondly, pump-out tanks with a macerator toilet which
| chews up the excrement before being deposited into a
| tank. They're much bigger so need to be emptied less
| often (over 3 months for our 500 litre beast). They need
| to be done at marinas or the ever-decreasing number of
| Canal and River Trust-maintained self-pumpouts. Costs
| about PS10-17 per pump-out. Elsan disposal is free as is
| covered by your license fee. Hundreds of thousands of
| words on forums have been written about the pros and cons
| of either of these approaches, and is considered on the
| canalworld forum to be a bit of a holy war.
|
| A much less common approach is composting toilets.
| There's not a lot of room on boats, so storing the waste
| long enough to turn into an effective compost doesn't
| seem too feasible. And then once it's done, what are you
| gonna do with it? You're on a boat, you don't have a
| garden. And recently CRT informed people that they cannot
| dispose of this compost toilet waste in their provided
| refuse bins.
|
| [1] https://marine-
| deals.freetls.fastly.net/media/catalog/produc...
| justneedaname wrote:
| Narrowboaters don't have the same reputation for a reason
| though. I've only had a handful of experiences with those who
| choose caravans as their method of itinerancy but they've all
| been negative. Everyone I know has had the same experience.
| It's disingenuous to suggest people hold differing views
| about them for no reason
| actionfromafar wrote:
| bool boat = social_standing || affluence;
| JR1427 wrote:
| This isn't really true.
|
| You get lots of people living on boats because housing is
| expensive (like my mother and stepdad).
|
| You do get plenty of "crusty" boat people, but generally
| they keep themselves to themselves.
|
| Maybe this is because people on boats are often in public
| and accessible places, where people will quickly complain.
| Symbiote wrote:
| None of us have ever seen a marina or mooring place covered
| in litter and human waste, or been subjected to petty crime
| by the boaters.
| s3krit wrote:
| I have, however, seen the Canal and River Trust's assets
| stolen from their working boats (steel fencing, tools, the
| door or something off an excavator if I heard the guy
| correctly). Not by boaters, but by the nearby travellers.
| mc32 wrote:
| Why? They are different populations that engage in different
| behaviors; one group engages in more antisocial behavior than
| the other. It's natural to want to avoid troublemakers.
| mock-possum wrote:
| If you were to give take a broad guess at the cost of moving
| around like that, in terms of maintaining supplies and securing
| a place to stay when you're not in the mood to move with the
| current, what would that come out to, say monthly?
| londons_explore wrote:
| There is a massive time Vs money tradeoff with boats.
|
| You can do it for almost zero money (perhaps $100/month) if
| you put many hours per day into maintaining the boat yourself
| and making everything you need yourself.
|
| Or you can pay for good gear and get all maintenance done by
| a professional and your canal boat will be costing more like
| $3000/month - and when you do that, it becomes a rich persons
| hobby.
| AlexMuir wrote:
| It depends on the level of comfort you want. If you're
| willing to shit in a bucket and shower once a fortnight then
| you can do it very cheaply and it'll be acceptable. Try that
| in a house and there will be concerns for your welfare. If
| you want a bathtub, on-demand central heating, a big fridge-
| freezer, bow thrusters, macerator toilets and a permanent
| mooring with mains electricity then you'll pay much more than
| you would for a house. Horses for courses. But doing things
| on boats is fun, and inventing solutions is great.
|
| Edit: You wanted a figure - for the sort of boat you'll find
| on a canal in the UK. Bottom end: buy a small fibreglass boat
| for PS5k, pay PS1k a year for your licence (many at this end
| don't bother. Another PS1k a year for maintenance and fuel )
|
| Top end: Buy a big boat for PS300k, PS2k a year licence, PS6k
| mooring, PS1k insurance, PS5-10k a year in maintenance.
|
| Also factor in that boats mostly depreciate (though the last
| couple of years have been an exception). If you spend PS100k
| on a boat today, you won't be able to sell it in 10 years get
| that PS100k back. If you fail to keep on top of maintenance a
| boat will rapidly lose value.
