Is CaRT fit for purpose?

[Midnight]

41 minutes ago, Jon johan said:

I believe many know surveys are loaded and prefer not to fill them in. 

I worked for a local authority my job was to make people believe we did a good job even though we didn't. I once suggested we just try to do a good job instead, it didn't go down too well. My boss asked me to produce surveys which gave the answers he was looking for. The Formulae One hotel group used the Yes/No satisfaction because they actually wanted to know how they were performing not trying to get the answers they were looking for. The CaRT surveys fall into the latter category. More sophisticated than the ones I created but nevertheless easy to spot by a trained eye.

[Steve Bassplayer]

10 hours ago, Midnight said:

Right now are you happy with CaRT's custodianship of the waterways or Not! - Simples!!

 

I thought the whole point of a forum is to discuss views...but anyway....I didn't vote because I think the answer is yes and no. 

 

Digital thinking is where I think it's all gone wrong.

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, Steve Bassplayer said:

 

I thought the whole point of a forum is to discuss views...but anyway....I didn't vote because I think the answer is yes and no. 

 

Digital thinking is where I think it's all gone wrong.

I blame digital watches. They divide time up into specific bits, which it isn't, as opposed to analogue, which gives the true impression of a flow of time. So now everyone think there is a yes/no answer to everything, which there isn't, as in the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

[Midnight]

8 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

So now everyone think there is a yes/no answer to everything

 

Actually you either do or you don't!
On a scale of 1 to 10 how wrong do you think I am? 

[Laurie Booth]

On 18/04/2021 at 09:38, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

 

 

Surely the one who voted 'yes' to the first question made an error, or didn't read the question properly.

Is there really someone on the forum who thinks C&RT are fit for purpose ?

 

 

fit for purpose

1. (of an institution, facility, etc.) well equipped or well suited for its designated role or purpose.

Well the National Trust were good !! (Not)

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Midnight said:

 

Actually you either do or you don't!
On a scale of 1 to 10 how wrong do you think I am? 

I've lost track of this thread a bit. If you mean your positively insane idea that a local authority should do a decent job instead of trying to find ways to convince the public you have when you haven't, I'm with you all the way. I was a civil servant for a while and nearly got sacked because I suggested it would be better if the stats we sent to head office actually represented the position we were in, rather than being fiddled to put us in a good light.

I do think the CRT blokes on the ground do the best they can. The contractors do what they're contracted for.

[Midnight]

57 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I've lost track of this thread a bit. If you mean your positively insane idea that a local authority should do a decent job instead of trying to find ways to convince the public you have when you haven't, I'm with you all the way. I was a civil servant for a while and nearly got sacked because I suggested it would be better if the stats we sent to head office actually represented the position we were in, rather than being fiddled to put us in a good light.

I do think the CRT blokes on the ground do the best they can. The contractors do what they're contracted for.

 

Okay I'll put another way
Do I think your song 'Travelling Man' is absolutely brilliant : choose YES/YES

[Arthur Marshall]

15 minutes ago, Midnight said:

 

Okay I'll put another way
Do I think your song 'Travelling Man' is absolutely brilliant : choose YES/YES

That's the kind of survey I like.

[TheBiscuits]

35 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

That's the kind of survey I like.

 

Didn't know you were a Tory donor

[churchward]

3 hours ago, Midnight said:

 

Actually you either do or you don't!
On a scale of 1 to 10 how wrong do you think I am? 

42

[Midnight]

23 minutes ago, churchward said:

42

That's an unequivocal YES (I'm wrong) so anything less than 42 could be interpreted as I'm not wrong so I have a 1 in 41 chance of being right 

[Arthur Marshall]

20 minutes ago, Midnight said:

That's an unequivocal YES (I'm wrong) so anything less than 42 could be interpreted as I'm not wrong so I have a 1 in 41 chance of being right 

That would imply that you are a bloke who has argued with his wife, although 1 in 41 is pretty good odds.

(Please don't get me sanctioned for unnecessary sexism...)

 

[Hudds Lad]

39 minutes ago, Midnight said:

That's an unequivocal YES (I'm wrong) so anything less than 42 could be interpreted as I'm not wrong so I have a 1 in 41 chance of being right 

but only if you're a cool and hoopy frood who knows where his towel's at

Edited April 19, 2021 by Hudds Lad

[cuthound]

On 18/04/2021 at 14:24, churchward said:

Quite.

