IanD

Us taxpayers. Unfortunately we don't get to decide where they spend our taxes... :--(

Did OVO buy it then?

Where did you get the HDPE strip from?

At least next time someone suggests that CART could save loads of money by closing down lots of expensive-to-run canals, we can refer back to this thread to show that this isn't the case... 🙂

Which is of course where many boaty visitors to London would like to moor, for obvious reasons. And they used to be able to without the problems they have trying to do this today since the number of moored boats has gone up so much. I've seen how the numbers have increased over the last 30 years I've lived here near the canal and especially the last ten years and the difference is huge, even in the suburbs where I am. As I said, if you're willing to moor further out (sometimes a *lot* further...) and away from shops/buses/railways there's plenty of space. But understandably many would prefer to moor either near these facilities or further in, and that's where the problem lies. And it didn't use to be like this... 😞

All of which means that if CART closed the Rochdale or HNC they'd have to pay back a sum similar to the original EP/Millennium grants that funded their restoration, or maybe even more allowing for inflation. Either way, the sums involved would be huge, and *far* outweigh any maintenance saving by closing them, even over many years. I wonder if anyone has ever pointed this out? 😉 So yes, in theory they could be closed because they're remainder waterways -- but in practice they can't be, it would be way too expensive to make any financial or business sense. Good news -- we get to keep the HNC and Rochdale, hurrah! 🙂 Bad news -- CART can't save money by closing them, so they're still in a financial hole, boo... 😞

Some of which might also be commercially confidential, otherwise it would presumably be in the public domain. We already know that both the Rochdale and HNC are still classed as "remainder waterways", IIRC you provided the evidence for this last time the subject came up... 😉

I'm seeing information from someone who knows a damn sight more about this than anyone else -- including you or me -- who has been arguing about this... 😉 If you don't want to believe this because it contradicts what you've kept on saying, that's your problem. I'm happy to believe it, for the opposite reason... 🙂

Hurrah, some actual evidence at last from someone who knows the facts, instead of speculation!!! 🙂 So which "remainder waterways" canals does that leave that could be closed to actually save money then?

I don't think the problem with boating in London is seen by those who CC/CM there, as you say there's a friendly community of all kinds of boats ranging from massive shiny widebeams to small scruffy yoghurt pots, some even afloat. The problem seems to be for visitors who can't find anywhere to moor -- especially in more popular areas -- because the towpath moorings are full of end-to-end boats (often doubled up), the free VMs are often occupied by chronic overstayers, and the few paid-for VMs are expensive or already booked (and sometimes already occupied by non-payers). Yes there are plenty of towpath spaces further out from the centre well away from facilities and transport links but that's not where people want to moor (or stop) -- as soon as you get to a spot which is decent to moor and near facilities/shops/transport it's full of boats who rarely move to free up space -- or swap with a buddy elsewhere, either way this gives visitors the cold shoulder. Anywhere near the centre is chock-full, no free spaces even with double-mooring in the most popular areas. It's resident-friendly but in many cases visitor-unfriendly... 😞

That's a good idea, I might do that too 🙂

I've now got fenders like that, and even in a trip of a few days I had to adjust the length -- you can have a high concrete bank almost up to gunwale level, or low armco/piling much closer to water level.

We're agreeing here then 🙂 Remainder waterways are vulnerable, some (e.g. HNC, Rochdale) may or may not be protected by grant repayments being required on closure -- which would have to be paid by CART since they'd be the organisation doing the closing. The K&A was converted to a cruising waterway some time ago. But IIRC the other unprotected remainder waterways form a relatively small part of the system; many of the heavily-locked expensive-to-maintain canals are cruising waterways and very difficult to close even if this would save a lot of money, because the chance of getting government time for an AoP is pretty much zero.

Which is exactly what I said for remainder waterways. Cruising waterways need an AoP to close them, yes?

Are you sure about the first line? It's been said before that to permanently close a cruising waterway (or is this what "restrictions and qualifications" means?) needs an Act of Parliament... The argument about terms of re-opening grants (millenium fund, councils etc.) has been had many times -- and as you say nobody on either side has produced definitive evidence to show whether this is the case or not, unsurprising since contract terms are often not made public. Which is why I carefully said "if this means refunding grants"... 🙂

IIRC closing cruising waterways would need an Act of Parliament, which is unlikely to happen. However many of the more expensive to maintain and little-used remainder waterways like the Rochdale and HNC could be closed more easily -- though if this means refunding grants used to re-open them, this may cost more in the short-term, which is where the big funding problem is. Doesn't stop "business advisers" recommending something that wouldn't work in practice though, it's happened often enough in the past... 😞

Well not to you, it's a waste of effort. Byee...

Pot, kettle... 😉 I'm calling out your BS -- how could CART magically make a fortune out of reservoirs which can barely keep the canals supplied? Go on, prove how brilliant you are -- if CART read this (which they won't, obviously...) you'll have helped save the canals you love so much. Oh yes I forgot, you don't, that's why you left them and keep making anti-CART posts. Silly me... 😞

Yes it's lack of funding, but like the railways and the Tube the canals are unlikely to ever be self-financing, so government money is needed to keep them open. I suspect you're bullsh*tting and don't actually have any realisable ideas about how they could make more money out of their reservoirs in reality -- it's easy to claim you do and them clam up when asked for details, anyone can do that, con-men always rely on convincing the gullible they have some "secret sauce" and can fix your problems if you cross their palms with silver... 😉 If CART took "proper business advice" -- meaning, how to make them commercially viable -- then almost certainly this would mean closing canals (maybe lots of them...) and charging boaters a *lot* more, because this would reduce expenditure and increase income. It's the same business model the railways took, maximise income by cropping the network back to the essentials only and squeezing as much money as possible out of "customers" who have little choice except to pay up. Good for business, but a terrible model for infrastructure -- and it would certainly transform the canals by driving off all those poor scruffy boaters who can't afford to pay up... 😞

There's no doubt they're friendly, and there are lots of them -- but also no doubt that many move little if at all, and don't contribute as much to CART as the majority*** of boaters, and those are the reasons they're seen as a problem by some other boaters who move more and/or pay more... 😉 *** 80% of boaters have a home mooring and currently pay more to CART via mooring fees or marina levies than CCers

A volatile market is by definition one where you can make big profits or big losses; a steady market (like investing cash) barely keeps up with inflation, if at all. Go on then, I'm going to ask -- what reservoir improvements/opportunities, and how could they make money? Given that CART barely seem to have enough water to keep the canals full, it's difficult to see how they could suddenly turn them into cash cows... It's always easy to talk about "improvements" and "efficiency savings" and "streamlining" as abstract concepts to make an organisation suddenly better, until it comes down to the nitty-gritty what these changes actually mean in practice, when they often mysteriously evaporate -- this happens every time the government blame the NHS for their failings, as if a tiny improvement in "efficiency" (which usually means job losses) can magically make up for a massive funding shortfall. But trying to push the blame onto CART or NHS management (or staff!) conveniently draws attention away from the real culprit, which is insufficient government funding... 😞