Frustration and embarrassment

EARLY each year, Canal & River Trust (CaRT) and before it British Waterways blames nesting birds for its inability to deal with the very routine task of vegetation management, writes Allan Richards.

Our thanks must go to David Hymers (Into the jungle) for again bringing the issue to public attention and also to Andrew Denny (Humans trump bird safety) for showing why this particular stock excuse does not bear scrutiny.

Contractors and weather

However, birds do not sit on nests all year long and as spring becomes summer other excuses have to be found. Two of the favourites (and these do not apply to just vegetation management) are the weather and the use of contractors.

A particular case that illustrates this is a complaint made by the Staffordshire & Worcestershire Canal Society regarding the appalling state of towpaths in its area and the derelict state of the Grade II listed little octagonal toll office at Stewponey Wharf.

The complaint also suggested that the condition of towpaths and canals in the area is as bad as it was 40 years ago and included a letter from a visiting boater who stated that the waterway was so overgrown that it represented a danger to boaters, due to restricted visibility, as well as to pedestrians and cyclists.

CaRT response

The Trust has responded by ignoring the issue of condition of the Grade II listed building, part of which has collapsed internally, and also the generality of the complaint. Instead, it has focused on ‘grass cutting' and blames its contractors who it says have fallen behind schedule.

It states that other complaints have been received which it has spent numerous hours responding to and the situation, which has been exacerbated by ideal growing conditions (i.e. the weather), has caused it ‘real frustration and embarrassment'.

However, as it also admits to ‘changes to the specification' one is left wondering if part of the problem is that it is just trying to reduce costs.

Just excuses

As with the ‘nesting birds' excuse, blaming lack of maintenance on the weather or contractors is just a ‘cop out'.

.... and what about the safety aspects? A page on CaRT's website mentions visibility on bends in connection with ‘Safety Standards':

‘We have a defined set of ‘Minimum Safety Standards'. The 47 safety standards have been introduced so that customers know the minimum that they can expect around our network.

Whether it's landings at all locks, clearance of vegetation on bends to give visibility or bollards at locksides to assist boaters use our locks safely—we have evolved our standards over the last few years and in an effort to keep in touch with customer expectations will look to review them (with customer input) throughout 2012/13'.

Missing safety standards

However, the customer is kept rather in the dark as to the review. Did it actually take place? What was the outcome?

Furthermore, no link can be found to the 47 safety standards so how can customers know what to expect from the Trust?

.... and as for nesting birds, CaRT has confirmed that it saved £500,000 this year by curtailing the vegetation management programme due to ‘the early nesting season as a result of the mild winter'.

[Allan tells us that he thinks that CaRT have not defined a set of ‘Minimum Safety Standards' as claimed but may have adopted (but not published) Safety Standards introduced by BW in 2008 as part of its ‘Customer Service Standards'. Minutes of a Navigational Advisory Group meeting in November 2012 state ‘The key point of discussion was around the sufficiency of Minimum Safety Standards with the group confirming that the standards were reasonable'.

Was this the sum total of customer input to the review?]