 

There have always been stoppages too.  They are more publiscised these days and there may be more but it has not just started happening.  How long was Braunston tunnel closed for in the 1980's?

 

The canal network has not suddenly aged and started to fall apart in the last 9 years of CRT's existence either.  There has been a lot of deferred maintenance in the BW days.

 

I don't recall Braunston Tunnel being closed during the 1980s.

 

I do recall Blissworth Tunnel being closed following a collapse whilst major major rebuilding works took place for about 4 years in the 80's though.

[churchward]

1 hour ago, cuthound said:

 

I don't recall Braunston Tunnel being closed during the 1980s.

 

I do recall Blissworth Tunnel being closed following a collapse whilst major major rebuilding works took place for about 4 years in the 80's though.

You are quite right it was Blissworth, I am getting old is my excuse.

[David Mack]

10 minutes ago, churchward said:

You are quite right it was Blisworth, I am getting old is my excuse.

And Preston Brook. And Netherton. And, I think, Saddington.

 

There was a period in the early 80s when several canals were affected by long term tunnel closures which BW couldn't afford to repair. I seem to recall that in the end some extra government money was found to avoid the political embarrassment of possible closure of canals which had been designated as 'Cruiseways' under the '68 Act, and which were legally required to be available for boating.

[churchward]

6 minutes ago, David Mack said:

And Preston Brook. And Netherton. And, I think, Saddington.

 

There was a period in the early 80s when several canals were affected by long term tunnel closures which BW couldn't afford to repair. I seem to recall that in the end some extra government money was found to avoid the political embarrassment of possible closure of canals which had been designated as 'Cruiseways' under the '68 Act, and which were legally required to be available for boating.

Yes indeed,  which was rather my point that the canals have experienced issues for many years and closures common.  

 

The Canal system has not fallen apart since CRT was created in just 8 years.  It is about a lot of defered maintenance in BW days along with under funding in BW & CRT years.  It was over-optimistic to think CRT could collect enough voluntary contributions (besides licence fees) to cover the cost for something everyone can visit for free.  Taxation contribution is the only way to make up the budget necessary and for everyone using the Canal system to make a contribution to its upkeep.

[Rob-M]

1 hour ago, David Mack said:

And Preston Brook. And Netherton. And, I think, Saddington.

 

There was a period in the early 80s when several canals were affected by long term tunnel closures which BW couldn't afford to repair. I seem to recall that in the end some extra government money was found to avoid the political embarrassment of possible closure of canals which had been designated as 'Cruiseways' under the '68 Act, and which were legally required to be available for boating.

And Wast Hill.  Alvechurch had to move their hire fleet to Earlswood whilst the tunnel was closed. 

[Mad Harold]

On 18/04/2021 at 09:25, Midnight said:

Considering the current mayhem on the waterways with stoppage after stoppage leaving boaters concerned and loosing confidence is it time for action? Let's see what boaters think and at least have some feedback to provide DEFRA when they audit CaRT's performance and record.

Stoppages are a problem,but so is the condition of the locks when they are open.

Had a trip from Huddersfield to Dewsbury at the weekend and I won't be boating for a week or so  (or doing anything else) thanks to most of the lock paddles being so stiff,my back is now killing me!

Two in particular on the C+H Shepley Bridge and Battyford were knackering!

One of the flood locks was also closed (I think Thornhill) and was a sod to open.On the way back someone had closed the floodgate again!

Not a happy trip.

[Midnight]

8 hours ago, Mad Harold said:

Stoppages are a problem,but so is the condition of the locks when they are open.

Had a trip from Huddersfield to Dewsbury at the weekend and I won't be boating for a week or so  (or doing anything else) thanks to most of the lock paddles being so stiff,my back is now killing me!

Two in particular on the C+H Shepley Bridge and Battyford were knackering!

One of the flood locks was also closed (I think Thornhill) and was a sod to open.On the way back someone had closed the floodgate again!

Not a happy trip.

Haven't been up to Shepley for awhile but Battyeford is a baby compared to some of them along the Calder Navigation. Have you tried a long handle Yorkshire windlass?

[peterboat]

We are on a commercial canal I haven't seen Exol pride for months! I am reliable told it will be September before the A&C breach is fixed. That means lots of extra pollution caused because 4 beats are off the water and lorries are carrying the freight.  Clearly maintenance is a little slack. 

[Mike Todd]

16 hours ago, churchward said:

Yes indeed,  which was rather my point that the canals have experienced issues for many years and closures common.  

