Calls to limit boat traffic to protect wildlife on restored Welsh canal

[MtB]

2 minutes ago, casper ghost said:

Damn, mines 73 year's old..

 

You'll be fine. It'll take a couple of years to implement...

 

 

[Tonka]

6 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

Sounds great! Just don't ever mention the Weil's Disease or they'll all be catching it. 

 

Amazingly when I was a teenager there was an informal Lido being operated in the Basingstoke canal somewhere around the New Haw/Woodham section still in water back in the 70s. I never fancied it at all but lots of my mates used to go swimming in the canal there in summer. They used to talk of getting changed in someone's terraced house (IIRC) then going through the back garden to the canal and sloshing about in the mud.

 

No-one caught Weils though, as far as I know. 

 

 

There is a section of the Basingstoke Canal by the top of Deepcut locks that is used by the army. 

[David Mack]

9 hours ago, MtB said:

From the article:

 

"Simon Spencer, a local wildlife expert, said: “The canal is wonderful as it is. It doesn’t need wrecking. It is currently used by canoeists and the whole length of the towpath from Llanymynech to Newtown is enjoyed by cyclists, walkers, birdwatchers. If it’s full of boats and oil film across the water-surface, you won’t have as many people using it. Why spend millions on a few boat movements?"

The canal is wonderful as it is precisely because canal enthusiast volunteers with support from the local authorities and BW/CRT have been working for 40+ years to restore the canal to navigation. If they hadn't bothered there would be little left by now for the canoeists, cyclists, walkers and birdwatchers. How many sections of disused canal which are not the subject of restoration proposals offer anything for those groups?

[ditchcrawler]

10 minutes ago, David Mack said:

The canal is wonderful as it is precisely because canal enthusiast volunteers with support from the local authorities and BW/CRT have been working for 40+ years to restore the canal to navigation. If they hadn't bothered there would be little left by now for the canoeists, cyclists, walkers and birdwatchers. How many sections of disused canal which are not the subject of restoration proposals offer anything for those groups?

Including all the wildlife refuges they had to build that wern't there 40 years ago.

[Pluto]

The problem is that people in general have great difficulty in understanding change over time, and this is especially the case with environmentalists. We have regulations and CRT involvement with the conservation of water voles, yet for most of the time that canals have been in existence, bank men would have killed any water vole because of the damage they did to canal structures. There used to be plenty of other, more natural, places where water voles could live, so why not preserve them, rather than allow damage to a man-made structure which was not their natural habitat. 

Change over time has also affected the Ribble estuary, now regarded as a major wintering site for geese. Yet that is mainly because of the changes to the estuary caused by the training walls built to allow shipping into Preston Docks around 1900. Now dredging has stopped, the Ribble is returning to its natural route, which could affect the wintering grounds. I can remember chatting to a farm labourer in Burscough in the early 1970s who complained about the restrictions on access to the new bird sanctuary at Martin Mere, as it had been the best place locally for shooting geese.

The Mersey estuary is another place where change has happened over time. With the dredging of the Bar, tides are now much faster than they were 100 or 200 years ago, and this has tended to scour the mud flats inland, completely changing the dynamics of the river. A barrage across the mouth of the Mersey would return it to its condition in the early 19th century, which would recreate the original conditions in the upper river. However, I am sure conservationists would oppose a barrage because it would alter the current conditions because they do not understand change over time, or exactly what they want to conserve.

[D Ash]

On 25/02/2023 at 11:59, magnetman said:

Badges are definitely good. 

 

Water is wet!

A litre of water's a pint and three-quarters.

A litre is the same as a metre, only wetter.

Could quote some more, but they don't get better.

[robtheplod]

Can we just train the wildlife to inhabit natural waterways only, not ones we made? 

[David Mack]

5 hours ago, D Ash said:

A litre of water's a pint and three-quarters.

A litre is the same as a metre, only wetter.

Could quote some more, but they don't get better.

A litre of water's a pint and three quarters.

A metre measures three foot three, its longer than a yard, you see.

Two and a quarter pounds of jam weigh about a kilogram.

 

(Metrication Board, 1970s)

[Ewan123]

On 25/02/2023 at 19:04, MtB said:

 

No idea. I've only ever been there on me bike. But the canal around there is an utter dream with gin-clear water and fish you can see. I can see why the environmentalists would want to get rid of the boats.

