Towpath Tarmacking Moratorium?

[CathyC]

Following my post in the early hours of Friday, I was very relieved to get a short email from CaRT's Wales and South West office saying they were not planning to tarmac over the towpath in the beautiful fields around Tyle Mill, near Aldermaston to create a bike lane, as they have just east of here.

However there is still the issue of what appears to be an inclination, or even plan, on CRT's part to hive off swathes of our towpaths to bike charity Sustrans for tarmacking.

The result, if you haven't seen it, is a black tarmac road over a metre wide where the towpath used to be.

I've never been consulted or even informed about this, the tracks just appear suddenly.

I'm posting this to pose a question: How would people feel about calling on CaRT to impose a moratorium on any further tarmacking work under the Sustrans initiative until proper consultations have taken place with users? This means boaters, walkers, runners  anglers, locals and, of course, cyclists.

I am not offering myself up to set up petitions and contact the likes of the IWA (I nearly called them NWA 😆), NBTA, and all that's in between.

I am simply not up to it.

I am putting it out there to gauge peoples' feelings so that then maybe action can be taken.

If you do have concerns about this and feel 'called upon' then please take action, because I won't be doing this.

Canal and River Trust is the custodian of this country's canals and towpaths. The paths are not theirs to hive off to a charity representing a particular cohort of users.

I apologise in advance for not getting as involved in this conversation I am starting as I would like to under different circumstances.

Thanks everybody for your kind words, help and support on my last post. 🤞 

 

Edited June 17, 2023 by CathyC
Correction

[Jen-in-Wellies]

The idea that canal tow paths should be a narrow muddy track wandering through grass, wild flowers and buzzing insects is a modern one. They only became this when animal/tractor towing of boats ceased in the '60's and early '70's. Before then, and especially when the canal companies still had some money, the tow path was typically well graded, with little to no mud, or vegetation and wide enough for two horses to pass at almost any point. It looked very like a modern cycle path upgrade, especially the graded, rather than tarmac ones. The current Sustrans conversions are largely restoring them to something closer to their proper state. See some of the old postcard images here for what tow paths looked like, when they were actually being used for towing. There was even the occasional speeding cyclists, as many boats had a lock wheeling push bike to speed setting the locks ahead in a flight. In many places, members of the public were prohibited from using the canal tow path at all.

[dmr]

The real issue is high speed aggressive cyclists especially as they often believe they have right of way and that walkers and boaters are intruders getting in their way. Some towpaths become bogs in the winter, though this is in part due to the cyclists. If we could have a better surface without the bad cyclists it could be good. Another related issue is that the towpath is usually not wide enough for bikes and people so we end up with "wall to canal edge" tarmac which destroys the wildlife and prevents mooring. A narrow path is more appropriate and acceptable.

 

A bit of info, many canal locks and other canal structures are listed so modernising the historic path near them should not be allowed. CRT have negotiated an exception so don't need to get permission for signage or surface changes. They justified (and won) this by stressing that it was an admin burden when they were working on locks so needed to erect warning signs and lay a temporary surface for getting the plant in. However now they have this exception they are using it to erect all sorts of blue signs and modern cycle friendly surfaces.

 

The Rochdale canal has some rather nice and unique stone overflows. The local council is running a consultation to find how best to improve (destroy?) these to make them better for cyclists (they really do slow the cyclists down 😀). So, a decision about destroying a bit of canal history will be made by the public and cyclists rather than boaters and historians.

 

[IanD]

1 hour ago, dmr said:

The real issue is high speed aggressive cyclists especially as they often believe they have right of way and that walkers and boaters are intruders getting in their way. Some towpaths become bogs in the winter, though this is in part due to the cyclists. If we could have a better surface without the bad cyclists it could be good. Another related issue is that the towpath is usually not wide enough for bikes and people so we end up with "wall to canal edge" tarmac which destroys the wildlife and prevents mooring. A narrow path is more appropriate and acceptable.

 

A bit of info, many canal locks and other canal structures are listed so modernising the historic path near them should not be allowed. CRT have negotiated an exception so don't need to get permission for signage or surface changes. They justified (and won) this by stressing that it was an admin burden when they were working on locks so needed to erect warning signs and lay a temporary surface for getting the plant in. However now they have this exception they are using it to erect all sorts of blue signs and modern cycle friendly surfaces.

