OK, so the canals were originally conceived for commercial gain, an asset that realised a return for the owners and carrying companies. BW now hold this asset and taking the same commercial perspective, seek to realise a return on this asset. However, over the last 150 years or so havethe canals and their supporting infrastructure not become woven into the fabric of our land, to an extent that BW, whether they like it or not, are effectively custodians of a national treasure? Along with this custody comes the attached duty of care, the duty to protect the reminders of a significant period in our history. If that means that an inconvenient group of individuals or a community call to account the custodian's motives and judgement, all well and good. It comes as part of the deal. BW's remit does not give them the unchallenged right to develop our canals into an 1800 mile linear theme park to be run as a purely commercial venture where we all pay a charge at the turnstile. Intelligent development is essential, but are challenges such as this not also essential as a 'heads up' on BW's purpose?