 

 

There's clear water with lots of fish swimming around the aqautic plants at Stonebridge on the Lee Navigation - very busy with boats and probably one of the most polluted stretches I would bet... 

 

I don't think powered vessels are necessarily that bad at all, especially if you can give the canal decent depth.

On 27/02/2023 at 08:38, Pluto said:

The problem is that people in general have great difficulty in understanding change over time, and this is especially the case with environmentalists. We have regulations and CRT involvement with the conservation of water voles, yet for most of the time that canals have been in existence, bank men would have killed any water vole because of the damage they did to canal structures. There used to be plenty of other, more natural, places where water voles could live, so why not preserve them, rather than allow damage to a man-made structure which was not their natural habitat. 

Change over time has also affected the Ribble estuary, now regarded as a major wintering site for geese. Yet that is mainly because of the changes to the estuary caused by the training walls built to allow shipping into Preston Docks around 1900. Now dredging has stopped, the Ribble is returning to its natural route, which could affect the wintering grounds. I can remember chatting to a farm labourer in Burscough in the early 1970s who complained about the restrictions on access to the new bird sanctuary at Martin Mere, as it had been the best place locally for shooting geese.

The Mersey estuary is another place where change has happened over time. With the dredging of the Bar, tides are now much faster than they were 100 or 200 years ago, and this has tended to scour the mud flats inland, completely changing the dynamics of the river. A barrage across the mouth of the Mersey would return it to its condition in the early 19th century, which would recreate the original conditions in the upper river. However, I am sure conservationists would oppose a barrage because it would alter the current conditions because they do not understand change over time, or exactly what they want to conserve.

A lot of conservationists fail to grasp the valuable distinction between conservation (often a good approach, has flexibility and can make positive changes) and preservation (usually doomed because the natural world doesn't want to remain static) - the latter often being what people actually demand. This is especially problematic when you include 'shifting baselines', e.g. which point in the past do you select as the ideal that we seek to achieve.

Edited February 28, 2023 by Ewan123

[ditchcrawler]

38 minutes ago, Ewan123 said:

There's clear water with lots of fish swimming around the aqautic plants at Stonebridge on the Lee Navigation - very busy with boats and probably one of the most polluted stretches I would bet... 

 

 

And the BCN

[MtB]

9 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

And the BCN

 

 

And the Stourbridge branch in particular.Some massive fish in there last time I biked it!

 

 

[Alan de Enfield]

Some of the best 'inshore' boat fishing in North Wales was about 2 miles off New Brighton in the Mersey Estuary.

 

The biggest fattest Cod you have seen ( but many of them had weird deformaties and scabs), and literally millions of Plaice and Dabs, in fact all of the bottom feeders.

 

The reason being that the industrial discharge pipes exited in that area, but of more interest to the fish was the untreated sewage discharges.

 

I remember once a friend telling one of the commercial Fishermen about the wonderful Cod Roe he had taken and eaten from a fish he had caught - the Fisherman was a little perplexed and said the fish don't have roe at this time of year - you must have eaten the diseased entrails.

 

Us boat fishing a competition off New Brighton - 5am start on a chilly January day.

2 mates in the stern and I was at the helm.

 

 

Edited February 28, 2023 by Alan de Enfield

[Heartland]

The restoration of the Montgomery has been considerably delayed by the demands of the conservationists and costs have increased no doubt. The latest comment about further restrictions for access is unreasonable. Maybe conservationists should deal with other issues such as understanding the science of what they do and the implications of their actions. Opening up the waterways creates an improved opportunity for wildlife and preserving the destructive action of the water vole, the right of a crested newt over the passage of boats or the blue-green algae ability to multiply and spread seems part of an academic experiment than any serious care for wildlife. 

[magpie patrick]

On 26/02/2023 at 11:57, Rincewind said:

On the topic of informal Lido's, many years ago the St. Helens canal near the town center was such a place all year round.  Pilkingtons Glass had a factory alongside the canal and they used to draw water from the canal for cooling purposes and then return it to the canal - at a much higher temperature.  You could go swimming there without restriction.  It was known locally as the "Hotties" and the water was, as I recall, crystal clear.  (Sadly not now!)

Pilkingtons raised the temperature of the canal water so much that someone put some tropical fish in that section of the canal and within a short time they had multiplied to the extent that the canal was teeming with them! They thrived for years until Pilkingtons changed their production methods and stopped using the canal water.