 

The Rochdale canal has some rather nice and unique stone overflows. The local council is running a consultation to find how best to improve (destroy?) these to make them better for cyclists (they really do slow the cyclists down 😀). So, a decision about destroying a bit of canal history will be made by the public and cyclists rather than boaters and historians.

 

 

And also on pavements, and pedestrian crossings, and anywhere else bikes and pedestrians mix -- this problem is by no means unique to towpaths... 😞

 

But as usual it's the selfish ar*ehole minority screwing things up for everyone else -- most cyclists (but not all, sadly...) I see on the towpaths ride sensibly, and for them -- just like walkers -- the towpath is a quiet safe and pollution-free place to get some exercise, which is generally held to be A Good Thing because it helps keep people healthy, and the UK population sure needs this given escalating ill health and obesity.

 

Anything to done to discourage/block selfish cyclists would also discourage sensible ones. I'm sure some people on here will say "I don't care, I'm not a cyclist" -- but in the bigger picture, isn't that also being selfish? 😉

Edited June 17, 2023 by IanD

[matty40s]

2 hours ago, CathyC said:

This means boaters, walkers, runners  anglers, locals and, of course, cyclists.

 

Dont forget the duckin ducks.

[Tony Brooks]

My take on the idiocy that seems to abound now, is that anything that is self-propelled, so that includes Ebikes and electric scooters, apart for very low powered and speed limited toys require licensing, number plates, insurance, and the passing of some form of test. Too many riders of both are a menace to themselves, lethal to pedestrians, and put motorists into danger. It is illegal to ride all but hired Escooters on the road and footpath, yet they do and ignore traffic lights, signalling, and road positioning. Often weaving about, across the rod and up and down the kerb as it suits them. A number of the Ebikers seem to do very similar things, plus ignore any speed limits.  In the case of Escooters the law is there, but it seems never enforced. I think there is also some law in respect of Ebike performance, but again it does not seem to be enforced.

 

I note that one local adult  Ebiker takes a child on the scooter and still ignores traffic lights etc. When there is an accident with a car, we all know whose fault will be assumed. We even get adults on Escooters ridding around the supermarket doing their shopping. We also know from experience of ordinary cycles that an accident with a pedestrian could well cause serious injuries and it will be far worse with a high-powered Ebike.

[IanD]

10 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

My take on the idiocy that seems to abound now, is that anything that is self-propelled, so that includes Ebikes and electric scooters, apart for very low powered and speed limited toys require licensing, number plates, insurance, and the passing of some form of test. Too many riders of both are a menace to themselves, lethal to pedestrians, and put motorists into danger. It is illegal to ride all but hired Escooters on the road and footpath, yet they do and ignore traffic lights, signalling, and road positioning. Often weaving about, across the rod and up and down the kerb as it suits them. A number of the Ebikers seem to do very similar things, plus ignore any speed limits.  In the case of Escooters the law is there, but it seems never enforced. I think there is also some law in respect of Ebike performance, but again it does not seem to be enforced.

 

I note that one local adult  Ebiker takes a child on the scooter and still ignores traffic lights etc. When there is an accident with a car, we all know whose fault will be assumed. We even get adults on Escooters ridding around the supermarket doing their shopping. We also know from experience of ordinary cycles that an accident with a pedestrian could well cause serious injuries and it will be far worse with a high-powered Ebike.

Escooters and ebikes are supposed to be speed-limited to 15mph, which any respectable cyclist (even me...) can get up to if they put their mind to it -- and many of the idiot non-e cyclists exceed regularly...

 

The big problem is that the government has taken its eye off the ball and failed to do anything to control the sale or use of ones which (illegally) go faster than this -- and since e-scooters are illegal anyway (but not enforced) people have no incentive to stay within the law.

 

And since anyone can then get up to these illegal speeds with no effort -- not just a few ultra-fit cyclists -- that's exactly what they do... 😞

Edited June 17, 2023 by IanD

[ditchcrawler]

4 hours ago, CathyC said:

Following my post in the early hours of Friday, I was very relieved to get a short email from CaRT's Wales and South West office saying they were not planning to tarmac over the towpath in the beautiful fields around Tyle Mill, near Aldermaston to create a bike lane, as they have just east of here.

