BELLE

Apologies for the delay, but unfortunately I have been ultra busy with my day job and I have had very little spare time for the last few weeks.   To boating business – I met with the BW Customer Services Supervisor for the Coventry, Ashby and Trent & Mersey Canals and a couple of his BW colleagues on 19 April 2010.   This was an opportunity for me to air my views about the maintenance issues I have raised in my BLOG. 

I have to say that I found these BW guys very receptive and there was very little said (or not said) from their side to suggest to me that they did not know about pretty much all of the issues I have raised.  They convinced me that BW does regularly carry out inspections of the waterway in this area.  For example, I was told that one or other of the members of the supervisor’s team walked the canals for which he is responsible (at least once every month) and that in so doing the presence of any new issues is noted, as is any deterioration for any known issues.  This information is supplied to colleagues in BW and they prioritise/schedule the remedial work required.

Now for the bummer - in the vast majority of instances, unless classified as ’safety critical’, or it gets associated with one or other of the BW ’honey pot’ projects, whatever the issue, it will just sit there in a queue until money becomes available to deal with it.  The number of BW maintenance personnel is being reduced, as is the maintenance budget for the area.  Ergo, contractors cannot be used if the BW maintenance personnel are no longer available.  Overall, I got the impression that these guys were at a stage where getting the OK from above to spend money on tins of paint was becoming an issue, so the issues I have raised will probably sit around for quite some time to come.

The message here is that the waterway is actually deteriorating and will continue to do so.  It would appear that the BW personnel at ‘local’ level are more or less powerless to do anything about it, because they take their instructions from above and they cannot do any work without sufficient budget authorisation from above.  Any BW funds that do become available will, more likely as not, be prioritised towards the ‘honey pot’ projects.

Fradley Junction is classified as a ‘honey pot’ project.  Activities here will become more intense, not so much as a result of more boat traffic passing through, moreover because more and more people are being encouraged to visit the area to take in the nature pool, etc.  For sure, facilities for these people will be developed further.  Rumour has it that the car parking capacity here is about to be increased significantly.  Does this mean that BW has purchased some suitable land nearby, thus diverting more BW funds away from essential waterway maintenance?

A nearby piece of (what was agricultural) land has been receiving spoil (including brick and concrete rubble) for about a year now.  As I type, excavators are buzzing around levelling this land - could this be with a view to hard surfacing it for use as a car park I am wondering? It’s certainly no good for growing crops any more.

BW has been busy at Fradley Junction - good in one sense but not in another.  Yesterday, a ‘temporary’ water point was erected about 15m away from the proper one and the proper one was surrounded by a rather impressive wooden fence.

I am very pleased that BW has at long last recognised the needs of the boater, insofar as BW has at long last recognised the importance of the water supply at this location – thank you BW.  I have my doubts however about the efficacy of this wooden fence.  In reality this fence is easier (for those that feel the need) to climb over than the orange fence that was there beforehand.  This temporary water point is so close to the old one that it is only a matter of time before boaters needing water will moor alongside this fence, even if they are just waiting for another boater to vacate this temporary water point.  Some will in all probability climb over the fence.  Therefore, the presence of the fence is virtually superfluous when considering the mitigation of the risk of injury presented to the boater (and other users of the canal) by the collapsing wall at this location.   Me thinks that somebody at BW has not carried out a robust risk assessment (or does not know how to do so) or the persons that participated in this risk assessment are short of common sense (you do not need to be an ‘expert’ to figure this one out!).

Could it be that BW’s decision to erect this wooden fence was driven more by a desire and/or pressure from others to get rid of the ‘unsightly’ orange fence?

How long will it be before somebody else is injured?

Fix the bloody wall!

Matters continue to deteriorate at the BW water point immediately outside the BW office at Fradley Junction.  Somebody (presumably a boater) has made short work of BW’s extensive bagging, taping and tagging, removing it all so as to gain access to the tap.

A complete collapse of this wall could well be accelerated by those that are prepared to risk using this water point in this condition, orange fence or no orange fence.

Thank you BW – the ground paddle at Woodend Lock (L20) on the Trent & Mersey appears to have been fixed.  Well, I am assuming it has been fixed because the tape and the warning notice have gone.   I did not have a windlass with me when I passed so I could not check myself to see if it was indeed operating normally.

Time to fix = approximately 2 months.

The water point immediately outside the BW office at Fradley Junction is not yet back in action I am afraid.  The Elsan disposal point at the same location is seeing much more action now though.  This is because some boaters are opting instead to connect their fresh water hoses to the water tap immediately above the trap!

So OK, BW has fixed a sign at this Elsan disposal point to warn users that the water here is not for drinking.  However, are BW management really that naive that they do not expect boaters to take water from here in the circumstances?  There is another BW water point located one lock up and around the junction on the Coventry Canal BW has argued.

