https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c93d5x7r6xdo?app-referrer=deep-link

7 hours ago, Orwellian said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c93d5x7r6xdo?app-referrer=deep-link

 

“finished by Christmas”: seem to think i’ve heard that before somewhere, oh yes, 1914!

 

 

10 hours ago, NB Saturn said:

 

“finished by Christmas”: seem to think i’ve heard that before somewhere, oh yes, 1914!

 

 

It's always true, provided you don't specify Christmas of which year. WW1 did indeed finish just before Christmas. Perhaps that is what the CaRT spokesperson has in mind. 

What he didn't say was that the latest project cost given to the May 2025 Trustee's meeting was £56.2 millions. So there will be more to add before it's all finalised. This is substantially more than was originally predicted.

That may teach them of the false economy of no maintenance and sacking the guy who kept his eye on it so that they could flog off his cottage.

4 minutes ago, Kingdom Isambard Brunel said:

That may teach them of the false economy of no maintenance and sacking the guy who kept his eye on it so that they could flog off his cottage.

Unlikely. The reaction at the board level is more likely to be to find the £56.2M by way of more redundancies and more asset sell offs. 

3 minutes ago, Jen-in-Wellies said:

Unlikely. The reaction at the board level is more likely to be to find the £56.2M by way of more redundancies and more asset sell offs. 

Sadly true. The ignorant may learn but the idiots don't.

5 hours ago, Orwellian said:

What he didn't say was that the latest project cost given to the May 2025 Trustee's meeting was £56.2 millions. So there will be more to add before it's all finalised. This is substantially more than was originally predicted.

 

And don't forget there are half a dozen other reservoirs that have ongoing urgent but non emergency works.

 

Admittedly they aren't all quite as big a job as Toddbrook, but between them they'll have cost CRT over £100 million or about 5 year's worth of total boating income.

 

And they're all legally required, so they couldn't wiggle out of the work.

 

 

 

Edited August 30, 20251 yr by TheBiscuits
spellink

15 hours ago, TheBiscuits said:

And they're all legally required, so they couldn't wiggle out of the work.

 

Draining the reservoir would also comply with the reservoirs act (subject to certain conditions) - and would be considerably cheaper

 

Lets hope they don't start thinking that way

1 minute ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Draining the reservoir would also comply with the reservoirs act (subject to certain conditions) - and would be considerably cheaper

 

Lets hope they don't start thinking that way

 

But think of the fish!

4 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Draining the reservoir would also comply with the reservoirs act (subject to certain conditions) - and would be considerably cheaper

 

Lets hope they don't start thinking that way

 

Haven't you seen the August figures for reservoir levels?  They pretty much have done!

 

Not through choice admittedly, but because the water was needed in the system.

 

https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/specialist-teams/managing-our-water/reservoir-watch

 

 

5 of the 13 regions are at their lowest ever August holding levels.

1 minute ago, TheBiscuits said:

 

Haven't you seen the August figures for reservoir levels?  They pretty much have done!

 

 

Very good!  

 

I was meaning they might not refill 'em.... 

6 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Very good!  

 

I was meaning they might not refill 'em.... 

 

Yeah, I know.  It was far too good a feeder line to resist though. 😁

34 minutes ago, NB Saturn said:

 

But think of the fish!

 

 

I have room in my pond for two or three more. 

 

Who should I email?

 

 

1 hour ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Draining the reservoir would also comply with the reservoirs act (subject to certain conditions) - and would be considerably cheaper

Just emptying a reservoir and leaving the draw down valve open isn't sufficient as a means of abandoning a reservoir and complying with the Act. You have to do more to ensure it can't ever refill - like removing part of the dam.

On 29/08/2025 at 21:19, NB Saturn said:

 

“finished by Christmas”: seem to think i’ve heard that before somewhere, oh yes, 1914!

 

 

You've worn well 😀

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

Just emptying a reservoir and leaving the draw down valve open isn't sufficient as a means of abandoning a reservoir and complying with the Act. You have to do more to ensure it can't ever refill - like removing part of the dam.

 

 

You're right, it isn't, that's among the "subject to conditions" bit. 