 

The Canal system has not fallen apart since CRT was created in just 8 years.  It is about a lot of defered maintenance in BW days along with under funding in BW & CRT years.  It was over-optimistic to think CRT could collect enough voluntary contributions (besides licence fees) to cover the cost for something everyone can visit for free.  Taxation contribution is the only way to make up the budget necessary and for everyone using the Canal system to make a contribution to its upkeep.

I suspect that the problem goes right back to the beginning of the canals as a transport infrastructure. Differences in communication perhaps make them seem more prominent at certain times. I am sure that the canal towpath telegraph was just as lively way back.

 

Many capital projects are funded on the basis of short term analyses which allow for the income in the early years to pay back the cost of construction but which make woeful allowance for on-going maintenance. Just because they look pretty, too many people remain unaware they they do not look after themselves. Also, the fact that many items have a good expected lifetime (30 years for lock gates is pretty good in a world that makes phones obsolete every two years). But they are expensive each time they do need replacing and many failures, each breaches, are rare but high cost items.

 

Planning remains complicated by the fact that only incomplete records were ever made at the time and, still today, new culverts are coming to light with unclear responsibilities. Many of today's stoppages relate to items that are at the intersection of two different systems and responsibilities (bridges, culverts, etc). Too often it is the navigation authority that gets the blame even if the inadequacy lies elsewhere. For example, roads that have approach bends that are not meant for motorised vehicles, let alone those drive at speed, may well be at the root of many parapet accidents which end up closing the canal for longer than the road. Is this fair? Is it recognised?

 

Any maintenance budget has to begin with a statement about the service level to be maintained, from almost instantaneous repair to run until it collapses and then abandon. The faster the response, the more expensive it will be as more preventative and pre-emptive repairs will be needed. We need to ask ourselves, what level of on-going cost are we prepared to pay (both licence holder and taxpayer) for what level of availability. (At the moment I am not aware of any part of the network which is designated DNR so all failures will be eventually repaired/replaced.

 

So, let's start with the not unreasonable assumption that the current experience is an inevitable consequence of the current budget (ie that the navigation authorities are doing a half decent job given the resources - to argue otherwise takes us into the winging domain). Let us also suppose that halving the average outage time (which in many cases will require upping the pre-emptive budget) would treble the licence fee and double the taxpayer contribution? Would this fly with an electorate?

 

[Machpoint005]

A very well-reasoned post, Mike, thank you for expressing a view that is both rational and pragmatic. 

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

8 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

(At the moment I am not aware of any part of the network which is designated DNR so all failures will be eventually repaired/replaced.

 

 

Any waterways not listed below are a 'remainder waterway' and are not required to be maintained by BW / C&RT, so, to use your terminology they are DNR

 

 

SCHEDULE 12 COMMERCIAL AND CRUISING WATERWAYS

 

PART I COMMERCIAL WATERWAYS

The main navigable channels of the following waterways : -

The Aire and Calder Navigation from the tail of River Lock, Leeds, and from the Calder and Hebble navigation at Wakefield, to its entrance to Goole Docks and to its junction with the River Ouse at Selby. The Calder and Hebble Navigation from the tail of Greenwood Lock to its junction with the Aire and Calder Navigation at Wakefield. The Caledonian Canal. The Crinan Canal. The Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation from the tail of the bottom lock at Tinsley to its junction with the River 'rent at Keadby. The New Junction Canal connecting the Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation with the Aire and Calder Navigation. The Trent Navigation from the tail of Meadow Lane Lock, Nottingham, to Gainsborough Bridge.  The Weaver Navigation and the Weston Canal from Winsford ScH. 12 Bridge to the junctions with the Manchester Ship Canal at Marsh Lock and at Delamere Dock. The River Severn from Stourport to its junction with the Gloucester and Sharpness Canal at Gloucester. The Gloucester and Sharpness Canal. The River Lee Navigation from Hertford to the River Thames at Limehouse and to the tail of Bow Locks.