 This is an interesting tale, and one I was aware of, but it also illustrates a valuable point that both boaters and the eco-worriers should be aware of - nothing stays the same. If the Montgomery Canal is restored it will change, if it is not restored it will change. Management to keep a canal exactly as is, without or without boats, is expensive and ultimately futile.  

[Tracy D'arth]

In a dead end canal, like the recently opened Crick Wharf extension, why will the water stay clear when there is no flow?  It runs off nowhere down there.

[Graham Davis]

There is a slight flow in and out of the relevant section of the Monty. I think the only section that doesn't have any appreciable flow is the last section alongside the A483 just outside Newtown, where Abermule Lock is.

 

[Heartland]

Re

If the Montgomery Canal is restored it will change, if it is not restored it will change. Management to keep a canal exactly as is, without or without boats, is expensive and ultimately futile.  

 

In trying to interpret this statement is it implied that it is futile to maintain canals and any future restoration scheme is pointless? Is this a canal engineer behaving like a turkey voting for Christmas?

 

As to the Montgomery Canal route, it has to be remembered that historically three separate waterways. The Llanymynech Branch of the Ellesmere Canal (originally), the Eastern Montgomery, and the Western Montgomery. This canal descended to its lowest level and then rose again through locks gradually up to Newtown. 

 

It is a waterway crammed with history and one that is attractive to boat along. Restoring the missing links to Welshpool and beyond must be an important

goal

[magpie patrick]

1 hour ago, Heartland said:

Re

If the Montgomery Canal is restored it will change, if it is not restored it will change. Management to keep a canal exactly as is, without or without boats, is expensive and ultimately futile.  

 

In trying to interpret this statement is it implied that it is futile to maintain canals and any future restoration scheme is pointless? Is this a canal engineer behaving like a turkey voting for Christmas?

 I think you've missed the words I've now put in bold! 

 

You can maintain a waterway in navigable condition but it will change over time as natural and man made influences occur and the waterway adapts to them

[Heartland]

Thanks for the clarification, but still wonder about the option to do nothing and let the waterway decline.

[magpie patrick]

13 minutes ago, Heartland said:

Thanks for the clarification, but still wonder about the option to do nothing and let the waterway decline.

It's a valid option - indeed that is what has happened on many abandoned canals, even more so in Ireland and France where there hasn't been the urban development pressure to fill em in and build on them. 

 

It's not an approach that would suit most nature conservationists though - it might be what they think they want, but it tends to lead to stagnant weed choked water

[Graham Davis]

With 2 crossings of the A483 trunk road between Llanymynach and Welshpool having been obliterated I cannot see that section ever being reopened.

Waterways Wales are currently doing some work on the isolated section opposite Garthmyl Hall.

[tree monkey]

1 hour ago, Heartland said:

Thanks for the clarification, but still wonder about the option to do nothing and let the waterway decline.

This is the problem that I often have with conservation, habitats are dynamic, change is a fact whether it's a woodland or a canal, some habitats are worth maintaining because of it's rarity value but that requires long term maintenance and generally after the initial excitement in most cases the money and enthusiasm wanes, in this case restoration answers the maintenance issue for a site worth retaining 

 

The monty is a classic case, right now it's perfect for the floating water plantain or whatever it is and restoration will damage the population but at least the habitat will have a long term future,with no maintenance it will eventually dry up and natural succession will turn it into a woodland or whatever is the final succession habitat for the site (which ironically might end up being of a more ecological interest overall but until it happens we don't know)

 

Efforts should be taken during the restoration to maintain viable populations of the species of interest and ideally ensure sufficient habitat when the canal is open, they certainly managed in the connected navigable section, plus of course boats will ensure long term maintenance 

[sueb]

It's a pity the conservationists don't do the restoration rath.er than wait for others to do the work for them 

[Pluto]

Where did all those endangered species live before moving to abandoned canals? Surely it is their historic environments which should be conserved?

[magnetman]

30 minutes ago, Pluto said:

Where did all those endangered species live before moving to abandoned canals? Surely it is their historic environments which should be conserved?

Maybe locals who don't want the canal reopened smuggled them in one night. 

 

Newts can be handy for this, and certain types of bat. 

 

I think on balance if I had a nice house somewhere with a derelict canal I would prefer it to stay that way rather than have random boaters gawping at the gardens. Much nicer.