SE Barlow

Fascinating debate, thankyou for the contributions. One of the reasons I think charitable status hasn't worked is that CRT simply isn't 'lovable' in the way that 'National Trust' is. By adopting a corporate ethos (seemingly driven by brand obsession, remorseless secrecy and a refusal to publicly take responsibility for its shortcomings) goodwill from its users simply doesn't exist - the ever declining satisfaction of boaters being a prime illustration (which simply isn't a matter for discussion). Admittedly, CRT is caught in a tragedy of the commons. Everyone thinks they have a right to access the towpath to walk, run, cycle and now (encouraged by CRT) to paddle but no one is prepared to pay more than £1 per person per year in E&W. Why should they? It doesn't matter whether the canal is 4 feet deep or just six inches. Doesn't matter if locks work nor if all the wharves, yards, and other properties are flogged off to developers. Doesn't matter if 35,000 ageing white folk can or can't go boating. The demonstration of health and wellbeing strategy isn't just futile but it's actually existentially dangerous to the fabric of everything most of us hold dear, namely the maintenence of navigation. So let's start again shall we?

I'm guessing that the Defra civil servants may not have been terribly moved by Mr Parry's erudite demonstration of £ billions societal value accrued from non-subscription towpath-related health and wellbeing promoting activity (requiring only a few lawnmowers and hedgetrimmers to maintain). By the way has anyone seen the 'Second Outcomes Report' summarising the results of CRT's 'Outcomes Measurment Framework', on which several million must have been spent so far? FOIRs to CRT and Defra have confirmed the existence of a substantive draft yet they refuse to release it. Personally I'd like to see the grant withdrawn and CRT being forced to hand the keys back allowing a new navigation authority to be formed. This has not been a good experiment.

I think the problem I have with it is a philosophical one. The new logo marked a transition from the maintenance of navigation as the defining ethos to the promotion of well-being for all. On the subject of rushes, they have absolutely no place on a well-maintained canal in my opinion. There are far too many places on the system where reed succession has narrowed the channel to a single narrow-boat width.

Oooooh, that's lovely. Thank you very much. Hudds Lad, is that good enough to replicate in a vector graphic?

Terrific. That's very kind. My intention is a sticker run for nostalgia. Let's see what this matchbox is like ... how did it end up in Malta?

Yes, brilliant Ray T. I just bought the matchbox. Surprisingly hard to find any material online with this visual identity. Thanks.

?

Yes! That sounds like it. Be very grateful if you could share at leisure. Cheers.

Thanks, I've seen this link recently. I was hoping someone might have an image of the wobbly anchor; 80's-style I imagine.

Does anyone have decent quality image/s of the old British Waterways Board Logos before the daft monochrome swan-bridge-reeds? Thanks.

Hello folks, any idea when Anderton Boat Lift will re-open?

Allan, could I get your opinion about Mr Halcrow's response? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/judging_criteria_for_tenders_on#incoming-1529371 Thanks.

FYI it has. The footbridge across the canal is still closed pending repair, replaced with a subatantial scaffold replacement.

Any update on whether these works have now been completed and the stoppage lifted? Thanks.

David, if by 'awkward squad' you mean someone that cares enough about our shared heritage to hold responsible public servants to account then fine, guilty as charged. Allan, this is amazing and truly useful. Thank you for getting intellectually involved. ? (bravo)

Apologies. Wrong vocab'. My bad. My understanding is that many waterside businesses who access the water from their properties pay a 'ground rent' to CRT for the privilege (often levied as a substantial slice of turnover).

Thanks for this well-reasoned thought, which has been articulated privately by others. However, I'm over the disappointment and am now into 'justice'! I detest being treated like a simpleton by the powers-that-be whose officers all too frequently imagine that a pat on the head with a hollow platitude will placate the masses.

True but the majority pay curtilage to CRT in order to trade. Let's see how the 35,000 [licence fee paying] boat owners get on without the existence of docking facilities.

Judge for yourselves ... (see attached) Among Ms Mobberley's response, the line I take greatest issue with is this: "The information you have requested does not relate to the operation or maintenance of our waterways". The maintenance of dry docks and wharfage are clearly essential to the operation of waterways.

Completely agree. The intentions of the new tenant are unknown to me, however, knowing them somewhat, I would assume they are sensitive to the historic nature of the site.

Sadly not. Ask the towpath telegraph. I have no quarrel with the successful applicant and genuinely wish them luck in this endeavour.

"They" collectively are Canal & River Trust. "They" specifically are 'the stakeholders' (whatever that means) who decided the upon successful applicant for the lease on the Dutton Dry Dock at Preston Brook at the top of the Trent & Mersey Canal. "It" is about fairness and transparency in public life. For the avoidance of doubt, I was among the unsuccessful applicants. By all means call "it" sour grapes if you wish. However, given that I invested £500 of my own money in preparing my own tender I should like to be reassured that my efforts were not futile from the outset.

I agree Nick. Having recently learned the identity of the successful applicant I'm pretty sure I know what it is but to do so without evidence would be slander. Thanks for kicking off the discussion.

Dear CanalWorld, https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/judging_criteria_for_tenders_on#outgoing-989216 Discuss ...