| s3krit wrote:
| You'll often see articles in the newspapers here gushing
| romantically about how a couple moved onto the canal in order
| to save money, and it's all so very nice and wonderful. The
| reality is once you've factored in a mooring, maintenance and
| other things, it tends to be comparable to living on land. A
| lot of people can't continuously cruise as we do, due to jobs
| and other responsibilities.
|
| A few grand a year for a mooring, plus around PS1k/year for
| your license (all boats on the Canal and River Trust's
| waterways must be licensed). Every few years you need your
| boat lifting out and the blacking on the bottom re-done (more
| PSPSPS), and in winter you get through a fair amount of coal
| and other fuel to keep the boat heated (I think we're at
| about PS100/mo for diesel + coal, but some people burn a lot
| more coal than us).
|
| You really have to want to do it for the experience of living
| on the canals rather than a way to live cheaply (though it
| can be done).
| EtherealMind wrote:
| My 0.02p, it cost about PS6000/yr to do it cheap. Goes up to
| PS10k/yr with a full time mooring in a marina and outsourced
| services.
|
| Boat pricing comes in a spectrum that very roughly looks like
| this:
|
| 3. PS20-PS40K Narrowboats are thirty or more years old, or
| are under 50ft. They have had many owners each of which will
| have done something to the boat. The engine fittings will be
| old eg. coolant hoses , the radiators might not work, the
| fireplace might need replacing, there is rust in important
| places needing welding and so on. There may be overplating on
| the hull to repair holes. In general, you can expect to
| perform regular/constant maintenance and repairs to maintain
| and keep them in working order. (some people enjoy this, you
| may not)
|
| 4. In the 40-60K range expect the boat to be about 20 years
| old. Generally modern and most things will be working but it
| might not have a good electrical system for modern
| lifestyles. It will have 20 years of wear and tear, and the
| interior might feel old and outdated.
|
| 5. In the PS100k-PS120 range you should see 5-10 year old
| boats. It probably will have a modern toilet/shower, modern
| electrical maybe a solar panel, a nicer kitchen and modern
| diesel engine/gearbox and propeller.
|
| 6. At PS160K-180K you can get a new but simple/basic boat
| fitout probably no solar, no dinette, few cupboards. Or it's
| a five year old custom build that has been fully fitted with
| many extras e.g washing machines, quality inverter/batteries
|
| 7. At PS200K+ it a brand new boat, built to your
| specification. An all electric boutique boat is PS220K-240K.
| I've heard of narrowboats up to PS280K. Luxury wide beams
| over PS350K do exist.
| fernly wrote:
| There are several narrowboaters who record their travels on YT,
| perhaps the best, certainly one of the first, is "Travels by
| Narrowboat", with 6 seasons on Prime[1] and the more recent
| years on YT[2].
|
| [1] https://www.amazon.com/s?k=travels+by+narrowboat
|
| [2] https://www.youtube.com/@CountryHouseGent
| yawpitch wrote:
| Kevins videos have always been great, and from the same
| generation of "BoatTubers" as myself and my wife and dog
| (we're Minimal List), but there were earlier (including the
| slightly more venerable CruisingTheCut) and a whole slew of
| great channels that came later, all speaking to different
| tastes and styles and audiences. My personal favorite as an
| introduction to narrowboat life has been Robbie Cummings for
| a while now; he ended up on the BBC as Canal Boat Diaries, so
| the production quality is just great, and he's also about the
| nicest and most affable fellow I've met on the canals, which
| in this community is saying quite a bit.
| AlexMuir wrote:
| How interesting that you're on HN. We regularly travel up
| and down the ship canal to/from Manchester. Give me a shout
| if you're ever in Manchester again, I think we'd enjoy a
| beer.
| AlexMuir wrote:
| Fellow boater here - I live on a Dutch Barge. Also awake at
| 0530 with creaking lines in this storm. Lovely lifestyle. We
| registered our new baby's address as the boat on a birth
| certificate last week and had no problems. Good luck to any
| future researcher geocoding that! I expected a postcode to be
| required but it wasn't :)
| s3krit wrote:
| Ah I love a Dutch barge, does yours have functioning
| leeboards? Very surprised you didn't need a postcode for the
| address on the birth certificate - although I suppose if it's
| 'place of birth', it could be anywhere really and that place
| might not have a postcode.
