Bridgewater Canal Breach

[MtB]

1 minute ago, magnetman said:

And did it have a projected useful lifespan? 

 

Good question. With all that exposed and unprotected steel in it, probably about 60 years.

 

Now what if failure of the 1972 repair turns out to be the cause of this breach?!

 

 

[magnetman]

Maybe the piles were not long enough.

 

Something to do with getting them on site, machinery available or even the availability of the product at the time it was needed. Corners could have been cut. 

 

Also what was the original construction technique? 

[dmr]

Its failed twice now but this was probably the first big canal embankment ever built. The climate is changing. A simple like for like repair will no longer do so some significant redesign involving lots of consultants and studies might well be required.

[junior]

Dam being put in this evening Altrincham side.

[Jim P]

Good. I hear (probably reliable) rumours that one of the beams has gone. Level here in sale has gone down a lot today.

 

neighbouring boats are beached, as are others in local marina.

Stretford to sale seems particularly shallow / gummed up. Had problems when it went down 3/4 years ago,

[Cheshire cat]

I was stuck behind that contraption at 19 o'clock this morning. It came on a low loader from Warrington. Would have expected it to have done the job in less than an hour. It's got a serious bucket on it.

 

That's Dunham school bridge so one further away from the breach than where they put the stop planks in.

[junior]

1 hour ago, Jim P said:

Good. I hear (probably reliable) rumours that one of the beams has gone. Level here in sale has gone down a lot today.

 

neighbouring boats are beached, as are others in local marina.

Stretford to sale seems particularly shallow / gummed up. Had problems when it went down 3/4 years ago,

I'm the only boat on CRT waters to the south of the breach on the same level/in the same pound as the breach. Levels down a few inches here at the moment but no real issues compared to what others are going through closer to the breach. Levels should rise this side if we get the snow overnight and then it melts. 

[b00ke23]

New drone footage from today with a comparison to 1st Jan here https://youtu.be/8env2H36Hto?si=WnTCtqf1ueyzLS86&t=857

 

It's clear the canal has been further eroded by about 70 yards in the 3 days the water has been flowing. Lets hope they can get the dams in place ASAP. 

[TheShipsCat]

We've been watching this situation from way out here, with our main thoughts and hopes going to the stranded boaters.  We were happy to hear that Peel has at least come up with a plan A and B for getting the boats out, for what that's worth.

There's been some discussion on the design of this canal section, where an embankment was raised up out of silt and other alluvium and the canal trenched through the crown of the berm.  We live in earthquake (as well as drought/flood) country, where it is deeply impressed upon us that alluvial soils as engineering material or base can, under certain environmental conditions (common enough here), very quickly turn to custard. 

 

How common is this kind of canal construction throughout other regions of Britain?

 

[b00ke23]

15 minutes ago, TheShipsCat said:

How common is this kind of canal construction throughout other regions of Britain?

 

 

This exact method is not very common, but it is common for Canals to tend to follow a terrain contour if possible so you often find sections of canal following a hillside where one side of the canal falls away in an embankment where this sort of breach could happen. The Llangollen Canal seriously breached in a section like this in 1945 causing a fatal train crash, and again in the 1980's after which the section was rebuilt in concrete to prevent further breaches. 

[Donny85]

On 01/01/2025 at 12:26, David Mack said:

Is there still a public right of navigation on the Bridgewater Canal?

Given the Bridgewater Canal was privately built and has remained privately owned, and as it wasn’t created under an Act of Parliament, it’s unlikely a public right of navigation (PRN) was ever established. Access is regulated by the private owners, and navigation is subject to their terms, such as reciprocal agreements allowing limited use by Canal & River Trust-licensed boats. While some suggest historical use might imply a PRN, there’s no legal evidence to support this, and any such rights were likely never formally recognised or have been overridden by private ownership.

[robtheplod]

Im guessing peel will now lose revenue as boaters find alternative routes... maybe this will have an impact over how long its closed for?? Its proably small fry though....

[Paul C]

14 minutes ago, robtheplod said:

Im guessing peel will now lose revenue as boaters find alternative routes... maybe this will have an impact over how long its closed for?? Its proably small fry though....

 

I don't see how, because you never previously paid for transit. There was an agreement with CRT to allow free use, and I can't see that many Bridgewater licence holders moving off (and giving up their moorings). The various boatyards along the canal will struggle, for sure, though.

[robtheplod]

40 minutes ago, Paul C said:

 

I don't see how, because you never previously paid for transit. There was an agreement with CRT to allow free use, and I can't see that many Bridgewater licence holders moving off (and giving up their moorings). The various boatyards along the canal will struggle, for sure, though.

ah i didnt know that, thought it was paid transit - guess they just like to know numbers?

