Jump to content

canal neglect


iteldoo4me

Featured Posts

During my first cruise for almost 5 months due to the high level of water we have had to endure,I was dissapointed at the number of unattended 'faults' by BW on my travels.The main being poorly maintained lock gates that wouldn't open properly,and masses of amounted wood floating near the locks,half sunken burnt out boats protruding out of the water,severed trees hanging precariously into our paths...which in my opinion should really be dealt with.With BW spending lots of our 'subscriptions' on real esates and plush looking offices for themselves,I wonder what other boaters have to say about this.Am I being picky?....and is this an issue that has been noticed in other parts of the country other than mine; and the namely Trent & Mersey?Perhaps it is just the onslaught of the new season that has begun and BW just havent got round to it?Any ideas when BW might be moving the half sunken narrowboat at Sawley weir,thats been bobbing up and down for near on 3 months now?and why oh why do BW insist on mooring their dredging boats on the narrowest part of the T&M canal making navigation just oh so difficult...Come on BW its about time you bucked your ideas up and spent time keeping our cruising waters clean and clear!

Would all other readers to this please be good enough to comment on their own findings as I dont wish to be singled out as a moaner...many thanks and happy cruising for 2007.:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LeicCanal03-06005.jpg

 

Hi all

 

Yes, things here down south on the Soar aren't to good either but that is mostly due to those floods we experienced a month ago which produced an amazing amount of drift wood, human produced rubbish and other matter that has defied the effort of the small team of the local authority, BW and their contractors to quickly clear up. Many trees were blown into the cut and these WERE quickly cleared only for the local dim wits to throw the diced up logs into the water for an extremely low level thrill which have choked some of the city's lock gates. But this is too in hand and passage through our fair city of Leicester is no problem according to the many boaters passing through on Good Friday. Much of this mixed debris has ended up in heaps - nay - islands in the side/back waters of the Soar which aren't and haven't been navigatable for many years.

As for the Floating Pennywort weed, all those responsible for the navigation recognise its potential for serious disruption and have, after three years of bureaucratic prevarication, mounted a campaign to eradicating this pernicious invader from the local waterways over the next five years.

 

Quite honestly you couldn’t ask for more, (well you could, but you would wasting your breath!)

 

 

King Learie :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BW have a out of sight out of mind policy - If the section of canal goes through a town the tow paths are tended and everything in the garden is smelling of roses, if not you have got no chance - they are too busy thrashing the grass on the Cain Hill flight within half an inch of its life, and I agree with you about the BW flotilla - they just abandon barges and tugs anywhere that takes there fancy. Mind you I am going to contradict myself now, have just come back from Ellesmere Port on the Shroppy , the tow path is all tarmac in this area but the canal is full of crap, I have never seen such a dirty stretch of canal in my 15 months of cruising the system, sightings included a fridge, computer screen and numerous shopping baskets. I dread to think what joe public thinks of the canals when he goes on his 30 minute boat trip from the Boat Museum.

 

RANT OVER - Have a nice day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BW have a out of sight out of mind policy - If the section of canal goes through a town the tow paths are tended and everything in the garden is smelling of roses, if not you have got no chance - they are too busy thrashing the grass on the Cain Hill flight within half an inch of its life, and I agree with you about the BW flotilla - they just abandon barges and tugs anywhere that takes there fancy. Mind you I am going to contradict myself now, have just come back from Ellesmere Port on the Shroppy , the tow path is all tarmac in this area but the canal is full of crap, I have never seen such a dirty stretch of canal in my 15 months of cruising the system, sightings included a fridge, computer screen and numerous shopping baskets. I dread to think what joe public thinks of the canals when he goes on his 30 minute boat trip from the Boat Museum.

 

RANT OVER - Have a nice day

 

Thankfully I can claim now not to be a moaning old git......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What on earth is wrong with clearing it up yourself, as you go along. Then put all the TVs etc. at the next rubbish disposal for BW to clear up. If it's a tree branch, saw it up to use on the stove when it dries out.

 

I don't get paid to do that, or I pay my license for that, I hear you whine. No, you pay your license so lots of people can have a cushy job on good money, with a sizeable chunk going into their pension fund.

 

So why do it. Because the satisfaction comes from knowing it's the same as giving every druggie, and doley work shy, vandalising waster, who's trying to turn the country into a tip, a smack in the mouth everytime you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

,and masses of amounted wood floating near the locks,

Firewood, as it's known to the "glass half full gang"

 

half sunken burnt out boats protruding out of the water

"someone's home/project? or better still, a bit of research and it could become your project.

 

severed trees hanging precariously into our paths...which in my opinion should really be dealt with.

