Gas Street Stop Lock

[Hobbler]

Who's warehouse was alongside Warwick bar?

 

Richard

 

Fellows Morton & Clayton

[Jim]

Only a little question - when was the Gas Street Basin stop lock de-gated? I believe there was a six inch level difference. how was that resolved?

 

To get us back on topic, I thought that the otherwise excellent history of the W&B Canal by Revd. Alan White published in 2005 contained everything there was to know about the canal. Everything that is except the date these lock gates were taken out!

 

When they were installed, in 1815, to replace the infamous "Worcester Bar" the arrangement was that IF there was a difference in water level of more than 6 inches across the lock then the company receiving water would pay the other coy. for it at a predetermined rate. This suggests that there was not a planned difference in level and, indeed, the original intention of the W&B had been to make a through route onto the BCN at this point. Compensation payments between companies would not have been an issue after nationalisation in 1948 and a 1960 photo in the book appears to show a gateless lock, which perhaps narrows the date down a bit.

Jim

Edited November 17, 2008 by Jim

[magpie patrick]

And here's a picture of Warwick Bar from the TNC site....

 

 

and on the right, you can just see the crest weir, right at the bottom of the photo

[RLWP]

Fellows Morton & Clayton

 

I thought that was the one with the curved wall. Didi they have the one right next to the bar as well?

 

Richard

[Hobbler]

I thought that was the one with the curved wall. Didi they have the one right next to the bar as well?

 

Richard

 

Sorry thought that was the one you meant .

 

E.J.Smart & Sons and Lawrence Cabinet Works both had wharves in the area of the Bar so it may have been either of them .

[BuckbyLocks]

I believe that is the original Pickfords warehouse.

[Laurence Hogg]

The gates came off the Gas St lock around 1963/4 from archive pictures I hold. There are sets of gates at various points in Birmingham to prevent flooding from war damage (and now terrorism), Old Turn jcn is directly over the tunnel North from New St with only a shallow depth between the two.

[BuckbyLocks]

The gates came off the Gas St lock around 1963/4 from archive pictures I hold. There are sets of gates at various points in Birmingham to prevent flooding from war damage (and now terrorism), Old Turn jcn is directly over the tunnel North from New St with only a shallow depth between the two.

 

The beams, if they had any may have come off in 63/64 but the gates themselves stayed well into this century. I saw the stoppage when they were removed but may not have had my camera with me. If I did it must have been just pre digital and the slide catalogue is still work in progress unfortunately. Working in Birmingham then meant I often walked through the Basin, but rarely had a camera with me. The Cambridge Street Gates under Tindal Bridge are still there if you look hard enough for them. Very hard to photograph however. I tried in September with only limited success.

[BuckbyLocks]

The beams, if they had any may have come off in 63/64 but the gates themselves stayed well into this century.

 

 

There is a good picture of the Worcester Bar Stop Gates, complete with Beams on page 63 of the January 2009 Wobbly World, taken in the early 50s if I have read the article correctly.

[New hope]

There were originally four gates at Worcester bar lock.I have a pic. There was normally a difference in level sufficient to prevent a boat from pushing the gates open without working the lock. The gates were removed about 1957 and I understand that the banks of the W&B summit only required a little raising in a few places to allow this. Incidentally the BCN Bottom Summit was, in those days, often very low and most of it was by no means deep.

[Heartland]

The concept of four gates was applied where one company would ensure the reduction of loss of water at the lock in their favour. That at Gas Street would have become necessary in 1815 when the bar was cut through and the lock made through what had been George Ryder Bird's Boat Dock. The Warwick Bar lock gates seen to have become neccessary with the making of the Birmingham & Warwick Junction Canal (1844)- I helped BW with the plans there and was partly responsible for those gates as they were installed in the images, and yes the plans (at the CRO Warwick) indicated the arrangement adopted. There was a third example at Horseleyfields where the Wyrley and Essington had to maintain the Wednesfield Level above that of the BCN. There were four gates there too. And to recall a fourth the Droitwich Canal link with the Salwarp required extra gates and I suppose the principal was the same there although the needs perhaps different.

 

Ray Shill

[Laurence Hogg]

The concept of four gates was applied where one company would ensure the reduction of loss of water at the lock in their favour. That at Gas Street would have become necessary in 1815 when the bar was cut through and the lock made through what had been George Ryder Bird's Boat Dock. The Warwick Bar lock gates seen to have become neccessary with the making of the Birmingham & Warwick Junction Canal (1844)- I helped BW with the plans there and was partly responsible for those gates as they were installed in the images, and yes the plans (at the CRO Warwick) indicated the arrangement adopted. There was a third example at Horseleyfields where the Wyrley and Essington had to maintain the Wednesfield Level above that of the BCN. There were four gates there too. And to recall a fourth the Droitwich Canal link with the Salwarp required extra gates and I suppose the principal was the same there although the needs perhaps different.