Most boaters navigating just the Trent & Mersey must surely consider accessing this water point on the Coventry Canal one hell of an inconvenience.  Human nature is such that some, due to ignorance or a relatively care-free approach to their health (and that of others), will rank the risk of a dose of Gastroenteritis (or something even worse) as ‘low’.  Ergo, they will take water from this Elsan disposal point instead of subjecting themselves to the boating equivalent of a ‘log jam’ that usually occurs at this junction on a daily basis throughout the boating season.

BW has a duty of care regarding the health and safety of the boater and others using the waterways.  We all (I propose) know what BW should be doing without further delay , i.e. they should be channelling more effort and resources into repairing the wall that has collapsed so that the proper water point can be put back into use.  I wonder if the Health & Safety Executive would hold a similar view whilst enforcing the requirements of the Health & Safety at Work Act and the associated regulations?

One of the new ‘talking’ information posts at Fradley Junction has been ‘bagged and taped’ already!  That’s all of two days since it was installed – if bust, is this a record?

On the other hand, if these talking information posts do turn out to be a failure, could it be that the BW staff at the BW information office at Fradley Junction get to keep their jobs for a bit longer?

Whilst out and about over the last few days I have observed the following:

Observation 1) – The ground paddle at Woodend Lock (L20) on the T&M has been suffering from a ’structural malfunction’ since mid-January 2010. I did not add this particular defect to my log – this is because when I first saw it in January the ground paddle gear had already been taped up by BW and a notice applied.

Closer inspection of this notice however has highlighted that, whilst apologetic for any inconveniences caused, BW apparently does not know when it will be carrying out suitable repairs.  It would also appear that BW has gone ‘ex-directory’ and would prefer you not to contact them about this particular structural malfunction either.  Thankfully there is also a gate paddle at this location, so the lock can still be used. It is already causing inconveniences and is likely to cause even more inconveniences when the volume of boating traffic increases over the next few weeks.  Is it really that much of a technical challenge to sort this paddle out?

Observation 2) – Why did the BW patrol officer that applied this notice to a recently sunken boat do so I am wondering?  The owner knows that it sank.  The ‘BW AWARE’ tape had been applied within a day or so of it sinking, so BW already knows that it sank. Most persons around here and many others that have passed through the area know that it sank. Those that have read this BLOG know that it sank.  The boats demise has also been covered on Narrowboatworld, so you can be sure that most of the boaters on the planet now know that it sank.

Could it be that this boat has been ‘moored’ here for slightly in excess of the 14 day mooring limit? The craft licence is valid, so is this a BW jobsworth in action? I hope that he or she did not waste BW time and effort making a special trip to this location to apply this notice when there are other much more direct ways for formally notifying the owner that the boat must be moved.

It being there however does not represent a hazard for other boaters and there are currently lots of other nearby mooring spaces available for other boaters, should they wish to use them.  In saying this, my expectation hope is that BW has also found the time to check that significant quantities of diesel fuel or engine oil will not be discharged into the canal and, if there is a risk of either occurring, taken appropriate steps to mitigate these risks.

Observation 3) – On the positive side – there has been a surge in BW towpath grass cutting activity which can only really be viewed as a good thing, both for boaters and other users of the waterway. Well done BW. Unfortunately, reducing the grass and other vegetation around here in a regulation haircut fashion to a height of approximately 15mm has exposed yet more of the collapsing retaining wall problems I blogged about on 27 February 2010 - be sure that these problems will be drawn to BW’s attention quite soon.

Observation 4) – Those boaters being denied usage of the water point immediately in front of the BW office at Fradley Junction may be interested to learn that BW has found the time and money to install a ’talking’ information point there instead.  Similar talking information points are still undergoing installation in the same general area.  How can BW can find the time, money and resource to install this sort of thing whilst the retaining wall at this water point still awaits repair?  I also noticed in a short article on Narrowboatworld yesterday that BW is now looking into providing a temporary water point on-site.  Why doesn’t BW just get on with fixing the bloody wall?

I am pretty sure that there will be some more critique offered up about this debacle soon.

Further to my BLOG on 27 February 2010; a page has now been added to this website describing a new British Waterways maintenance log and my plans for updating it. You can access it from the Pages link or from here:

British Waterways Maintenance Log

Feel free to use this as a template for offering up your own survey information to British Waterways.

Cheers, Chris.

Observation 1) – Today saw a stack of BW cash spent on having a contractor apply a multitude of new white and yellow road markings  on both of the approach roads to Fradley Junction.

Observation 2) – About six weeks ago the canal retaining wall at the water point immediately in front of the BW office at Fradley Junction collapsed  into the canal and whilst doing so injured a boater – you can read about it here on the Narrowboatworld website if you like.

Observation 3) - Since the collapse described in 2) above, the water point has been fenced off, thus compelling boaters to go elsewhere for their water supply.

So, my immediate question is; why the hell has BW left this water point in this condition whilst allowing precious BW money and time to be diverted to having contractors apply totally bloody uneccessary white and yellow road markings?

Feel free to enlighten me if you think that I have missed something here!