However there is still the issue of what appears to be an inclination, or even plan, on CRT's part to hive off swathes of our towpaths to bike charity Sustrans for tarmacking.

The result, if you haven't seen it, is a black tarmac road over a metre wide where the towpath used to be.

I've never been consulted or even informed about this, the tracks just appear suddenly.

I'm posting this to pose a question: How would people feel about calling on CaRT to impose a moratorium on any further tarmacking work under the Sustrans initiative until proper consultations have taken place with users? This means boaters, walkers, runners  anglers, locals and, of course, cyclists.

I am not offering myself up to set up petitions and contact the likes of the IWA (I nearly called them NWA 😆), NBTA, and all that's in between.

I am simply not up to it.

I am putting it out there to gauge peoples' feelings so that then maybe action can be taken.

If you do have concerns about this and feel 'called upon' then please take action, because I won't be doing this.

Canal and River Trust is the custodian of this country's canals and towpaths. The paths are not theirs to hive off to a charity representing a particular cohort of users.

I apologise in advance for not getting as involved in this conversation I am starting as I would like to under different circumstances.

Thanks everybody for your kind words, help and support on my last post. 🤞 

 

Why would they consult you?

[Tony Brooks]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

Escooters and ebikes are supposed to be speed-limited to 15mph, which any respectable cyclist (even me...) can get up to if they put their mind to it -- and many of the idiot non-e cyclists exceed regularly...

 

The big problem is that the government has taken its eye off the ball and failed to do anything to control the sale or use of ones which (illegally) go faster than this -- and since e-scooters are illegal anyway (but not enforced) people have no incentive to stay within the law.

 

And since anyone can then get up to these illegal speeds with no effort -- not just a few ultra-fit cyclists -- that's exactly what they do... 😞

 

 

I don't think outright speed is the real issue. It is that all too many seem incapable of riding safely at that speed and do not seem to recognise that their riding is dangerous to themselves and others. For the safety of all either their maximum acceleration, minimum breaking force and maximum speed needs very strictly controlling, or they should be subject to the same rules as motorists

[ditchcrawler]

4 minutes ago, IanD said:

Escooters and ebikes are supposed to be speed-limited to 15mph, which any respectable cyclist (even me...) can get up to if they put their mind to it -- and many of the idiot non-e cyclists exceed regularly...

 

The big problem is that the government has taken its eye off the ball and failed to do anything to control the sale or use of ones which (illegally) go faster than this -- and since e-scooters are illegal anyway (but not enforced) people have no incentive to stay within the law.

 

And since anyone can then get up to these illegal speeds with no effort -- not just a few ultra-fit cyclists -- that's exactly what they do... 😞

Its illegal to use any escooter on the towpath that is not hired from a licenced outlet, regardless of the speed they do.

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Its illegal to use any escooter on the towpath that is not hired from a licenced outlet, regardless of the speed they do.

 

It's illegal anywhere except on private land, not just on the towpath -- and there are far more of them on roads and pavements than the towpath...

 

5 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I don't think outright speed is the real issue. It is that all too many seem incapable of riding safely at that speed and do not seem to recognise that their riding is dangerous to themselves and others. For the safety of all either their maximum acceleration, minimum breaking force and maximum speed needs very strictly controlling, or they should be subject to the same rules as motorists

 

It's both -- cyclists on proper bikes who can go at 15mph are usually fairly experienced, a lot of the e-scooter and e-bike riders are not, anyone can hop on one and go as fast or faster than a cyclist with little effort, so they do.

 

But for sure a significant number of them are illegally derestricted and can go *way* faster than 15mph, which greatly increases the danger if they collide with a pedestrian... 😞

Edited June 17, 2023 by IanD

[beerbeerbeerbeerbeer]

I must say when I see it working well, I think it’s great and I like seeing people enjoying the canal.  
Sometimes it’s quite a marvel to see how naturally synchronisation takes form between all the towpath users. 
 

Where I think it seems to go wrong big time is in the Towns. Why can’t cyclists just get off and push their bike through a crowd? Cycling around Gas street basin and wizzing down farmer’s bridge is bonkers. 

Isn’t it possible to introduce areas where cycling is prohibited?
 