 

I know that the owners of Tamar Lakes (the Bude Canal) looked at this but concluded it wasn't worth it - but that was partly the environment damage it would cause and partly that they had a full, albeit redundant, reservoir with a basically sound structure. I should imagine the calculation might be different when you have a failed headbank and you've already had to drain the reservoir anyway. 

On 30/08/2025 at 18:09, Kingdom Isambard Brunel said:

That may teach them of the false economy of no maintenance and sacking the guy who kept his eye on it so that they could flog off his cottage.

 

CRT slow to carry out recommended maintenance, yes. And "lessons have been learned" they said in response to report. It was more fundamental than someone "keeping his eye on it", that wouldn't have made any difference.

1 hour ago, TunnelTiger said:

It was more fundamental than someone "keeping his eye on it", that wouldn't have made any difference.

 

I fear you're right. A bod in the cottage keeping an eye on it and reporting what was happening, is as likely as not to have his report dismissed and ignored by chair polishers in head office not grasping the import of what he was telling them...

 

 

10 hours ago, magpie patrick said:

 

Draining the reservoir would also comply with the reservoirs act (subject to certain conditions) - and would be considerably cheaper

 

Lets hope they don't start thinking that way

They already are. To an extent. Barrowford being an example where they are "reducing" its capacity rather than  doing a toddbrook. operate it at a reduced capacity and problem solved....

3 hours ago, MtB said:

 

I fear you're right. A bod in the cottage keeping an eye on it and reporting what was happening, is as likely as not to have his report dismissed and ignored by chair polishers in head office not grasping the import of what he was telling them...

 

 

 

No, I don't believe a safety problem with a dam would be "dismissed and ignored". But it wasn't about a "bod in a cottage" doing any reporting. The issue was that engineer's inspections picked up problems but didn't impose a time scale for remedial work, so it wasn't done. 

Interesting looking at Google earth/maps how the vegetation has re-established in the zone between the full level, and the current lowered level. 

A comment from FB on the latest from CRT:

"Bad news dressed up as good news!

For months, CRT have been saying that Toddbrook would be refilled over the winter of 2025/26. 

That would mean that in 2026 the Macc and PF actually have a workable water supply. 

Now, they are talking about the refill starting “in the spring”

So after the wettest part of the year has passed. 

They then need to bring it up a metre at a time and pause for a week to check for problems. 

Starting in spring will mean that those 1m refill and test cycles could take several weeks each. 

Whilst they are doing this, they can’t actually draw down any water to feed the canal. 

So the ACTUAL story here is “we are 3 months late starting the refill, so it will be another year before the water supply is sorted”"

 

I wonder if they'll offer a refund on my licence if I'm stuck on the mud for a year. I suppose I could cancel my mooring and claim to be a CC, unable to move - that would save me nearly a grand.

On 31/08/2025 at 21:58, MtB said:

 

I fear you're right. A bod in the cottage keeping an eye on it and reporting what was happening, is as likely as not to have his report dismissed and ignored by chair polishers in head office not grasping the import of what he was telling them...

 

 

 

I'm currently reading the history of the Crinan Canal - the construction and early years are littered with middle management telling the board what they wanted to hear rather than what their engineers had told them - there is nothing new under moon or sun!

49 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

A comment from FB on the latest from CRT:

"Bad news dressed up as good news!

For months, CRT have been saying that Toddbrook would be refilled over the winter of 2025/26. 

That would mean that in 2026 the Macc and PF actually have a workable water supply. 

Now, they are talking about the refill starting “in the spring”

So after the wettest part of the year has passed. 

They then need to bring it up a metre at a time and pause for a week to check for problems. 

Starting in spring will mean that those 1m refill and test cycles could take several weeks each. 

Whilst they are doing this, they can’t actually draw down any water to feed the canal. 

So the ACTUAL story here is “we are 3 months late starting the refill, so it will be another year before the water supply is sorted”"

 

I wonder if they'll offer a refund on my licence if I'm stuck on the mud for a year. I suppose I could cancel my mooring and claim to be a CC, unable to move - that would save me nearly a grand.

August update on the CRT Toddbrook website (Restoring Toddbrook Reservoir | What's happening in the North West) :

 

'All water from Toddbrook, that feeds the reservoir and gives it its name, is now flowing into the main reservoir, and this will eventually provide a regular flow down the spillway channel to create an attractive, stepped waterfall feature through the town’s Memorial Park.'.