| AlexMuir wrote:
| No leeboards I'm afraid - mine is a replica Luxemotor built
| in 2011. I have a friend with leeboards and they are
| beautiful but without sails they are just ornamental and
| one more thing to sand and varnish!
| mattpallissard wrote:
| I'm not a liveaboard but I live in an archipelago and have done
| my fair share of commercial fishing.
|
| IMO: When the weather is nice, there is no better way to travel
| than by boat. If the weather is poor, there is no worse way to
| travel than by boat.
|
| That said, while being stuck at anchor due to bad weather can
| be frustrating, there is something pleasant about laying next
| to the stove while you're being tossed about... Unless you're
| trying to sleep while you're listening to your anchor drag.
| Doctor_Fegg wrote:
| Another narrowboater here - though leisure not liveaboard. We
| moor our 40-footer in Worcester, just off the Severn. I worked
| with the canals for many years, including a spell at British
| Waterways and then editing Waterways World magazine, and I
| still draw the maps for WW. I have a 75%-finished canal mapping
| app I really need to get round to releasing...
| lostlogin wrote:
| Some of us here would love to see it, or even just hear the
| concept.
| pabloescobyte wrote:
| Seconded. There's at least two of us for sure!
| mlrtime wrote:
| off topic: It's always fun reading the writings from
| Englanders about topics that are not foreign to America.
|
| I understand the vocabulary that I've never read before but
| it's like reading a passage from the 18th century. :)
| PetitPrince wrote:
| So, how does that work when you have to receive letters ? Do
| you have a PO box somewhere or a home port of some sort ?
| yawpitch wrote:
| It's easiest to have a home address somewhere you can use as
| a permanent mailing addresss, but there's a system called
| Post Retente that can be used to receive mail at a lot of
| (especially more rural) Post Office locations. For the most
| part though it's best to convert all the bills and whatnot to
| online delivery and use Amazon lockers and the Click and
| Collect services offered by many shops to get what you need.
| jampekka wrote:
| Loved the canals when I lived in England (Leeds). I didn't
| narrowboat, but rode bike (including commute) on the canal
| sidewalks.
|
| Canals tend to have wildish nature around them (quite rare in
| England) and they are digged totally flat (with a very subtle
| incline/decline, apart from waterlocks). They have decent
| sidewalks that make them ideal to bike along (quite rare in
| England). They are very long so you can have a daytrip to visit
| multiple towns. And they don't have cars (quite rare in
| England).
|
| Canals are great!
| bdsa wrote:
| The "sidewalks" are towpaths - horses and/or people would
| walk along those to pull boats along.
| shafyy wrote:
| This is incredible! How easy is it to buy and register a
| Narrowboat? How does it work legally, can you register your
| home address to the boat?
| yawpitch wrote:
| If you've got the money for one it's easy to buy (see a site
| called ApolloDuck for used prices) and register, though the
| specifics of registration depend on which waterways you want
| to be on (the Canal and River Trust covers the majority, the
| Environment Agency some key sections, and there's some odd
| few others managed by their own agencies). It's perfectly
| legal, but as Covid really proved access to services can be a
| bit confusing, as it's the mooring, not the boat, that can be
| classed as having a post code, and pretty much everything in
| the UK is tied to your post code. So while the boat can be
| your residence it can be more than a little difficult to
| access things like GP Surgeries (primary medical care( and
| other government systems that assume you're at a fixed
| address. It's a great way to live and to see the UK, but it
| has caveats for anyone with chronic medical issues, for
| example.
| shafyy wrote:
| I see, thanks. And I'm also assuming I would need to get
| some special license to sail a Narrowboat? As a non-UK
| citizen (EU/Swiss), do you think it could be complicated to
| get a Narrowboat and live on it for half a year or so?
| JR1427 wrote:
| No, you don't need a licence to pilot a boat on most
| inland waters in the UK (there may be exceptions on busy
| commercial stretches).
|
| It would not be complicated to get a boat, assuming you
| have the money. You basically need to buy a boat, pay for
| the relevant licences, make sure the boat has the correct
| safety certificate, and off you go.
|
| You cannot just stop and tie up anywhere. You either need
| some private land where you will keep the boat, or you
| need to make sure you don't violate the rules of the
| public areas. There is a concept of "continuous
| cruising", which means you need to move on every 14 days
| (I think).