I agree entirely, we're not going to solve the problem of overhanging branches until we kill all the trees. I think we should start a 'Downing street petition' calling for the wholesale use of Agent Orange and Napalm along the towpath. Let's clean up these disgusting plants once and for all and install some nice clean concrete.

 

Any ideas when BW might be moving the half sunken narrowboat at Sawley weir,thats been bobbing up and down for near on 3 months now?

Any photos? Half sunken, still bobbing after 3 months sounds like a reasonable hull. Wish I'd known about it a couple of weeks ago when I drove up to Sawley.

 

Come on BW its about time you bucked your ideas up and spent time keeping our cruising waters clean and clear!

I don't want my waterways sterile and bland thanks

 

I dont wish to be singled out as a moaner

Too late! Don't worry though you're not alone.

 

I like to see old semi-derelict boats on the cut, and weighing up their potential (there goes that half full cup again).

 

I miss the days when you could pick crab apples and blackberries from the overhanging branches.

 

If there's firewood in the cut I'll pull it out and burn it.

 

If there's rubbish stopping a lock gate I'll get out my keb and clear it.

 

I pull litter out of the canal and drop it off at a rubbish point. Not my job, I know, but I'm also guilty of picking litter up off the streets and putting it in the bin. I dropped off a mattress, loads of old polythene and a fridge freezer at the sutton stop rubbish point once, all of it dragged out of the canal on a trip from charity dock.

 

Our licences will go up and the services provided will go down. This is inevitable, so either get used to it or sell the boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yes! Adelaide, reputedly the last wooden Royalty class butty left (the owner won't let me take measurements to confirm though). Built July 1931 by Walker bros of Rickmansworth. I did some work on her many years ago. Refloated her three times as well. Last I heard she was up the top of Hatton flight. She's a lot stronger than she looks, and looks like she's had a recent docking judging by the shinyness of the blackstuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

During my first cruise for almost 5 months due to the high level of water we have had to endure,I was dissapointed at the number of unattended 'faults' by BW on my travels.The main being poorly maintained lock gates that wouldn't open properly,and masses of amounted wood floating near the locks,half sunken burnt out boats protruding out of the water,severed trees hanging precariously into our paths...which in my opinion should really be dealt with.With BW spending lots of our 'subscriptions' on real esates and plush looking offices for themselves,I wonder what other boaters have to say about this.Am I being picky?....and is this an issue that has been noticed in other parts of the country other than mine; and the namely Trent & Mersey?Perhaps it is just the onslaught of the new season that has begun and BW just havent got round to it?Any ideas when BW might be moving the half sunken narrowboat at Sawley weir,thats been bobbing up and down for near on 3 months now?and why oh why do BW insist on mooring their dredging boats on the narrowest part of the T&M canal making navigation just oh so difficult...Come on BW its about time you bucked your ideas up and spent time keeping our cruising waters clean and clear!

Would all other readers to this please be good enough to comment on their own findings as I dont wish to be singled out as a moaner...many thanks and happy cruising for 2007.:D

Boaters and their licenses directly provide appreciably less than 20% of B.W.`s income . Possibly as little as 15% . Their property portfolio is by far their biggest earner and therefore their number one priority. I think if people were entirely honest we would see that the actual navigations and the infrastructure that supports them are seen by the powers that be as a mighty nuisance that they have been historically lumbered with. Face it , if you were charged with exploiting assets to the full would you want to be stuck with a dilapilated canal system in need of constant and major maintenance when you have some of the best and most valuable building land in the country at your disposal and a mandate to make the most of it?

Cheers

Phil

Edited by Phil Speight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boaters and their licenses directly provide appreciably less than 20% of B.W.`s income . Possibly as little as 15% . Their property portfolio is by far their biggest earner and therefore their number one priority. I think if people were entirely honest we would see that the actual navigations and the infrastructure that supports them are seen by the powers that be as a mighty nuisance that they have been historically lumbered with. Face it , if you were charged with exploiting assets to the full would you want to be stuck with a dilapilated canal system in need of constant and major maintenance when you have some of the best and most valuable building land in the country at your disposal and a mandate to make the most of it?

Cheers

Phil

 

I always think you can tell more about people's priorities by looking at where they spend their money, rather than where they make it.

 

In fact, licence income accounts for only 9 per cent of BW's trading income (it's about £11 million from licences), and if you take the government grant into account that proportion falls to under 6 per cent. A similar proportion (about another £11 million) comes from mooring fees and marinas.

