Just how important is upgrading towpaths for "Cyclists"?

[Higgs]

What do you mean by "poor state"?

 

Mud is my main problem - we have two dogs - the Marina is mud free so it works for us.

 

 

You seem to want some kind of a sanitised environment.

[curzons246]

You seem to want some kind of a sanitised environment.

 

I'll continue to strive for a clean, tidy and healthy home. Dosn't seem unreasonable surely.

[Higgs]

You seem to want some kind of a sanitised environment.

 

I'll continue to strive for a clean, tidy and healthy home. Dosn't seem unreasonable surely.

 

 

Clean home, fine, but you can't force that on the towpath.

[Heffalump]

Maybe you'll have a different view if do buy a boat and pay a large licence fee only to be frustrated by faulty locks (road closures), canals that need dredging (potholes), frequent stoppages due to poor maintenance (roadworks) etc.

 

Like the car drivers who also abuse cyclists because "they don't pay road tax"?

 

I disagree, I'm in the (by the looks of it) small amount of people who pays road tax for multiple vehicles but still believe that cyclists have as much right to use it as I do.

 

I've a feeling that when I do get a NB, (Not currently owning one does not mean I have not used the cut frequently in the past) I'll still be in the same boat.

 

Pun intended

 

Edited to add my own carriageway equivalents in Robert's comment

Edited August 3, 2015 by Heffalump

[Heffalump]

 

How stupid can you be? I "learned" the BCN from my bike as a youngster. hundreds of cyclists used the BCN towpaths to go to work, that's why they remained in such good condition,

what do cyclists contribute to the CRT coffers? - bugger all!

 

Sorry for double posting

 

So as a cyclist you "learned" and appreciated a sense of caring for the canal system. This is slightly at odds with your OP, declaring that cyclists don't care about the cut or its history.

 

What about cyclists who also own boats and pay license fees? I appreciate that it's a small percentage, but do CRT segregate their fees and discard them as filthy cyclist fees so that you can claim that no cyclists contribute to the CRT fund?

 

Do CRT not have an obligation to maintain the waterways and associated furniture for all users, not just boaters?

 

Do you feel the same about cyclists on the road?

 

Do you know where the money has been allocated from to provide this refurbishment? And can you prove this? Was it provided from CRT License fees? Or subsidised elsewhere?

[alan_fincher]

Here we go (yet) again!.......

 

Whatever you think about it, it is almost universally the case that tow-path upgrades, (if you are prepared to see them that way!) for cycling are never significantly funded by CRT. It generally only happens when somebody other than CRT is paying for it.

 

On the other hand if a paddle needs fixing, or the canal needs dredging, in general CRT have to find the money.

 

So, however much it irks that money is being spent on tow-path upgrades, but not enough on "boaty" things, it is not the case that there is the option of not doing one to fund the other.

 

It does get a bit ridiculous when (an in the Leighton Buzzard area) a perfectly adequate bit of towpath has heaps of money spent on it as a further upgrade. However CRT assure us that in many such cases the person paying for it insists that the money can only be spent on the length they have chosen. Seems to me if you want to have a go about that, (not unreasonable!) you need to have a go at Sustrans, the council, (or whoever is funding), not at CRT.

It is of course nonsense that cyclists contribute nothing to the canals, any who pay taxes are doing so, in a way that applies to every tax-payer in the UK, whether they set forth on a tow-path or not. Additionally many cyclists will be contributing significant amounts to Sustrans, who in turn are spending it on these upgrades. The fact you may not like that doesn't change the truth of either of these points.

[peterboat]

I suppose if they tarmac over the towpath everywhere then their will be no more CCing as pins wont be able to be knocked in any more happy days eh. I am just about to early retire and hoped to have many happy years of cruising fat chance it will be one big cycle track

 

Peter

[cotswoldsman]

I suppose if they tarmac over the towpath everywhere then their will be no more CCing as pins wont be able to be knocked in any more happy days eh. I am just about to early retire and hoped to have many happy years of cruising fat chance it will be one big cycle track

 

Peter

If you cruise to much you will be dealt with.

