BW Water Points

[NB Willawaw]

Does anybody know if there is an on-line list of BW watering points ?

I have searched the BW and related site and can find no reference.

I thought there used to be a list of all their water and sanitary stations ??

 

Best Regards

 

Mark

 

NB Willawaw

[Richard Fairhurst]

Does anybody know if there is an on-line list of BW watering points ?

I have searched the BW and related site and can find no reference.

 

We're working on it at present - water points and a whole lot more besides. Will be on Waterscape.com in the next few months.

 

Richard

editor, Waterscape.com

[NB Willawaw]

Thats good to hear.

I mostly use paper guides like the Nicholsons at present, but due to limitations in space on their map scales, it is not always exactly clear where the taps, etc are.

 

Having often having to drift mid-cut and look for the taps on either bank, it would be useful if your guide could indicate where they are in a bit more detail. If not possible pictorially, it would be good if you could indicate whether it is the towpath side or not, whether it is a stand-alone or part of a sanitation bock, etc.

 

I tend to fill up every other day and try to avoid boatyards, so rely a lot of on-line canal watering holes.

 

Many thanks.

[Guest]

Richard - that will be really usefull. Can we assume that you will post a note here when it becomes available? Mabey this thread would be a good place ....

 

Peter

[Richard Fairhurst]

No problem, will post a note.

 

There will be a webpage for each waterway on Waterscape.com listing the facilities, as you'd expect.

 

But you'll also be able to download a PDF with waterway maps and symbols for each water point, sanitary station, visitor mooring and so on. The idea is that it's something you can print out and take with you on your boat. You can see an early version for the London canals here - we're currently working on refining it further and adding info for all the other canals.

 

Richard

[John Orentas]

So once again BW are going into open competition with their customers, this time the canal guide producers, Nicholson's, Pearson's and others.

 

They will have all the advantages of up to date information and technical data that can only be acquired from them, for how much longer will all this be made freely and promptly available to other publishers and when this inbuilt advantage ultimately leaves BW with another monopoly situation, what then.

 

How much are we going to have to pay for the information we need. You could call me cynical but BW do not have a good track record, they have shown themselves to be hell bent on exploiting their privileged (and subsidised) situation as sole operators of the canal system to give themselves an unfair commercial advantage over anyone who seeks to run any kind of business within "their domain".

[bottle]

John

 

whilst agreeing with you I would hope and expect the BW guide to be basic i.e. water/sanitry station/self pumpout and mooring points.

 

The guide producers will give the extras, I would not like to see them go out of production.

[wynd lass(nb.Black Pearl)]

true Bottle: you can be stood on the stern of the boat, pootling along with your nicholsons in hand or whatever...... I think having your laptop pooter on the sliding rear hatch could be a dangerous thing to be doing!

 

Unfortunately though (and very sadly) its a dog eat dog world we live in these days, and in business, if you want to be a success, you can't afford to have sentimental issues about things -sadly

 

Everything is about bottom lines now........what makes "us" the most profitt etc.

 

Greed basically.

[dor]

Waterscape (or at least, the old BW site) used to have canal maps that you could look at and zoom in on. I found these very useful, especially if the Nicholson was on the boat and I was thinking about a trip. I did contact them at the time (2 or 3 years ago) as winding holes were not shown. I was told then that it was planned to increase the information to make it more useful.

 

I don't think they will replace Nicholson's, but surely it is of benefit to us as boaters to have an up-to-date information service. Do we really want to be griping about what BW is doing in this case?

 

It is not as though Nicholson's or Pearson's are the most accurate sources of information, and can soon get out of date.

[Richard Fairhurst]

So once again BW are going into open competition with their customers, this time the canal guide producers, Nicholson's, Pearson's and others.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, we're not. If you compare the PDF link I posted to a Nicholsons, you'll find an enormous difference in the amount of information provided.

 

BW has been asked repeatedly by boaters, and user groups, for information on its winding holes, water points, sanitary stations and so far. Until we (BW and Waterscape jointly) started on this project at the end of last year, we actually didn't have this information. I don't think it's unreasonable for boaters, who help to pay for these facilities, to ask where they are and expect an answer. The map format simply happens to be the best way of doing it.

 

For what it's worth, BW doesn't pay us to produce the PDFs, and we don't (and won't) charge users for them. But we do sell Nicholson's, Pearson's and GEOprojects guides through Waterscape, in conjunction with the IWA bookshop. If we were just in it for the money, surely we'd either charge for the PDFs or not produce them at all?

 

Personally, I've been using Nicholsons for the last 10 years and have no intention of changing! (Never really got on with Pearson's...)

 

cheers

Richard

editor, Waterscape.com

[dor]

Having just had a look at the London example given by Richard, the visitor mooring information will certainly be useful, as that is an area that Nicholson's do not cover, and Pearson's can be a bit patchy.

[Big COL]

You can see an early version for the London canals

 

here Richard

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The early version shows winding holes, but gives no dimensions as for the suitability for the length of boat.

[Richard Fairhurst]

The early version shows winding holes, but gives no dimensions as for the suitability for the length of boat.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Indeed - we're collecting the information but haven't yet worked out the best way to represent it on the map.

 

Richard

[bottle]

I am not "trying to teach my grandmother how to suck eggs" but may I suggest the map is as simple as possible just symbols and numbers with a good index on the same page and all the relevant information.

 

I.e, on the map a symbol for a turning point and number, in the index on same page the relvant info: max boat length that can be manouvered etc.

[NB Willawaw]

I've had a quick look at the preliminary sample for London.

It seems very similar to the information that I currently get from Nicholsons.