 

But if you look at what BW spends on the canals, the total is far higher than the £22 million raised directly from boaters. Maintenance and dredging on the leisure canals came to nearly £30 million, with another £5.5 million spent on what BW calls "multi-use" waterways (such as the Trent, the Aire and Calder, and the Weaver). Then there were staff costs of around £58 million.

 

So while BW makes very little of its money from boaters it spends rather a lot on the things they benefit from.

 

(All figures from the 2006 annual report)

 

you pay your license so lots of people can have a cushy job on good money, with a sizeable chunk going into their pension fund.

 

Average BW salary is £27,000. And the pension fund has a deficit of £56 million.

 

Any ideas when BW might be moving the half sunken narrowboat at Sawley weir,thats been bobbing up and down for near on 3 months now?

 

Could it be that the same high water levels which have kept you tied up prevented the recovery of this boat?

Edited by adam1uk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boaters and their licenses directly provide appreciably less than 20% of B.W.`s income . Possibly as little as 15% . Their property portfolio is by far their biggest earner and therefore their number one priority. I think if people were entirely honest we would see that the actual navigations and the infrastructure that supports them are seen by the powers that be as a mighty nuisance that they have been historically lumbered with. Face it , if you were charged with exploiting assets to the full would you want to be stuck with a dilapilated canal system in need of constant and major maintenance when you have some of the best and most valuable building land in the country at your disposal and a mandate to make the most of it?

Cheers

Phil

 

 

Phil.

 

There is a lot more to it than that, BW have been pedalling that 20% line for years, it amounts to fiddling the figures. It could just as easily be argued that the problem is not that boat licence income is too low but that their spending is far too high. If BW concentrated on what should be their core activity, the care and maintenance of the canal system as they have been tasked to do, their income and expenditure would be very much closer to being in balance.

 

Instead they adopt all the ambitions, pretencion's, trappings and presumably costs of a multi-national company. If BW was indeed a private company it would be quite a small one, they would not have the resources to spend on new offices every two or three years and the very top heavy management structure they have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil.

 

There is a lot more to it than that, BW have been pedalling that 20% line for years, it amounts to fiddling the figures. It could just as easily be argued that the problem is not that boat licence income is too low but that their spending is far too high. If BW concentrated on what should be their core activity, the care and maintenance of the canal system as they have been tasked to do, their income and expenditure would be very much closer to being in balance.

 

Instead they adopt all the ambitions, pretencion's, trappings and presumably costs of a multi-national company. If BW was indeed a private company it would be quite a small one, they would not have the resources to spend on new offices every two or three years and the very top heavy management structure they have now.

I agree entirely. The government needs to see the canal system as a national asset with great heritage value, not economic value.

 

£30 million pounds is a ridiculous amount to spend on a mere dredging operation. Assuming the whole system is dredged each year (pause for raucous laughter) that's £15k per mile; dredging; never!

 

Road maintenance, on average, costs less than £3.2k per mile. Nobody can convince me the canals get more maintenence than our roads (I worked as highways inspector, maintaining the roads in Daventry district btw).

 

Either the figures are flawed or someone's telling porkies.

 

Edited because my figures were flawed.

Edited by carlt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot the difference:

 

Maintenance and dredging on the leisure canals came to nearly £30 million

 

£30 million pounds is a ridiculous amount to spend on a mere dredging operation.
Edited by adam1uk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot the defference:

Ok, fair point.

 

£15k per mile is a ridiculous amount to be spending on the repair and maintenance of a canal system that is as poorly maintained as ours.

Edited to add: and the £3k per mile I had to maintain the roads included the wages bill.

 

Better?

Edited by carlt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, fair point.

 

£15k per mile is a ridiculous amount to be spending on the repair and maintenance of a canal system that is as poorly maintained as ours.

Edited to add: and the £3k per mile I had to maintain the roads included the wages bill.

 

Better?

 

Well I guess some things cost a lot to maintain, particularly when they're a couple of hundred years old. I'd imagine that tunnels, aqueducts, embankments etc push the cost up. How much does a pair of made-to-measure lock gates cost? And one-off problems can add to the figure -- the breach on the Rochdale apparently cost well over £1 million to repair.

 

Bearing in mind that most of the road maintenance round here consists of slapping in a bit of tarmac so it almost fills a pothole, or spraying some sticky stuff on the road then throwing a load of stones on top, I'm not surprised that canal maintenance is most expensive.

Edited by adam1uk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess some things cost a lot to maintain, particularly when they're a couple of hundred years old. I'd imagine that tunnels, aqueducts, embankments etc push the cost up. How much does a pair of made-to-measure lock gates cost? And one-off problems can add to the figure -- the breach on the Rochdale apparently cost well over £1 million to repair.