 

Ray Shill

 

Although Horseley fields is a bit neglected we had a go at clearing the site last year and found one gate to still be in situ. This is quite a big gate as the stop of course is around 9ft wide to pass "Hampton boats"

 

[magpie patrick]

The concept of four gates was applied where one company would ensure the reduction of loss of water at the lock in their favour.

 

Surely four gates, two in each direction, were necessary where the fall could be either way? the way to ensure it was always in one company's favour would be for the head to be sufficient that only gates facing one way were required?

 

Other stop locks with this arrangement were at Marple, Barnsley and Marston Jabbet, I don't doubt there were others.

 

As you suggest, Droitwich Barge Lock had four sets of gates as the river could be lower than the canal. Firepool Lock in Taunton also had this arrangement. In both cases, modern crest weirs mean the river will never be lower than the canal today except in extreme drought.

 

The entrance lock to the Somerset Coal Canal had an interesting variant. Having a fall from the coal canal to the Kennet and Avon of 7 inches, the coal canal was not normally going to be lower so the lock did not need to work "backwards", nor were the coal canal company that bothered about losing water to the K and A, they'd finished with it and it ran to waste back to the Cam Brook. However the K and A were worried that if the coal canal leaked it wasn't taking K and A water, as they had to feed the locks in Bath.

 

A 7 inch head worked for ordinary leakage, but if the Coal Canal breached then this head would be lost very quickly, so a third gate was fitted facing the other way. We've no idea whether the lock keeper would have been required to act quickly, or whether it had a bucket scoop, but it was there to protect the K and A from a burst on the Coal Canal. BW have a gate in that recess today for the same reason.

[Heartland]

Patrick, the company there first had a concern of loosing water if levels on the more recent waterway fell below theirs either through poor water supply or a breach. The BCN insisted on the Horseleyfield arrangement first, then came Gas Street and Warwick Bar. At Kingswood just to add another factor, the Stratford Canal fed water through the last lock and there was initially not an issue. The problem came when William James continued the Stratford Canal onto Stratford. James solution failed to impress the Warwick & Birmingham Canal Company and they went to the Court of Chancery, the final solution was a new lock that meant all craft had to lock up and then down to reach Straford.

 

Water supply was considered a most important resource. With the Wyrley & Essington there was a bonus for them when they made Cannock Chase Reservoir and water supply came to benefit them and eventually the BCN when these two companies merged.

 

Ray Shill

Edited August 1, 2012 by Heartland

[magpie patrick]

Patrick, the company there first had a concern of loosing water if levels on the more recent waterway fell below theirs either through poor water supply or a breach.

 

 

This would have been resolved by gates protecting only the older canal, a lock with four sets of gates protects both canals from each other, and is effectively a valve. Marston Jabbet stop lock once had bolts fitted to the gates to stop them being blown open.My guess (and it is only a guess) is that the gates were normally held closed on most of these locks with a chain or similar. Of course, a stop lock where canals meet is also a convenient opportunity to gauge and levy a toll.

 

 

The BCN insisted on the Horseleyfield arrangement first, then came Gas Street and Warwick Bar.

 

 

I will admit I know nothing of the history of Horseleyfields other than it was, for a limited time, the junction of two companies. One problem at Worcester Bar was that the arrangement was retrospective, they had to live with the levels they'd got. Given the original intention of the bar was commercial, the levying of tolls undoubtedly came into it, but equally both companies would jealously guard their water supplies

 

At Kingswood just to add another factor, the Stratford Canal fed water through the last lock and there was initially not an issue. The problem came when William James continued the Stratford Canal onto Stratford. James solution failed to impress the Warwick & Birmingham Canal Company and they went to the Court of Chancery, the final solution was a new lock that meant all craft had to lock up and then down to reach Straford.

 

In effect the court of chancery determined that the W&B were entitled to a full lock of water, not just the measly amount a water control structure would provide

 

 

Water supply was considered a most important resource. With the Wyrley & Essington there was a bonus for them when they made Cannock Chase Reservoir and water supply came to benefit them and eventually the BCN when these two companies merged.

 

Ray Shill

 

I am aware of all that, and whilst I rarely take umbrage at posts given your opening addressed me personally I have to comment that the words in bold are a tad facile. Even now water is considered the most important resource for a canal. I've got fed up of asking clients and applicants where they are going to get the water from, and regularly deal with proposals for control structures (not on CRT waterways) to make sure water stays where it should.

[Heartland]

As this Forum aims at a general audience, I try to phrase comments for that contingency. However, I do wonder the precentage of water supply to our navigations that come from unrecorded sources. However this post was about gates at stop locks and the use of four or two gates. This post also related specifically to the BCN, with observations elsewhere, and their links with other canal navigations. By the nature that they were there first, the BCN could protect water supply at a time when they had a limited resource. An issue that still deserves a resolve is the Dudley Canal, where if I recall the lock was in the tunnel, then at Tipton Green. The Tipton Tithe map appears to show a simple two gate arrangement. But again referring to water supply, the two tunnels, Dudley and Wrens Nest probably generated a useful supply of water fron the limestone workings.