[Tony Brooks]

4 minutes ago, robtheplod said:

ah i didnt know that, thought it was paid transit - guess they just like to know numbers?

 

It is now if you make another transit within X days (can't remember that actual number) which makes Liverpool and back difficult. Certainly still free for those on a ring as long as they do not hang about.

[Cheshire cat]

3 minutes ago, robtheplod said:

ah i didnt know that, thought it was paid transit - guess they just like to know numbers?

I think it's more a case of scaring continuous moorers off. You can't have a licence unless you've got a mooring and if you haven't got a licence you can't stay for more than a few days before you have to get back on C&RT waters. 

 

I'm not sure who is policing things since Sonny "retired". I cycle up and down regularly and I think there are a few squatters but not many.

[ditchcrawler]

1 hour ago, robtheplod said:

Im guessing peel will now lose revenue as boaters find alternative routes... maybe this will have an impact over how long its closed for?? Its proably small fry though....

How much revenue do you think they collected from boats using that route. The only ones that pay are the ones moored on there. The rest pass through under the reciprocal agreement .

[Pluto]

6 hours ago, Donny85 said:

 

Given the Bridgewater Canal was privately built and has remained privately owned, and as it wasn’t created under an Act of Parliament, it’s unlikely a public right of navigation (PRN) was ever established. Access is regulated by the private owners, and navigation is subject to their terms, such as reciprocal agreements allowing limited use by Canal & River Trust-licensed boats. While some suggest historical use might imply a PRN, there’s no legal evidence to support this, and any such rights were likely never formally recognised or have been overridden by private ownership.

This is a load of b*****ks. There were several Bridgewater Canal Acts authorising its construction in the 1760s and 1770s whose terms are basically still in position, though perhaps slightly amended by the MSC Acts.

 

On the method of construction, although one of the earliest canal embankments - there are earlier ones on the Bridgewater - it did remain sound for 250 years, something which I suspect few modern structures will achieve. Brindley, and other contemporary canal builders, learnt their skills from older craftsmen, with knowledge being handed down verbally. This would have included the assessment of different types of earth, and their stability.Those craftsmen who rose to the top of their trade, such as Brindley and the other canal builders, were not stupid, and probably had higher levels of intelligence than most at university today.

 

We have lost much of that information which was passed down from one generation of craftsmen to the next. For example, where canals needed to be lined to make them watertight, they did not use clay as we know it today. Sources of this are limited and it was too heavy to carry any distance by road. Instead they used a mixture of suitable earth and small stone, known as 'Sammel'. The name probably comes from the German, meaning 'collection'. This type of earth could be found naturally in many places, and it seems to have turned up during construction. Any excess was then used elsewhere close at hand for lining the canal bed, and is why puddle was usually at least four feet thick. This is just one of the many facets of canal engineering that have been virtually forgotten because craft skills are no long passed down by word of mouth 'on the job'. Training in a college or pseudo university just doesn't cut it for producing really good skilled workers.

[ditchcrawler]

52 minutes ago, Cheshire cat said:

 I'm not sure who is policing things since Sonny "retired". I cycle up and down regularly and I think there are a few squatters but not many.

From what I have heard, no one.

[Pluto]

The following was taken, I think, from the 1973 MSC/Bridgewater guide. Not sure what £190,000 is in modern terms.

 

BRIDGEWATER CANAL

Note on collapsed embankment crossing the River Rollin near Altrincham, August 2nd 1971, andthe major reconstruction of the canal to restore navigation.

On 2nd August 1971 at about 07.20 hours the Altrincham Police received a report from two eleven year old boys thatthere was a leak from the Bridgewater Canal near the BoIlin Aqueduct. At 07.50 hours the first stop logs were inserted atAgden and by 11.30 hours stop log dams on each side of the breach had been installed and the remainder of the canalwas safe. The canal in Manchester had dropped 14 inches which was made good with water from the River Medlock by3rd August.

The canal crosses the River Bollin at the site of the breach on the largest Bridgewater Canal embankment; thedifference in height between the canal and river level being thirty-four feet. The canal had washed a hole in the embankment 90 feet wide and some 20,000 cubic yards of material had been deposited in the river bed. The cause ofthe disaster will never definitely be established, but detailed discussions with the Engineering Staff of BritishWaterways Board and circumstantial evidence, leads us to believe that the cause was a complicated leachingprocess of fine sand particles from the bed of the canal which had continued over the two hundred year life of theembankment. There have been several other very similar failures of high canal embankment where the canals hadcrossed rivers. The failure no doubt resulted from slight seepage at canal bed level and special precautions have been taken to seal the canal bed of the new embankment and also to check the canal bed where the Bridgewater crosses the River Mersey.