When cyclists are disturbing my beer drinking that’s the end for me. 
The other day I was having a pint outside a bar just along from the Giraffe. I was enjoying the sun and watching the boats but couldn’t believe the rascals were cycling past my chair, through what’s both a walkway and a seating area. It’s not an example of towpath misuse mind (the bar and walkway is a above the towpath)but an example of what’s simply become the norm. 
 

They’re adults too. 

When I was a kid we got shouted at for doing stuff like that.

 

I do admire those youths who ride 3 or 4 abreast pulling a wheelie all the way down the road and holding the traffic up. 👍

It seems the youth have been forced back on the road. It’s no longer cool to cycle on the pavement because thats what the old folk do. 

 

Edited June 17, 2023 by Goliath

[ditchcrawler]

1 minute ago, Goliath said:

 

They’re adults too. 

When I was a kid we got shouted at for doing stuff like that.

 

 

The copper would pull us for that

[CathyC]

4 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

The idea that canal tow paths should be a narrow muddy track wandering through grass, wild flowers and buzzing insects is a modern one. They only became this when animal/tractor towing of boats ceased in the '60's and early '70's. Before then, and especially when the canal companies still had some money, the tow path was typically well graded, with little to no mud, or vegetation and wide enough for two horses to pass at almost any point. It looked very like a modern cycle path upgrade, especially the graded, rather than tarmac ones. The current Sustrans conversions are largely restoring them to something closer to their proper state. See some of the old postcard images here for what tow paths looked like, when they were actually being used for towing. There was even the occasional speeding cyclists, as many boats had a lock wheeling push bike to speed setting the locks ahead in a flight. In many places, members of the public were prohibited from using the canal tow path at all.

See pics

Hi all, I've just added a couple of pics. Top one is new bike road and one below obviously towpath through 'cow field' in Tyle Mill.

4 minutes ago, CathyC said:

Hi all, I've just added a couple of pics. Top one is new bike road and one below obviously towpath through 'cow field' in Tyle Mill.

 

8 minutes ago, CathyC said:

See pics

Hi all, I've just added a couple of pics. Top one is new bike road and one below obviously towpath through 'cow field' in Tyle Mill.

 

 

[LadyG]

5 hours ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

The idea that canal tow paths should be a narrow muddy track wandering through grass, wild flowers and buzzing insects is a modern one. They only became this when animal/tractor towing of boats ceased in the '60's and early '70's. Before then, and especially when the canal companies still had some money, the tow path was typically well graded, with little to no mud, or vegetation and wide enough for two horses to pass at almost any point. It looked very like a modern cycle path upgrade, especially the graded, rather than tarmac ones. The current Sustrans conversions are largely restoring them to something closer to their proper state. See some of the old postcard images here for what tow paths looked like, when they were actually being used for towing. There was even the occasional speeding cyclists, as many boats had a lock wheeling push bike to speed setting the locks ahead in a flight. In many places, members of the public were prohibited from using the canal tow path at all.

In the days of horse drawn boats the standard bike was relatively basic, speeds of 10mph were pretty much max, also the lads who cycled between locks would have no need to cycle at 15-20mph.

Horses would probably walk at about 4-5mph.

People had little time for recreational walks, they worked forty five hours per week ,  manual work. Saturday afternoon, maybe watch a football match. Sunday a day of rest. 

Edited June 17, 2023 by LadyG

[ditchcrawler]

46 minutes ago, CathyC said:

See pics

Hi all, I've just added a couple of pics. Top one is new bike road and one below obviously towpath through 'cow field' in Tyle Mill.

 

 

Looks OK to me, plenty of room between the path and the edge.

[MtB]

10 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Looks OK to me, plenty of room between the path and the edge.

Looks fine to me too. Give it five years and the grass each side will have encroached far enough over the edges to meet in the middle. 
 

 

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

Its illegal to use any escooter on the towpath that is not hired from a licenced outlet, regardless of the speed they do.

And what about motorised bikes. Surely it is not the type of vehicle, it is the question of the package': (force times mass) ,  and the lack of care taken by the driver.

Here the towpath is used on a daily basis by dog walkers motorised bikes, scooters, all sorts plus, I suspect two quad bikes, but could not see them due to the dust they kicked up.

