Access to open spaces

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

I know another covid thread feel free to ignore if you've had enough!

I know UKC is always a safe space to air those thoughts you have whilst out walking the dog (from my house as my 1 daily piece of exercise!)

There seems to be a trend of public bodies trying to restrict access to public spaces. Started by the national parks (and I get why lots of people driving around is a bad idea) but the canal and river trust have now issued a notice that "use of canal towpaths should be limited" whatever that means. There are a lot of canals in urban areas that make up a good part of the open space available to residents.

My thoughts are wouldn't it be better if there were more spaces available for people to take their exercise close to home rather than fewer? All a question of density, same number of people spread over a greater space, easier to maintain social distances. It would also reduce the "if I drive somewhere to walk I'll see fewer people argument"

My next thought came as I walked past a locked up and deserted golf course. "Look  all that open space that people could use." I'll admit straight away I liked that thought because how much would annoy the golfists, I can hear them grumbling "how come they're allowed to walk round my golf course but I'm not allowed to walk round it hitting a little ball."

Anyway that was my thoughts those morning.

Post edited at 10:13
 skog 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

Yep, I've a feeling that excessive restrictions on where you can exercise and how you can get there are going to prove counterproductive.

The priority has to be distancing from other people, and that's very hard for a lot of people to do right by their home.

Clearly travelling long distances (risk of spreading to areas that would not otherwise get it for a while), or into rural communities with poorer service provision, is bad, but otherwise spreading out appears to make a lot of sense.

Post edited at 10:18
 oldie 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

While I agree in principle that the larger the space available the more people can keep within their 2m anti virus forcefield, I suppose there does have to be adequate space along paths for people to pass each other while maintaining separation especially if it becomes busy. My wife tells me a London park has been closed because people were having barbecue parties there against the separation rules. People need to be sensible (most are) and alter their walk if it is too crowded, or else there will be further restrictions for everyone.

 Neil Williams 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

The problem with canal towpaths is that they are mostly under 2m wide and so it's impossible to maintain distancing on them.

1
Andy 1902 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

The CRT guidance is mainly about trying to maintain social distance, the towpath is not closed. Please be aware many boaters live on their boat and some need to try to self isolate. My request is if you are walking or cycling along towpaths is that you don't congregate especially at locks and if a boat has put out markers trying to keep people away from their boat please respect them (as long as the markers still leave room for passage for walkers and cyclist).

Boat movements are now restricted to essential movements only i.e. to get fuel/water/empty toilets. Towpaths won't close because many boaters would die of hunger/thirst if they did.

In reply to oldie:

I have to say everyone I've met out on morning walks has been sensible, using the towpath like a single track road with passing places on narrow sections etc. I just don't get what they're trying to achieve with this statement to limit use of the towpaths. It means nothing, limit to who? It's just confusing.

There's a bloke that lives on a narrow boat on the canal where I walk who is in the vulnerable category and is trying to self isolate on a boat, not easy! He's put out very polite signs saying "hi I'm trying to self isolate, please give me as much space as you can so I can get off my boat safely, this path is the only outside space available to me" this has been very effective and because it's personal you'd have to be a real dick to go "no screw you I'm entitled to walk this towpath"

I can't see any justification to limiting use of the towpath network as a general principle.

In reply to Andy 1902:

Crossed messages I agree with you, I just think a statement more like yours from the CRT would be more effective. Reminding folk that people live there etc. The generic limit use of towpaths is just ineffective because it doesn't mean anything and is more likely to get push back because it does read a little like please stay off our towpaths. Also it doesn't really help those who do live aboard and/or are vulnerable because it doesn't tell anyone what to do in that scenario.

Andy 1902 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

CRT are quite notorious amongst canal dwellers for putting out mixed (i.e crap) statements!.......

 Blue Straggler 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

What is the Canal and River Trust? Is an authority body that can enforce things? This is a genuine question, not an "I am entitled to do X because of Y". 
My house is ON a canal towpath and I've been taking daily walks along it. It is true that when passing people, it is impossible to maintain 2 metres distance, then best I've managed is to maximise distance and sort of turn my face down and away from the other people, which feels awfully half hearted. 

It would be a shame if I can't use the towpath, but it won't be the end of the world for me

NB I have not passed any moored residential boats. 

Post edited at 12:39
 Yanis Nayu 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

My thoughts exactly, along with it being wiser to allow people to drive to exercise as it allows people to spread out - providing they avoid the honeypots. 

Andy 1902 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Blue Straggler:

> What is the Canal and River Trust? Is an authority body that can enforce things? This is a genuine question, not an "I am entitled to do X because of Y". 

CRT can enforce some things - they can close most towpaths pretty much at whim - most towpaths are not public rights of way (for a variety of reasons). Without getting into legal discussions they can close towpaths but their public funding is based upon an agreement that they don't unless it is necessary.

 toad 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Blue Straggler:

They are the charity formed from the old British Waterways statutory body. They haven't really adapted to not being a quango in terms of behaving like a charity and they fought really hard against members/ public accountability when they were set up. It does mean that they have all sorts of legacy powers and obligations that are enforceable

The hebden bridge flood, for eg, was their reservoir and their problem

 Blue Straggler 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Andy 1902 and toad:

thanks 

 The New NickB 27 Mar 2020
In reply to toad:

I can't speak for all of our canals, but certainly on the Rochdale Canal, the canal is actually owned by the four local authorities that it passes through, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale and Calderdale. When the restoration of the waterway was completed in 2002, part of the obligation of the local authorities was to guarantee maintenance for at least 50 years, to do this they entered in to a 50 year operation and management agreement with British Waterways, which passed on to the Canal & River Trust as the legacy body. The four authorities pay in the region of £1.5m between them to the Canal & River Trust.

In reply to toad:

Not sure if you mean Whaley bridge rather than hebden, but Whaley was definitely their problem. They do seem to be falling I to the same gap between public and private/charity sector. I don't know if the full review into the Whaley incident has been published yet but if the CRT is found to be at fault will they be on the line for all the lost earnings etc from the businesses shut down for a week? If it was a big chemical company that had a leak and caused an evacuation I'm sure there's be plenty of claims going in.

 toad 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

Yes, whaley

In reply to Andy 1902:

You made me go and get out the OS map, you're right I'd always assumed towpaths were public rights of way. In the same way footpaths alongside roads were as towpaths are just an older equivalent on a public transport infrastructure.

 Neil Williams 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

Some of them are but they mostly aren't.

 ClimberEd 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

>

> My next thought came as I walked past a locked up and deserted golf course. "Look  all that open space that people could use." I'll admit straight away I liked that thought because how much would annoy the golfists, I can hear them grumbling "how come they're allowed to walk round my golf course but I'm not allowed to walk round it hitting a little ball."

Several of my local golf courses  are closed for golf but open for the general public to walk on.

Andy 1902 27 Mar 2020
In reply to Moomin.williams:

Now without getting too political.....

CRTs public funding agreement is up for renegotiating in a couple of years time - boaters will never be able to afford the gap between what it costs to maintain the system and what they can afford. When the inevitable debate happens please don't forget the benefit the canals and towpaths give.


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...