A1Sailor
...
Here's the Management Team:
https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/corporate/about-us/meet-the-management-team/
https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/corporate/about-us/meet-the-management-team/
Canals closing in Scotland
- Thread starter Sneaky Pete
- Start date
ctva
Well-Known Member
It is really depressing, the state of Scottish Canals. Even more so looking at the board members... only one is even remotely associated with the marine industry.
And after the debacle of the running (or not as the case may be) of the Crinan this year, they have postponed the user group meeting that used to be held every year for the locals (boaty and residents) to hear from and question the local management, big wigs and Head Office types, has been postponed again. In their ineptitude, they (Head Office types in Glasgow) tried to organise it earlier in the year, on a Thursday evening and gave less than two weeks notice. They were told that the late notification, mid week timing would automatically preclude most interested parties from attending but the HO communications director insisted that this was the best time and had been requested by users... and TWO people turned up! So the said they would rearrange for a weekend at the end of the season. Oh, and it was cancelled, or just not arranged, last year too. One might get the impression that they do not want to face the users as.
The sticky tape, elastic bands and good will of the local staff will only keep it running in the short term.
One despairs!
And after the debacle of the running (or not as the case may be) of the Crinan this year, they have postponed the user group meeting that used to be held every year for the locals (boaty and residents) to hear from and question the local management, big wigs and Head Office types, has been postponed again. In their ineptitude, they (Head Office types in Glasgow) tried to organise it earlier in the year, on a Thursday evening and gave less than two weeks notice. They were told that the late notification, mid week timing would automatically preclude most interested parties from attending but the HO communications director insisted that this was the best time and had been requested by users... and TWO people turned up! So the said they would rearrange for a weekend at the end of the season. Oh, and it was cancelled, or just not arranged, last year too. One might get the impression that they do not want to face the users as.
The sticky tape, elastic bands and good will of the local staff will only keep it running in the short term.
One despairs!
A1Sailor
...
Irrelevant thread drift, but I discovered today that the F&C Canal is the route of the original fuel/oil pipeline between Grangemouth & Old Kilpatrick, built around 1918. It was later extended to go to Rosneath & Finnart. http://historicalrfa.org/57-stories/special/2085-hm-oil-fuel-depot-old-kilpatrick
The replacement pipeline from Finnart to Grangemouth was built around 1954.
The replacement pipeline from Finnart to Grangemouth was built around 1954.
Quandary
Well-Known Member
Couple of years ago the Chairman turned up to address our community council, naively, we mistakenly thought he was seeking feedback, but we were impressed with his sublime ignorance of current issues and it was good for us to be talked down to so arrogantly, just the sort of guy needed to put these local yokels in their place.
Birdseye
Well-Known Member
Maybe just me, but to me the word "investment" means placing money into some asset where you hope that the capital will be preserved and there will be a cash return. Nowadays, politicians have turned to calling all spending as "investment" because it makes it more palatable to the public. Plugging holes in canals isnt investment - its spending.
wee_niall
Well-Known Member
This is quite an interesting document:
https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/AMS_FINAL_JUNE18.pdf
Basically identifies that they are 6-9million short every year and so more failures are inevitable. Also confirms that operation of the canals is the lowest priority:
"Our focus will always be on ensuring that assets are safe, protecting the wider public, local infrastructure, our staff and visitors, while also aiming, when funds allow, to maintain operational functionality."
https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/AMS_FINAL_JUNE18.pdf
Basically identifies that they are 6-9million short every year and so more failures are inevitable. Also confirms that operation of the canals is the lowest priority:
"Our focus will always be on ensuring that assets are safe, protecting the wider public, local infrastructure, our staff and visitors, while also aiming, when funds allow, to maintain operational functionality."
ProDave
Well-Known Member
So that sums it up well. The primary function of a canal in Scotland is NOT navigation by boat.
