An honest observation.

[rotrax]

I have detected in this forum an aversion to the possibility of the Canal and River Trust becoming responsible for the non tidal Thames. Living as I do-and have for the last 45 years within a mile of the river and used it frequently during that time-I thought I might share the following with you.

First Mate and I have just purchased a modern 41 foot motor sailer. It is alongside in Gloucester Docks. During the last six days we have lived aboard preparing her for her trip round to Gosport-about 450NM.

During this time we have had ample time to watch the CRT staff operating the lift bridges and managing the other facilities.

Compared to the Thames there are fewer locks by far but lots of powered lift and swing bridges that have to be opened for navigation.

I really dont share the concerns of some posters on here-the Gloucester and Sharpness canal is a serious waterway and managed very well from what we saw. If the Thames was managed in the same profesional way there would be few complaints.

I am afraid the days of the Thames Conservancy are long gone...................................

 

[oldgit]

There is always a reluctance to accept change, sometimes it would be better if the people who will benefit/suffer from that change get stuck in and engage with the process and attempt to improve those proposals,rather than rejecting them outright.
One or two saw the writing on the wall ages ago , attempted to at least get the subject of change out in the in the open for discussion and have been roundly criticised for their efforts.
It is very easy to believe that because something has been going on in a certain fashion since time immemorial that there is some divine right to those services.
For those of us who boat beyond Teddington , it was obvious that that there is very special set up on the Thames which the rest of the UK does not enjoy.
The over all argument that came from the no change army was that you were some sort of special case and should not have to share "your" resources with the wider world.
Or did I get the wrong impression.
Then of course you have a fifth column who refuse to pay anything at all.

 

[boatone]

It is impossible to form any considered opinion regarding the merits or otherwise of a transfer of EA waterways to the C&RT as there is absolutely no indication of how such transfer might be constructed and achieved.
The Environment Agency is a complex beast and it is virtually impossible to clearly recognise, as an example, the difference between "Navigation" and "Flood Control and Risk Management" (FCRM). Even the EA themselves struggle to explain these differences and how the various functions might be transferred to another "authority".

I think you are right to observe a fundamental opposition from some here but that opposition cannot be founded on anything other than emotional reactions until we have a clearer picture - i.e. a definitive proposal.

We can hardly argue that the current position is one worth defending when it is so obvious that the EA no longer have the resources to carry out their statutory duties, particularly enforcement.

For anyone who has not done so, it is worth visiting the C&RT website to get a flavour of how they are now operating. https://canalrivertrust.org.uk
Anyone who cannot immediately see simply the difference in communicating with waterways users compared to the EA's struggles with .gov.uk must be blind.

For the record, I remain agnostic until sufficient information is made available to enable me to have a considered and constructive opinion.

 

[boatingdave]

As one who has moored on both the Thames and the G&S (and still have friends on both, well they say they are anyway but thats another thread....) I think whilst there are issues on the Thames with diminishing resources for locks etc, it is a very similar picture on the G&S which is run by the CRT. They are both as bad as each other however much of it is due to 'austerity' measures and the biggest cost saving is to get rid of staff, even though many are volunteers for both organisations. I visited a friend of mine in Victoria basin on Sunday who had very little good to say about them. I have the impression that the service, and ability to communicate, has worsened since they were BW although the commercial structure (and subsiduaries such as CRT Moorings Ltd) is very similar in many ways to the old B&W. On the G&S they have been trying to get 'remote control' bridges to work with mixed responses with an 'app' which you have to tether your wireless to a local Access Point to use - security nightmare. I understand why there are a plethora of views on here as peeps feel emotional about different things but I think we just have to accept that the world is changing, technology isn't always the right solution but a lot of companies think that it is. I know my point is very similar that a lot of it is around resources but the CRT is also working hard to get rid of those resources and the service provision is getting lower and the costs are going up so most folk feel they aren't getting a good deal.

 

[capnfishy]

While I agree that there is an assumption that conditions will be worse under the CRT, your comment, 'if the Thames was managed in the same professional way' is a grievous slight against the 60 dedicated and, mostly, long serving lock & weir keepers, not to mention the 30 other river staff, who care much for and run the river as best they can given the resources available. It underlines your lack of knowledge and ill-informed opinion of what happens on the Thames.

There is no statutory obligation upon the EA to provide tax payer subsidised assisted passage through locks so enjoy it while you can but please do not use the lock staff as easy targets.

 

[oldgit]

'if the Thames was managed in the same professional way' is a grievous slight, It underlines your lack of knowledge and ill-informed opinion of what happens on the Thames.

Do not think this post was directed in any way against the lock keepers and other frontline staff.
The management further up the food chain can only spent what they are allocated.
Suspect that cuts in funding affecting DEFRA will not be the last.

 

[rotrax]

Do not think this post was directed in any way against the lockeepers and other frontline staff.

Thank you-in no way did I intend to compare the two staffs, both of who do a splendid job within the financial constraints.

My observation-for that is all it was-was that a highly complex 18 mile waterway was operated in a very competent manner that if used on the Thames would not be dissapointing to most users of the river.

I also believe that costs will undoubtedly increase for boatowners on the Thames. Managing waterways is not cheap, and users should bear a fair amount of the cost.

With the proviso that maintenance and staff levels are kept up, of course.