The water points are still shown approximately and I have to try to guess where they are from the map. In unfamiliar areas, when many boats are moving around at locks and many more are tied up on the banks, it is often difficult to see the water points from the boat as they are obscured and I have to drop crew off to locate them. Some form of better indication would be appreciated.

[Richard Fairhurst]

I'll look into whether we can provide some sort of textual reference (e.g. '200 yards west of Bridge 92'). It's not something that'll happen in the first release but could be a later improvement.

 

cheers

Richard

[Eugene Baston]

Hi

 

I think the debate's largely run its course here. Lap tops aren't suited to hatch tops (but paper based versions are), while the additional information found in a paper guide is complimented by greater detail on Waterscape.com.

 

Richard's goal at the moment is to accurately map all of the basic facilities on the network in a form that's manageable on the web, particularly bearing in mind the chances of a mobile phone being used to make a connection. After then the refinement begins. We've already spoken to boating user groups and asked them to help us check the accuracy of the mappings before they all go entirely live, and I'm sure with your help the process of refinement will be even better.

 

While I'm here, I can't let John Orentas write what he wrote without some clarification. So John, my invitation to you is to start a new thread and put some detail on your statement shown below, and I'll respond.

 

"BW do not have a good track record, they have shown themselves to be hell bent on exploiting their privileged (and subsidised) situation as sole operators of the canal system to give themselves an unfair commercial advantage over anyone who seeks to run any kind of business within "their domain" "

 

Cheers, Eugene

[John Orentas]

Eugene.

 

I think we will let others decide if the debate has run it's course.

 

Quote (me), from the Bugsworth basin thread.

 

"I have it on good authority that in this area it is considered to be not cost effective to chase unlicensed boat owners, presumably it is easier to increase the charges on the rest of us".

 

It cannot have escaped your notice that such sentiments are expressed routinely in the waterways press, I doubt if you could write them all off as misguided embittered cranks.

 

When the angler chap who sits across from my boat told me "I have as much right to be here as you have, I have to buy a licence too". When I told him how much I pay compared to his £1 -50 per year he went quiet.

 

The other chap who gallops his horse along the towpath every weekend, how much does he contribute to cover the damage he causes to that splendid towpath BW has so expensively laid for the benefit of the walkers. Come to think of it, how much do they donate.

 

State monopolies are all very well but when they are totally unregulated, and they use their privileged position to extract a disproportionate charge from one easily targeted group, and ignore other groups where licencing or charging would be just too much trouble. Then it is time for a change.

 

If you choose to be an apologist for this organisation, whether they are your employers or not then you will have an uphill struggle with me at least.

[bottle]

Whose job is it to check licences? Is it a special job or do all BW workers keep an eye out.

 

Also see my post in "Bugsworth Basin"

 

Something has got to be done we need each other. BW need us to help pay the wages

and we need them to carry out all the work required to maintain the system.

[Guest st170dw]

We need BW as much as they need us. I am sure that without their assistance much of the re-openings and continued usage of canals would not have happened.

 

How many canals have they taken on by BW without sufficient budget in the past 20 years and how many schemes have prospered with their assistance?

 

For the canals in this country to survive and prosper we need to ALL work together to develop the system in the future.

 

We also need to band together to assist the Waterways Trust in safeguarding the past. The past is not today so we need to work with BW ifor the future in my opinion.

 

Now I will duck to avoid the incoming!

 

Dave

[nbtafelberg]

Richard

 

Your stoppage page is not up to date - right now the River Wey navigation has stoppages particularly at Pyrford Lock.

[Eugene Baston]

John

 

My comment about the debate related to the pros and cons of Waterscape providing *free* inforrmation for boaters. Noting that your comment was about a much wider subject, I invited you to establish a separate thread rather than have an important debate buried at the bottom of an existing thread. The invitation remains.

 

What is particularly irksome is pharases such as "I have it on good authority". Without being challenged, such statements becoming prevailing 'facts' and accepted as truths. I do not choose to be an "apologist" for BW, I choose to work for the organisation because I believe it is a worthwhile occupation and that I can contribute to a better understanding of the many varied issues that crop up on a day to day basis. Is my presence here, in that role, an issue to you?

 

Taking the Bugsworth Basin example, I'm astounded that anybody with any authority would say such a thing. It is against BW's stated aims (and its everyday actions in tackling licence evasion), and so what I'd like to know is where this came from. You can email me separately if you do not wish to disclose this publically. I will then investigate and inform you whether this is true or not. In my mind this is a proper and fair thing to do, but please let me know if you disagree.

 

You're right you know, I do notice sentiments being expressed in a wide variety of forums about BW's approach to licence evasion and many other things. Because I take my role seriously I'm keen to understand these sentiments and get to the bottom of them, to find out whether they are genuine, misguided or inflamatory, and then do something about them, depending on what's uncovered.

 

If we've got something genuinely wrong I want to know about it so it can be put right. And if we haven't got something wrong, I want to put the record straight.

 

Over to you.

 

Eugene

Customer Relations Manager, BW.

[Bernie]

Since this rather inflammatory subject has deviated so much from the original I do think a separate topic would be better.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Your stoppage page is not up to date - right now the River Wey navigation has stoppages particularly at Pyrford Lock.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thanks - we're reliant on information supplied by the navigation authorities to keep it up-to-date. BW, EA, Broads Authority and MSC Co. (Bridgewater/Manchester Ship Canal) are all fine but some of the smaller ones don't always send us the info. Will prod accordingly.

 

Richard

[David Schweizer]

John

 

My comment about the debate related to the pros and cons of Waterscape providing *free* inforrmation for boaters.  Noting that your comment was about a much wider subject, I invited you to establish a separate thread rather than have an important debate buried at the bottom of an existing thread.  The invitation remains.

 

 

Eugene

Customer Relations Manager, BW.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>