 

Bearing in mind that most of the road maintenance round here consists of slapping in a bit of tarmac so it almost fills a pothole, or spraying some sticky stuff on the road then throwing a load of stones on top, I'm not surprised that canal maintenance is most expensive.

Your lack of knowledge on civil engineering matters is beginning to show. Have you never driven over a bridge (bw doesn't maintain them, your highway authority does), through a tunnel? Do you not wonder how the street lamps, traffic lights, other street furniture gets maintained? Ever wondered how come the roads don't flood every time it rains? Who mows the verges, renews the white lines, makes sure there isn't a single trip greater than 10mm in your footway, Puts disabled drop kerbs on street corners, clears vegetation from road signs, dredges roadside watercourses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your lack of knowledge on civil engineering matters is beginning to show. Have you never driven over a bridge (bw doesn't maintain them, your highway authority does), through a tunnel? Do you not wonder how the street lamps, traffic lights, other street furniture gets maintained? Ever wondered how come the roads don't flood every time it rains? Who mows the verges, renews the white lines, makes sure there isn't a single trip greater than 10mm in your footway, Puts disabled drop kerbs on street corners, clears vegetation from road signs, dredges roadside watercourses?

 

Your lack of knowledge of where I live is beginning to show. No street lights here, no traffic lights for miles, no white lines, the road floods whenever it rains, the verges are seldom mown, signs are obstructed by vegetation, no footpaths so no drop kerbs!!!

 

Actually, I'd be interested to know where you got the figure of £3000 per mile for road maintenance. I've just looked up the current year's budget for West Sussex. It says there are 2500 miles of road for which the county is responsible, and the highways maintenance budget is £20,554,000. That gives a cost per mile of £8221. Of course trunk roads an motorways aren't included, because they're maintained by the Highways Agency (and I'd guess -- although I wouldn't claim to know -- that they'd cost more to maintain).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil.

 

There is a lot more to it than that, BW have been pedalling that 20% line for years, it amounts to fiddling the figures. It could just as easily be argued that the problem is not that boat licence income is too low but that their spending is far too high. If BW concentrated on what should be their core activity, the care and maintenance of the canal system as they have been tasked to do, their income and expenditure would be very much closer to being in balance.

 

Instead they adopt all the ambitions, pretencion's, trappings and presumably costs of a multi-national company. If BW was indeed a private company it would be quite a small one, they would not have the resources to spend on new offices every two or three years and the very top heavy management structure they have now.

 

John

 

"Fiddling the figures" is a strong allegation, I hope that you can substantiate this, or if you can not, you should retract it.

 

Licences and moorings in 2005/06 accounted for £11.4m and £4.6m respectively, which is only 13.5% of the direct costs incurred in maintaining the network year on year. So, in fact, it's actually less than 20% quoted elsewhere.

 

I can see from other comments on this thread that we are not currently meeting the expectations of all boaters in terms of maintenance on the Cut. But John, can you honestly tell me that the canals were better maintained 30 years ago than to the standard they are maintained at these days? Can you tell me that you had more miles available to cruise 30 years ago than you do today?

 

How do you think BW is able to maintain the waterways at today's costs without additional income other than that proportion provided by licences and moorings? Total maintenance is well over £100m each year. Add the figures above to £55.4m Government grant and it doesn't reach "over £100m". Where else should the money come from?

 

Eugene

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey look Eugene's back. Welcome back

 

there's a piece in this fortnight's private eye having a pop at DEFRA that mentions BW.

 

One day we're going to have to get John O, and Eugene into a boxing ring.

Edited by fuzzyduck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll tell you one fact I know.

 

The shared 1 mile of dirt track to Bardney Lock is usually terrible....full of potholes.

 

Someone I know offered to fill them in for £200. Using rubble, and a tractor and bucket this is quite a simple job.

 

He was refused, and I was later told BW had put £10,000 aside to do the job. A few months later a digger driver levelled the whole of the road. It was as smooth as a metalled road, for about 6 weeks, then it soon deteriated into a worse state than before.

 

Several weeks later, another gang filled the potholes with tarmac. I don't know who paid them.

 

The road was OKish for the rest of last year, but now it's almost as bad as it was at first.

 

For the same result, they could have saved £9800, money invested would have paid someone to repair the road each year for £200.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your lack of knowledge of where I live is beginning to show. No street lights here, no traffic lights for miles, no white lines, the road floods whenever it rains, the verges are seldom mown, signs are obstructed by vegetation, no footpaths so no drop kerbs!!!