The design and reconstruction of the aqueduct and canal embankment was under the direction of Mr. Blyth the ChiefEngineer. A detailed survey and cross sections were immediately taken to establish the magnitude of the task. Indealing with an old structure it is always a problem to decide where to draw the line between repair and renewal anddifficult decisions had to be made.

The Company are as yet however bearing the full cost of repairing the breach which together with the associatedcost of rebuilding Woodhouse Lane aqueduct is likely to amount to nearly £190,000.

The Inland Waterways Association representing the pleasure boat owners, and other amenity interests, were veryactive in organising support for the restoration. They held a rally of seven hundred boats at Lymm in August 1972,which in spite of atrocious weather was very well attended. They hope to be able to contribute to the restorationwork.

The contractors were Messrs. Harry Fairclough & Co. Ltd., of Warrington, for the main restoration and WoodhouseLane aqueduct, and Messrs. A. Monk & Co. Ltd., of Warrington rebuilt the wing wall of the Bollin aqueduct.

The canal will be reopened in September, and the Company would like to place on record their appreciation of theefforts made by the contractors and the understanding shown by the canal users.

[Russ T]

9 minutes ago, Pluto said:

Not sure what £190,000 is in modern terms.

Thiugh the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) replaced the Retail Prices Index (RPI) as the UK's official inflation measure in 2003

Edited January 5, 2025 by Rod Stewart

[frangar]

Building costs have vastly increased since then…as an owner of a 200 year old cottage getting rebuild costs for insurance has been a bit of an eye opener….the rebuild cost is well in excess of the market value of the property and it’s not even listed. 

[dmr]

49 minutes ago, Pluto said:

This is a load of b*****ks. There were several Bridgewater Canal Acts authorising its construction in the 1760s and 1770s whose terms are basically still in position, though perhaps slightly amended by the MSC Acts.

 

On the method of construction, although one of the earliest canal embankments - there are earlier ones on the Bridgewater - it did remain sound for 250 years, something which I suspect few modern structures will achieve. Brindley, and other contemporary canal builders, learnt their skills from older craftsmen, with knowledge being handed down verbally. This would have included the assessment of different types of earth, and their stability.Those craftsmen who rose to the top of their trade, such as Brindley and the other canal builders, were not stupid, and probably had higher levels of intelligence than most at university today.

 

We have lost much of that information which was passed down from one generation of craftsmen to the next. For example, where canals needed to be lined to make them watertight, they did not use clay as we know it today. Sources of this are limited and it was too heavy to carry any distance by road. Instead they used a mixture of suitable earth and small stone, known as 'Sammel'. The name probably comes from the German, meaning 'collection'. This type of earth could be found naturally in many places, and it seems to have turned up during construction. Any excess was then used elsewhere close at hand for lining the canal bed, and is why puddle was usually at least four feet thick. This is just one of the many facets of canal engineering that have been virtually forgotten because craft skills are no long passed down by word of mouth 'on the job'. Training in a college or pseudo university just doesn't cut it for producing really good skilled workers.

 

I've puzzled over this, everytime I read that the canals are clay lined I think "where did it come from" Transporting clay over any distance would be a huge task, especially before the canals.  My only canal bed experience is a little bit of the Rochdale and that is certainly clay lined with an obvious heavy yellow clay. It contains quite a few biggish rocks. Its a slightly different colour to the immediate local clay but that is maybe a colour change over time?  Where the canal was cut through clay then that clay could have been used for the bed and maybe transported a very short distance. There are also one or two cuttings into the hillside which might have been dug to extract some clay....or maybe the stone?   It feels to me that a whole load of history was never recorded, or has got lost.

[PeterF]

2 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

It is now if you make another transit within X days (can't remember that actual number) which makes Liverpool and back difficult. Certainly still free for those on a ring as long as they do not hang about.

Not usually an issue because you can book a 7 day outbound and a separate 3 day return within the same month to cover this. If your return is after 28 days then it counts as a new journey.

[TunnelTiger]

2 hours ago, Pluto said:

This is a load of b*****ks. There were several Bridgewater Canal Acts authorising its construction in the 1760s and 1770s whose terms are basically still in position, though perhaps slightly amended by the MSC Acts......

 

 

That doesn't answer the question about public right of navigation.  Do these various acts establish a PRN?