 

PART II CRUISING WATERWAYS

The main navigable channels of the following waterways : -

The Ashby Canal from its junction with the Coventry Canal to Snarestone. The Birmingham Canal from its junction with the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal at Farmer's Bridge and from its junction with the Worcester and Birmingham Canal at Worcester Bar to its junction with the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal at Aldersley by way of the Birmingham level as far as the head of Factory Locks, Tipton, and thence by way of the Wolverhampton Level, including the branch leading to its junction with the Stourbridge Canal at Black Delph by way of the Netherton Tunnel. The Birmingham and Fazeley Canal from its junction with the Birmingham Canal at Farmer's Bridge to its junction with the Trent and Mersey Canal at Fradley, including the detached portion of the Coventry Canal between Huddlesford Junction and Fradley Junction and the Digbeth branch. The Calder and Hebble Navigation from Sowerby Bridge to the tail of Greenwood Lock, including the Huddersfield Broad Canal to Aspley Basin. The Chesterfield Canal from the tail of Morse Lock, Worksop, to its junction with the River Trent. The Coventry Canal from its junction with the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal at Fazeley to Coventry. The Erewash Canal from Tamworth Road Bridge to its junction with the River Trent. The Fossdyke Navigation. The Grand Union Canal from its junctions with the Birmingham and Fazeley Canal at Digbeth and Salford to its junctions with the River Thames at Brentford and at Regent's Canal Dock, including the branches to Northampton and Aylesbury and the Hertford Union Canal leading to the River Lee at Old Ford. The Grand Union Canal from Leicester to Norton Junction, including the branch to Market Harborough. The Kennet and Avon Canal from High) Bridge, Reading, to the tail of Tyle Mill Lock, and from the head of Bull's Lock to the tail of Hamstead Lock, and from the tail of Hanham Lock to the tail of the bottom lock at Bath.  The Lancaster Canal from Preston to Tewitfield, including the branch to Glasson Dock. The Leeds and Liverpool Canal from Old Roan Bridge, Aintree, to Leeds, including the branches to Tarleton and Leigh. The Macclesfield Canal. The Oxford Canal from its junction with the Grand Union Canal at Braunston to its junction with the Coventry Canal at Hawkesbury and from its junction with the Grand Union Canal at Napton to Oxford, including the branch to the River Thames. The Peak Forest Canal from the top of Marple Locks to Whaley Bridge. The Ripon Canal from its junction with the River Ure to the tail of Littlethorpe Lock. The Shropshire Union Canal from its junction with the Manchester Ship Canal at Ellesmere Port to its junction with the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal at Autherley, including the branches to the River Dee at Chester, to Llantisilio and to Middlewich. The River Soar Navigation from its junction with the River Trent to Leicester. The Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal. The River Stort Navigation. The Stourbridge Canal from its junction with the Birmingham Canal at Black Delph to its junction with the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal at Stourton. The Stratford-on-Avon Canal from its junction with the Worcester and Birmingham Canal at King's Norton to its junction with the Grand Union Canal at Kingswood. The Trent and Mersey Canal, including the branch to Hall Green. The Trent Navigation from Shardlow to the tail of Meadow Lane Lock, Nottingham, by way of the Beeston Canal and part of the Nottingham Canal and including the branch to the River Soar and the length of the River Trent from its junction with the Nottingham Canal to Beeston Weir. The River Ure Navigation from its junction with the Ripon Canal to Swale Nab. The Witham Navigation from Lincoln to Boston. The Worcester and Birmingham Canal.

 

ANY OTHER WATERWAY IS A 'REMAINDER WATERWAY'

 

 

Fraenkel Report :

 

1.3.2

There are many examples of Remainder waterways (i.e. those not designated as Commercial or Cruising) where, in spite of a lack of any specific obligation to improve their condition, much effort has been, and continues to be, devoted to restoring them to acceptable cruising standards. This is largely due to the efforts, both physical and financial, of volunteers banded together on an ad hoc basis but in some cases assistance is given by local authorities donating funds to the Board under agreement, the Board then undertaking that the proceeds will be used entirely for the betterment of specified lengths of waterway. Where there are firm agreements of this kind, but not otherwise, we have been instructed to take account of the relevant income in assessing the economics of possible methods of treatment. 

[Philip]

The canals as we use them are a niche, which is a major part of their charm. You could argue it's a wonder that so many are still navigable and in good condition at all, considering they could be thought of and treated as nature reserves or parkland, rather than waterways to go boating on.

 

The majority of people haven't and are unlikely to go on a canal holiday, never mind make a habit of it. We think of them and their good navigable condition as essential, but many do not and you can probably include most government ministers in the latter category.

 

Perhaps the 'staycations' this year might bring a new lease of life and greater urgency to keep the canals in good condition for boating. CaRT are just performing how you'd realistically expect them to, it's unsurprising that they are focusing a lot of attention towards visitor attractions and non-boating canal users.