 

I don't know where you live, but I imagine your county does actually have towns. Most do and that is where the greatest expenditure goes

 

Actually, I'd be interested to know where you got the figure of £3000 per mile for road maintenance. I've just looked up the current year's budget for West Sussex. It says there are 2500 miles of road for which the county is responsible, and the highways maintenance budget is £20,554,000. That gives a cost per mile of £8221.

 

It's an average figure. It doesn't surprise me in the least that a county in the south east gets far more than the average amount. But, lets assume leafy west sussex's figure of £8k is the average (bearing in mind this includes manpower on which, according to your figures, BW spends another £50m ) if you really think that the highway maintenance budget, bearing in mind everybody uses, at speed, is only worth around half the budget per mile a transport system which hardly anyone uses, then I have nothing to add. From a civil engineering point of view, west sussex is grossly overspending (but being in Tory south they don't have a lot of other services to spend it on), however this is peanuts compared to your figures for BW wastefulness. And still people aren't happy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

 

"Fiddling the figures" is a strong allegation, I hope that you can substantiate this, or if you can not, you should retract it.

 

Licences and moorings in 2005/06 accounted for £11.4m and £4.6m respectively, which is only 13.5% of the direct costs incurred in maintaining the network year on year. So, in fact, it's actually less than 20% quoted elsewhere.

 

I can see from other comments on this thread that we are not currently meeting the expectations of all boaters in terms of maintenance on the Cut. But John, can you honestly tell me that the canals were better maintained 30 years ago than to the standard they are maintained at these days? Can you tell me that you had more miles available to cruise 30 years ago than you do today?

 

How do you think BW is able to maintain the waterways at today's costs without additional income other than that proportion provided by licences and moorings? Total maintenance is well over £100m each year. Add the figures above to £55.4m Government grant and it doesn't reach "over £100m". Where else should the money come from?

 

Eugene

It`s very true that the navigation is better maintained now than it was 30 years ago and that more of it is available. Wether that would have been true had the current regime been in charge thirty years ago , or without the thousands of hours put in throughout that period by volunteer organizations and pressure groups must remain unknown to us. ( Incidentally - the problem with dredging isn`t getting the stuff out of the canal - it`s what you do with it afterwards ).It seems to me though that it is too much to expect BW to keep it so ( and further improve it ) without a massive increase in outside funding. When I suggested earlier that BW would be happier without a canal to maintain it reflected my belief that there is little actual enthusiasm for the canal or it`s heritage at the top of the organization - but I also tried to say that I can quite see why! It must be a nightmare having to remain financially viable while stuck with that lot! The canal system is largely ( but not entirely ) run by white collar professional career people and used by often knowledgable enthusiasts. They are different breeds entirely, with different ambitions and expectations for waterways. Add in a lack of goverment interest . politically correct but totally misplaced interference from , among others, the nature lobby ( there is only one indigineous species on the canal and it`s US ) and self interest at various levels , in various places and in various forms ( and that`s only human nature ) - well, agreement and progress through understanding and co-operation ain`t ever going to be easy. The canal system as a whole could well qualify as a world heritage site - it never will of course , because for a start , no one will ever ask , but we need the politicians to give us all a break , B.W., enthusiasts ( boating or not ) , students of history and industrial archeology and all the rest . If B.W. had the funds to do what we demand of them , if The Waterways Trust had the funds to actually become the organization so many of us hoped it would be , then we could rip in to them if they failed us. As it is the issue is clouded by a simple lack of cash. Give them the money . Then bollock them if they let us down or spend it inappropriately . Remember , we`re tax payers - it`s our canal.Lots of us feel that fortunes have been wasted , in offices , buildings , presentation and even change for changes sake , but not everyone thinks so. It depends on your brief,where your interest lies and even how you look at life and the direction it takes.

Cheers

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Then there were staff costs of around £58 million.".

 

Phil, if you believe adam1uk's figures then this is where any necessary money should come from. The figures I quote for highway maintenance (and adam's) include wages of the maintenance staff. There is no way we should be spending more on maintaining the canal system than the county roads network. There is no need for more money. BW needs to be focussed on its task as a public body, charged with the upkeep and maintenance of a public asset, the waterways. Not mucking around in areas that it has no experience, or relevance. We may not get every towpath metalled (we may not want it) we might not have squeaky sterile waterways devoid of character or challenge but we might have a public body that hasn't become such a bloated, grotesque parody of what was originally intended that no'one, including it's staff, knows what it's purpose is.

 

The highway departments of most counties have now shrunk back to where their responsibilities are admin, inspection and enforcement. The actual maintenance work going out to tender on a term contract. Maybe this is the way BW should go (I can't see them privatising the lot after the railways and buses fiascos...then again) at least the costs would go down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.