|
| Anyway, not complicated, but requires a bit of homework.
| Easiest if you can find a mentor who is already boating
| in the UK to help you out.
| omnibrain wrote:
| A few years ago, we decided to travel to Wales, mainly to visit
| the Doctor Who Experience, but also to pay
| Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch a
| visit (for the novelty factor). We flew to Stansted and then
| drove through the English countryside and had a truly magical
| moment, when we decided to stop for a short rest. In small town
| we drove onto a parking lot, and then followed the sign to a
| small park/picnic are. The park was right at one of the
| waterways and there lay a few of those narrowboats and one or
| two were navigating the channel. It was such an unexpected
| sight, it felt light out of this world. Before that I had never
| heard of them.
|
| Later I saw a depiction of life on such a boat when my wife
| watched Call the Midwife. It must have been Episode S05E07.
| mc32 wrote:
| You can find a show or two on streaming services that expose
| life on narowboats.
| rmc wrote:
| Lovely! I'm Irish, we don't have it as much. But I'd love to do
| a canal boat holiday. Doddleing along the canals, stopping in a
| lovely english country pub... oh I can dream.
|
| I made WaterwayMap.org, and one of the view is for anything
| OpenStreetMap considers "boatable":
| <https://waterwaymap.org/#tiles=planet-waterway-boatable> I
| know nothing about this topic, so if there's anything missing,
| I'm willing to add it.
| focusedone wrote:
| First I've heard of this, but it's super cool! Can you suggest
| a blog or small web site to learn more about it?
| s3krit wrote:
| For the history of the canals, wikipedia[1] has a pretty good
| page. The Canal and River Trust (CRT) is the current
| authority for much of the canal system in England and Wales,
| and they have a site[2] with plenty of little articles on
| individual little bits and bobs.
|
| If you're after more of a modern angle - i.e., stories and
| insights from people that live on them (or just use them)
| today, there are many blogs from boaters, but I tend to not
| read them unles I come across a particular post addressing
| something relevant to me (usually repairs...). There are also
| tons of vlogs and youtube channels where people document
| their journeys which other people in the comments have
| mentioned, and even TV shows! I highly recommend Canal Boat
| Diaries by Robbie Cumming, though outside the UK I'm not sure
| where it can be found. He also has a youtube channel [3]
| which is less highly polished and a bit more 'real'.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_British_cana
| l_s...
|
| [2] https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/things-to-do/canal-history
|
| [3] https://www.youtube.com/c/RobbieCumming
| mayormcmatt wrote:
| Gush on! This is the kind of thing I love to occasionally see
| here. Wish I could live on the water, but slip fees are pricey
| and limited where I'm at. Best to you!
| EtherealMind wrote:
| I spend 8 months a year on my narrowboat moving around the
| canals as I hunt for pubs, relaxation and peace. In winter I
| hibernate in my house, pining for the canals and freedom.
|
| Also, I work full-time from the boat.
| anonu wrote:
| This is cool - makes me realize how incredible the Intracoastal
| Waterway is [1]: 3000 miles of mostly protected waterways along
| the US Eastern Seaboard. Definitely on my bucket list to sail it
| down one day.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intracoastal_Waterway
| gry wrote:
| Minnesota's has expansive rivers feeding the Mississippi[1] and
| it has one million acres designated to a canoe wilderness -- the
| Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness -- bounded by the Canadian
| Quetico to the north[2].
|
| They are navigable by canoe by design, yet they are flitting
| dots.
|
| It gives me pause; what is this site trying to convey? It's a
| fantastic effort, yet for the water we have, it doesn't match.
|
| [1]
| https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/watertrails/interactive_map/inde...
| [2] https://www.paddleplanner.com/tools/maps/bwcaqueticomap.aspx
| maxglute wrote:
| Is there a legend somewhere? Or a way to delineate something like
| a small culvert versus large canal.