[mayalld]

I guess whoever foots the major portion of the bill for the upgrade decides what the (previously known as) towpath is designated and therefore used for. Certainly in North Staffordshire it is a combination of the county council and Sustrans

 

Edited to correct auto correct

Easy answer.

 

Don't take money for "improvements" from people who are intent on improving it for themselves rather than the other users

[W+T]

To answer the OP. I dont think there is any importance to make the tow/foot paths any better for cyclists. The majority use mountain bikes anyway. Fair enough some need repairs but not tarmacing or the likes.

Also whatever is repaired or made for one choice or another folk. will moan about it.

[MisterDave]

Seriously considering adding a large battery SDS drill to my boating kit to help get mooring pins through surfaced towpaths, following a breakdown incident earlier this year where I had to haul the boat half a mile just to be able to moor up and have a look what went wrong!

[X Alan W]

 

Well I tend to agree, and when I occasionally cycle on the towpath I don't tend to wear "proper" cycling gear, I go slowly and I do not use a bell, I say "excuse me" and "thank you" when I meet walkers.

 

I just don't like the generalisation/implication that all cyclists who wear lycra are inconsiderate yobbos.

 

BTW I'm old enough to remember the days well before modern fabrics and I_(" often wonder what adjective was used when all we had was wool jerseys and shorts.")

Back in the day of wool jerseys/shorts the local club 'bikies' in my area Derbys/ Notts were referred to as' Wooly backed 'uns '

[curzons246]

Clean home, fine, but you can't force that on the towpath.

Did I say I wanted to change the towpath?

[John V]

Seriously considering adding a large battery SDS drill to my boating kit to help get mooring pins through surfaced towpaths, following a breakdown incident earlier this year where I had to haul the boat half a mile just to be able to moor up and have a look what went wrong!

 

 

Maybe a Hilti and some of these ?

 

https://www.us.hilti.com/direct-fastening/electrical-%26-mechanical-fastenings/r514

[b0atman]

Seriously considering adding a large battery SDS drill to my boating kit to help get mooring pins through surfaced towpaths, following a breakdown incident earlier this year where I had to haul the boat half a mile just to be able to moor up and have a look what went wrong!

Exactly why I asked the question why can rings not be put in within the price of the cycle path as they are more cycle friendly and surely are a necessity that Sustrans and local councils cannot complain about.

[W+T]

I agree. So could it be CRT have other motives for not fitting mooring the rings. ?

[Leo No2]

Easy answer.

Don't take money for "improvements" from people who are intent on improving it for themselves rather than the other users

I always give the National Trust (River Wey) view and contrast that with the Basingstoke. The NT view is the towpaths were made for horses and that's the way they will remain; if you can cycle on them that's fine. That view is despite pressure from Sustrans to turn the Wey towpath into a cycleway. By contrast the Basingstoke towpath was 'sustrans'd' some years ago within Surrey; that's been the source of a lot of complaints, accidents and the like and there's no budget to repair the cycleway other than the usual towpath maintenance budget. I think the National Trust have it about right.

[Neil2]

Here we go (yet) again!.......

 

Whatever you think about it, it is almost universally the case that tow-path upgrades, (if you are prepared to see them that way!) for cycling are never significantly funded by CRT. It generally only happens when somebody other than CRT is paying for it.

 

On the other hand if a paddle needs fixing, or the canal needs dredging, in general CRT have to find the money.

 

So, however much it irks that money is being spent on tow-path upgrades, but not enough on "boaty" things, it is not the case that there is the option of not doing one to fund the other.

 

It does get a bit ridiculous when (an in the Leighton Buzzard area) a perfectly adequate bit of towpath has heaps of money spent on it as a further upgrade. However CRT assure us that in many such cases the person paying for it insists that the money can only be spent on the length they have chosen. Seems to me if you want to have a go about that, (not unreasonable!) you need to have a go at Sustrans, the council, (or whoever is funding), not at CRT.

