Victor: Did you believe it?

YES, you have guessed what I am referring to—the claim by Cart that  boaters satisfaction with its waterways has increased in the past year together with the number who think that the upkeep of the waterways has continued to improve.

What utter tosh!  And that published on the week there were no less than five stoppages, and as we all know due to lack of maintenance, and the same week after week with locks, swing bridges, and lift bridges continuing to fail, and don't let us forget the 'leaks'. Who on earth does it think it is kidding?

It reckons that 76% of the  1,160 respondents said they were happy with their cruising experience, up from 68% in 2016. We are not told who are  the 1,160 boaters, but I reckon they were certainly not continuous cruisers who have to battle with the ever increasing failures.

Wait a mo—Cart told us it contacted a third of its licence holders, and though we don't know exactly how many licence holders there are, its figures rather fluctuating, it is about 33,000, which means the survey was sent to 11,000 boaters but it can be seen that only a tenth replied, so that really doesn't fill you with confidence does it? And knowing of dear Cart's propensity for exaggeration, I just wonder if once again it is much ado about now't.

Anyone out there who actually took part?  Let us know—it will be in confidence, unless you ask for it to be published...

A dangerous exercise

So Cart is now encouraging canoeists to use waterway tunnels, which is without doubt a very silly—and dangerous—thing to do. Someone at Cart must really have lost his or her marbles, in its race to mean everything to everybody.  First it was the cyclists and now it is the canoeists, who are perhaps putting on pressure, so Cart is obliging, as it will all look good to its paymasters.

The problem is canoeists don't seem to bother with the rules, as we have had them pass us on both sides, and at the same time—both ways, as I am sure many of you have.

So the latest tunnel to be used by the canoeists is Foulridge on the Leeds & Liverpool, and I well remember this is regulated by lights working on a one-way system.  But do you think for one moment some canoeists waiting for the light to change and believing the tunnel is empty will 'risk it' and go through.  Of course they will, and meet a boat coming the other way.

As our contributor, T. Lang, pointed out, many boaters, us included, put on all the interior lights to illuminate the walls of a tunnel and have the light shining towards the roof to enable the boat to be kept in the centre.  There is no way a steerer at the back of a boat will see anything in the water coming towards them, especially something as low as a person in a canoe. As to their carrying a bright light with them, I don't think so.

There are miles and miles of waterways—over 2,000—so surely they don't really need to travel through tunnels, just for the waterway to be part of some 'trail' or other.  It is taking it too far.

There will be a disaster, and with women carrying small children in canoes it could be a very tragic one.

Is he right?

Here's one of our contributors opinion of the many strange decisions of Cart nowadays:

'The waterways are being ruled by non-boating liberals who haven't a clue about anything in life but because their telephone tells them it's right they believe it. What ever happens will be blamed on the boater, just like cycle incidents are blamed on the pedestrians.

Cars in cuts, canoes in tunnels, cyclists on towpaths, lock beams broken, unusable paddles, broken bridges and holes in the bottom—what a bloody mess CaRT are making of it.

It's about time we had some major changes in the management of Cart. We need some people who understand the real reason for the canals and put a stop the the namby pamby liberal minded environmentalist attitude before it's totally too late'.

He certainly has a point.

Victor Swift