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ There isn 't a legend, because all
| waterways are treated the same.
| hasoleju wrote:
| If you zoom in you see a length in km next to each river. For
| small ones it looks like it is the total length of that waterway.
| For bigger rivers that I'm familiar with I was not able to make
| sense of that number. It is not the length, it's too big for
| that. Maybe it's the total length of that waterway and all
| connected waterways? It also does not change when I travel along
| that waterway.
|
| My example is the river Neckar close to Heidelberg in Germany.
| The number there is:2595963 km
|
| In reality the length of each river is measured from it's
| estuary. For bigger waterways in Germany you see a sign every
| kilometer with a number. The number is the distance in kilometers
| to the estuary of that waterway.
| Doctor_Fegg wrote:
| > Maybe it's the total length of that waterway and all
| connected waterways?
|
| Exactly this.
| rmc wrote:
| > For bigger rivers that I'm familiar with I was not able to
| make sense of that number. [...] Maybe it's the total length of
| that waterway and all connected waterways?
|
| Correct.
|
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_
| londons_explore wrote:
| I was surprised at the rivers in the middle of the Sahara.
|
| But upon zooming in on Google satellite view, I do see dry
| riverbeds in those places, and even the occasional tree along the
| route of the 'river', so I guess occasionally there must be a
| storm and those rivers become wet and flow.
| swarnie wrote:
| Similarly i was surprised to find its marked a river in my
| village i didn't know existed.
|
| Turns out its the drainage ditch they dug to stop the new
| Barrett boxes from flooding.
|
| I think the data may need some work....
| timeon wrote:
| > I think the data may need some work....
|
| Well If you want to, mapping around local village is good way
| to start.
|
| https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dditch
|
| https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:intermittent
| flohofwoe wrote:
| Crazy detailed, but also kinda random. For my home area, there
| are small creeks/brooks (??? in German "Bach") which are
| literally just half a meter wide and in the middle of a forest on
| the map, but others which are flowing right through settlements
| are not listed.
| matkoniecz wrote:
| Yes, https://www.openstreetmap.org has quite inconsistent
| detail as it relies on people mapping stuff.
|
| And help is welcome, anyone can join and help with mapping!
| lukasm wrote:
| I had a look at central Europe and this map not accurate e.g.
| motor boar = yes and it only shows w few parts of the same river.
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ The data is 100% OpenStreetMap. It
| 's possible many rivers are missing the `boat` tag (which that
| uses). If you add the missing tag, then it'll appear on WWM.org
| tomorrow!
| Jemm wrote:
| When choosing 'Navigable by boat', the massive Trent-Severn
| system in Southern Ontario disappears.
| Thedarkb wrote:
| Well, it's probably worth your while to update it then.
| rmc wrote:
| _(I made WaterwayMap.org)_ The data is 100% OpenStreetMap, and
| updated daily. Something missing on WWM.org means something
| missing on OSM. You can fix that yourself!
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| Looks nice but it's probably not really usable for navigation. I
| checked the Netherlands and Germany. You'd need more details for
| safely navigating on the water. But it definitely has potential.
|
| There are also some other specialized open street map based maps
| for
|
| - rails: https://www.openrailwaymap.org/
|
| - cycling: https://www.opencyclemap.org/
|
| - sea map (competes with this I guess, and is a bit more detailed
| for navigation): https://map.openseamap.org/
|
| And probably loads of other ones.
| s3krit wrote:
| For the canals in the UK there's https://opencanalmap.uk/
| Doctor_Fegg wrote:
| FWIW it's not really "open" in any sense. The code isn't
| public let alone open, and the source data doesn't conform to
| the Open Definition: the data is from the Canal & River Trust
| who have exasperatingly placed a non-commercial restriction
| on it. (I can guarantee that CRT spent more in lawyer hours
| writing a custom licence than they've received income from
| licensing the data commercially.)
| timeon wrote:
| > Looks nice but it's probably not really usable for
| navigation.
|
| It is mostly QA tool for OSM contributors.
| rmc wrote:
| Hello! I'm the creator of WaterwayMap.org.
|
| The code is here:
| <https://github.com/amandasaurus/waterwaymap.org/> if you want to
| file a bug report or feature request. The main code to calculate
| the network is `osm-lump-ways`:
| <https://github.com/amandasaurus/osm-lump-ways>
| ozim wrote:
| Something in the same topic: https://map.openseamap.org/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-01-24 23:01 UTC)