 

It is of course nonsense that cyclists contribute nothing to the canals, any who pay taxes are doing so, in a way that applies to every tax-payer in the UK, whether they set forth on a tow-path or not. Additionally many cyclists will be contributing significant amounts to Sustrans, who in turn are spending it on these upgrades. The fact you may not like that doesn't change the truth of either of these points.

 

Yes, Laurence rather shot himself in the foot when he tried to justify his point of view by saying cyclists contribute "bugger all" to the canal infrastructure.

 

I think us boat owners have to start looking at this from the other side of the fence. Boaters only contribute, directly, about a third of the total bill for running the inland waterways. So the person cycling or walking their dog along the towpath might very well take the view that they are actually subsidising the person passing by in their £90,000 narrowboat.

 

 

 

From what I've heard there does actually seem to be a fair bit of tension between Birmingham City Council, who would prefer to improve highway facilities for cyclists, and CRT who clearly want to promote the towpaths as an off road alternative. Personally I think opening up the towpaths for wider use is a win win situation. From our point of view the only price to be paid is tolerating the occasional speeding cyclist, but the people most inconvenienced by this are other towpath users who have more right to be upset about it than boat owners do.

[Heffalump]

I agree. So could it be CRT have other motives for not fitting mooring the rings. ?

 

100% correct, they're in league with Al-Qaeda and the Legion of Doom.

[emm]

I went past the workers today upgrading the towpath near Small Heath. All looks very nice, pity no one was fixing the broken lock paddle on Knowle top lock.

There is only ever one top paddle in operation at Knowle top lock.

Presumably to help out the guys at Knowle Hall Wharf when they are painting, welding, drilling etc?

[brassedoff]

The towpaths should be kept to a reasonable standard for everyone to use.

 

Where i live the residents have adopted a mile and they themselves have laid new paths and keep it litter free.

 

 

Cyclists and Walkers should be welcomed to the Canals, i used them twice a day to travel 10 miles to and from work and it was great.

 

Lawrence what about Walkers are they allowed to wear Lycra ?

Edited August 4, 2015 by brassedoff

[pearley]

There is only ever one top paddle in operation at Knowle top lock.

Presumably to help out the guys at Knowle Hall Wharf when they are painting, welding, drilling etc?

When we were at Stephen Goldsborough a few years ago to have some work done, this is what we were told. If both top paddles were opened it reduced the level at the Wharf considerably for a few minutes. Edited August 4, 2015 by pearley

[cuthound]

By contrast the Basingstoke towpath was 'sustrans'd' some years ago within Surrey and there's no budget to repair the cycleway other than the usual towpath maintenance budget.

Is the failure to secure an ongoing repair budget from Sustrans by Surrey County Council an oversight, or do CRT also have to fund ongoing repairs to toepaths upgraded to cycle paths?

[Machpoint005]

 

Yes, Laurence rather shot himself in the foot when he tried to justify his point of view by saying cyclists contribute "bugger all" to the canal infrastructure.

 

I think us boat owners have to start looking at this from the other side of the fence. Boaters only contribute, directly, about a third of the total bill for running the inland waterways. So the person cycling or walking their dog along the towpath might very well take the view that they are actually subsidising the person passing by in their £90,000 narrowboat.

 

 

 

From what I've heard there does actually seem to be a fair bit of tension between Birmingham City Council, who would prefer to improve highway facilities for cyclists, and CRT who clearly want to promote the towpaths as an off road alternative. Personally I think opening up the towpaths for wider use is a win win situation. From our point of view the only price to be paid is tolerating the occasional speeding cyclist, but the people most inconvenienced by this are other towpath users who have more right to be upset about it than boat owners do.

 

Well put - saved me the trouble of pointing that out!

[David Mack]

Exactly why I asked the question why can rings not be put in within the price of the cycle path as they are more cycle friendly and surely are a necessity that Sustrans and local councils cannot complain about.

Rings were put in all along the (offside) frontage of the new development at Aylesbury Basin. Then a child tripped over one and fell in. They have now all been cut off.

Edited August 4, 2015 by David Mack