The CRT need to communicate with local police authorities and set up speed traps. Remove the bikes as evidence, straight away. The CRT have to take the initiative because the police wont.

[Arthur Marshall]

13 minutes ago, LadyG said:

And what about motorised bikes. Surely it is not the type of vehicle, it is the question of the package': (force times mass) ,  and the lack of care taken by the driver.

Here the towpath is used on a daily basis by dog walkers motorised bikes, scooters, all sorts plus, I suspect two quad bikes, but could not see them due to the dust they kicked up.

The CRT need to communicate with local police authorities and set up speed traps. Remove the bikes as evidence, straight away. The CRT have to take the initiative because the police wont.

No point making laws if you can't police them. No point even expecting a decent police force unless you're prepared to pay for it. And nobody is. You get what you pay (and vote) for - and I don't think many on here are going to vote for a party that argues for higher taxes.

 

[LadyG]

13 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

No point making laws if you can't police them. No point even expecting a decent police force unless you're prepared to pay for it. And nobody is. You get what you pay (and vote) for - and I don't think many on here are going to vote for a party that argues for higher taxes.

 

I do Arthur, and I remember when I paid a fair whack on my salary, I didn't have to buy a fishing permit, or many pay for other things which are now charged.

Scottish education was always considered to be top notch, university affordable. A doctor would come to your home if you were ill, and  they answered the phone 24/7. 

Edited June 17, 2023 by LadyG

[Tony Brooks]

7 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

No point making laws if you can't police them. No point even expecting a decent police force unless you're prepared to pay for it. And nobody is. You get what you pay (and vote) for - and I don't think many on here are going to vote for a party that argues for higher taxes.

 

 

I would, as long as they were hypothecated and accounted for each year, rather than going into the general pot for use as the government wishes.

[ditchcrawler]

2 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

I would, as long as they were hypothecated and accounted for each year, rather than going into the general pot for use as the government wishes.

If I remember correctly there is a bit on the Council Tax that goes to the police. Every one who pays council tax pays towards it.

Q: What is the Police Precept? A: This is the portion of a Council Tax bill that is put towards paying for policing services locally. On Council Tax notices it may be marked as being for the Police and Crime Commissioner, who sets the budg- et for the police.

[Mike Hurley]

I think the police are more busy trying to catch the murderers that seem in abundance everywhere along with all the mentally unstable/drug addicts/alcoholic nutters that seem to be on the increase in UK, certainly seems it from what i see when i visit. Catching cyclists doing wrong is a low priority in todays world. Gov are encouraging people to cycle more hence the towpath improvements and more cycle tracks, a few moaning boaters are nothing compared to the millions that cycle, and fish for that matter. I cycle responsibly to the pub and going shopping but even in my part of the world you have to deal with all the head/earphone users and people that cant read signs, but thats drivers as well.

[LadyG]

1 hour ago, Mike Hurley said:

I think the police are more busy trying to catch the murderers that seem in abundance everywhere along with all the mentally unstable/drug addicts/alcoholic nutters that seem to be on the increase in UK, certainly seems it from what i see when i visit. Catching cyclists doing wrong is a low priority in todays world. Gov are encouraging people to cycle more hence the towpath improvements and more cycle tracks, a few moaning boaters are nothing compared to the millions that cycle, and fish for that matter. I cycle responsibly to the pub and going shopping but even in my part of the world you have to deal with all the head/earphone users and people that cant read signs, but thats drivers as well.

The police may be more concerned about murders etc but I think that the public have been surveyed in the past and they are very concerned about low level criminality, I have an idea that was why the community police force, ie sort of high Viz but low arrest scenario was tried. It was a abandoned in Scotland, not efficient use of resources.

I think we had a senior police bod stating he wanted to back off dealing with mental health issues, easy to say!!!

 

Edited June 17, 2023 by LadyG

[MrsM]

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

No point making laws if you can't police them. No point even expecting a decent police force unless you're prepared to pay for it. And nobody is. You get what you pay (and vote) for - and I don't think many on here are going to vote for a party that argues for higher taxes.

 

I normally agree with you but on this occasion I don't. I don't know anybody who wouldn't be happy to pay a bit more tax if it meant that our health and public services could be saved from the catastrophic decline they've faced in the last decade and longer.