It has to be said that the EA Bailiff was a least persistent and it is interesting that he is probably funded by the Rod License fee which raises over £20 million a year (note that the offender in this case did have an up-to-date licence). I have never understood why BW don't try to negotiate a deal with the EA to collect licence fees for canal cycling, fishing, and dog walking. The argument against BW charging for use like this has always been the cost of setting up and running the system and the resulting enforcement – like BW, EA’s sponsoring government department is DEFRA, so it shouldn’t be that difficult to start a dialogue.

EA’s Rod Licence costs around £25 a year and some 1.2 million anglers pay it without a fuss. Even a nominal fee of £10 a year for specific-interest canal users like anglers, cyclists and dog-walkers would surely raise enough to pay for proper enforcement of towpath use as well as boat licensing and possibly several million a year for waterway upkeep? How much more difficult would it be to enforce licensing amongst cyclists & dog-walkers along the canals than it is for EA’s bailiffs to enforce rod licences? This story suggests that EA Bailiffs are already monitoring canals so there might even be an opportunity for EA & BW enforcement officers to collaborate.

In preparation for the transition of British Waterways to new waterways charity, the Canal and River Trust, a local waterways partnership may already have been formed and if one exists in your area, it may be a good idea to write a letter of concern to them. This type of issue is one that they would/should be addressing as it concerns the welfare and enjoyment of more than one type of canal user.

It will be interesting to see how the new Canal & River Trust handles the issues; I suspect that the greater involvement of local communities through the local and regional waterway partnerships will take more interest than BW has in the past.