Anyone find a similar statement by the Canal and River Trust in England or Wales to either confirm they have the same view, or if they place navigation as a higher priority?
wee_niall
Well-Known Member
This is even more gloomy:
"There is, therefore, a need to consider a more rationalised approach to budget prioritisation. Consideration must be given to the primary use and function of the various canals, recognising the wider benefits to the greatest number of people. This may not necessarily include navigation"
Here's the canal and river trusts AMS which paints a much more positive situation in E&W:
https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/refresh/media/thumbnail/38703-asset-management-strategy-issue-2.pdf
Last edited:
ProDave
Well-Known Member
Yes it does seem the CRT in E&W do seem to regard maintaining a navigable waterway as a primary function.
It is a sad state of affairs that Scottish Canals don't share that goal. Whoever is in charge needs to be persuaded to change that view.
It is a sad state of affairs that Scottish Canals don't share that goal. Whoever is in charge needs to be persuaded to change that view.
lw395
Well-Known Member
The only way that's going to change is if there is a financial case.
Why should a small number of yachts be subsidised by spending millions a year on the canals?
It's not as if we are primarily canal boaters.
Maybe the business model needs to be more like 'preservation railways', like the Bluebell Line, where lots of volunteers do the graft for free and tourists pay a lot for a short ride.
Daydream believer
Well-Known Member
There is a guy operating two large barges as adventure holiday hotels that travel the canal weekly from end to end.
If depths at the Neptune flight is restricted, how will all this affect his business? What about that of the one or two canal boat operators that hire holiday craft on the canal? How will they fair?
If depths at the Neptune flight is restricted, how will all this affect his business? What about that of the one or two canal boat operators that hire holiday craft on the canal? How will they fair?
lw395
Well-Known Member
Badly I expect, but why should they expect subsidy?
dgadee
Well-Known Member
You are right, lw395. London needs the money to subsidise crossrail 1 and 2.
Last edited:
ctva
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately a canal without moving boats is just a water ditch which will not attract tourists only fishermen.
The subsidy for the canals is the share that covers the tourist, canoeists, cyclists, walkers, dogs and all using the facilities which in turn benefits all the local businesses. All part of the money go round that keeps the economy going.
Oh, and it s a pitance compared to the tax money that goes into the SE of England, just all part of the same.
We jus need to get rid of the inept SC leadership.
The subsidy for the canals is the share that covers the tourist, canoeists, cyclists, walkers, dogs and all using the facilities which in turn benefits all the local businesses. All part of the money go round that keeps the economy going.
Oh, and it s a pitance compared to the tax money that goes into the SE of England, just all part of the same.
We jus need to get rid of the inept SC leadership.
Hadenough
Well-Known Member
ProDave
Well-Known Member
But if Scotland was not obsessed with taking everything "in house"(because they think they can do it better on their own) it would all still have been part of "British Waterways" and the vision to actually keep the canals open for navigation might still be there.
Last edited:
ProDave
Well-Known Member
I don't think the restricted draft would stop a dutch barge, but from what I understand it is stopping some larger commercial (fishing boats for example) from transiting through.
lw395
Well-Known Member
Boat owners are not going to be a priority in the people's republic of scotland.
Unless you can make a coherent case for spending the money, it won't happen.
Also, not everyone likes boats on canals. Particularly too many boats. Parts of the canal system in England have filled up with traveller types and become unpleasant. A lot of people have agendas which can work against the cruising boat owner.
jamie N
Well-Known Member
It's not a problem for them; indeed I rafted through the locks tied to one them.
wee_niall
Well-Known Member
Scottish Canals is still technically British Waterways - it was the english and welsh waterways that were hived off into a charitable trust....i guess there's pros and cons with both structures but it does feel like SC are happy to manage decline of the waterways and focus on regeneration and other economic development projects with the waterways as a mere backdrop.
Interesting that the condition of the original grant funding for the lowland canals was that they would be "maintained to cruising standard for 25 years" which was apparently reaffirmed by the scottish government in 2011.
https://www.waterways.org.uk/news/view?id=363&x[0]=news/list