 

Ray Shill

[Theo]

There was never a formal difference in level, although it did regulate flow between the canals their design level is the same. The gates were still there in the 70's I think, but were opened on nationalisation.

 

There was also a little swing bridge (well, swing plank) over it, but when the area was redeveloped this wasa not felt suitable for the general public and the present footbridge was built.

 

There is now a flow from the BCN to the W&B through the lock: a couple of years ago BW drained the lock for a week: when they took the stop planks out the lock was impassible for about half an hour because the flow through it was so strong.

 

There are a few stop locks that did have a change in level and have now been degated: Neachalls Shallow lock near Spaghetti Junction for example: the higher level has to be lowered rather than bringing the lower level up.

 

Now t

 

 

 

I am at Gas Street this evening and was looking at the stop lock an hour or so ago. I see that there used to be tow sets of gates designed to oppose flow in either direction. From this I assume that the levels could be lower in either direction.

 

Nick

 

 

PS I really should have read the rest of the topic before posting this...

Edited August 4, 2012 by Theo
Add the PS

[Heartland]

Regarding the former Stop Lock on the Birmingham & Warwick Junction Canal near the Gravelly Hill Interchange, what is now the difference of level considered to be? Some accounts state 2ft, with the fall of Garrison Locks (5) as 34. The difference in level between Salford Jubction and the junction with the Warwick & Birmingham being 36ft.

 

Ray Shill

[magpie patrick]

Regarding the former Stop Lock on the Birmingham & Warwick Junction Canal near the Gravelly Hill Interchange, what is now the difference of level considered to be? Some accounts state 2ft, with the fall of Garrison Locks (5) as 34. The difference in level between Salford Jubction and the junction with the Warwick & Birmingham being 36ft.

 

Ray Shill

 

I've always understood it to be six inches, but this is only because of the following

 

1) 1971 Nicholson's quotes six inches

2) Six inches appears to have been a fairly standard fall for stop locks

3) Much more than a foot would have been difficult to eradicate

 

I never saw it with a change of level, although I've been though it in it's current condition. Whilst I don't have photos to hand, it don't recall it looking like an empty lock with a fall of two feet.

 

I suppose if there are any overflow weirs on that pound their height above water would give an indication? Also, all the drop of Neachalls would be added to the bottom lock at Garrison, which I don't recall being obviously deeper than the others.

 

Six inches does seem to have been a notional measurement meaning "not very much", Preston Brook Stop Lock is stated to be six inches, I haven't measured it but when we went through it appeared to be less than two inches and at one time had only one gate.

[Timleech]

 

 

Six inches does seem to have been a notional measurement meaning "not very much", Preston Brook Stop Lock is stated to be six inches, I haven't measured it but when we went through it appeared to be less than two inches and at one time had only one gate.

 

Dutton Stop Lock, the one you mean, can vary from nothing to six inches or occasionally more.

 

It had one gate for a number of years because the difference was small, as the Bridgewater was always kept full to help the barges carrying grain to Kelloggs.

That traffic ended pretty much simultaneously with a very bad breach at Bollington, after which the canal company became nervous of keeping the level high and dropped it by several inches. This meant that the bottom gates had to be reinstated (they were actually made by MSC Co). In recent years the Bridgewater level has crept up, my cynical mind says it's to delay the inevitable need to dredge, and about 3 inches is probably usual. It can be quite a lot more if there's a strong Westerly wind for a couple of days, though.

 

Tim

[Pluto]

Dutton Stop Lock, the one you mean, can vary from nothing to six inches or occasionally more.

 

It had one gate for a number of years because the difference was small, as the Bridgewater was always kept full to help the barges carrying grain to Kelloggs.

That traffic ended pretty much simultaneously with a very bad breach at Bollington, after which the canal company became nervous of keeping the level high and dropped it by several inches. This meant that the bottom gates had to be reinstated (they were actually made by MSC Co). In recent years the Bridgewater level has crept up, my cynical mind says it's to delay the inevitable need to dredge, and about 3 inches is probably usual. It can be quite a lot more if there's a strong Westerly wind for a couple of days, though.

 

Tim

I was chatting to Brian Houlton the other day, and we discussed variations in level along the Bridgewater. He says that there is often three or four inches variation between Runcorn and Castlefields when the wind is in the right direction. It takes several days for the level to equalise once the wind drops. If there are a series of gales from a particular direction over a week or so, the variation can be even more.

[Timleech]

I was chatting to Brian Houlton the other day, and we discussed variations in level along the Bridgewater. He says that there is often three or four inches variation between Runcorn and Castlefields when the wind is in the right direction. It takes several days for the level to equalise once the wind drops. If there are a series of gales from a particular direction over a week or so, the variation can be even more.

 

I've been told that at one time (must have been circa 1960 I think) they tried removing the gates altogether from Dutton stop lock. They had to reinstate a top gate fairly soon, because the level at Middlewich was varying too much.

 

Tim

[Derek R.]

Reminds me of the 'Hampton Tides'. Someone recalled that the levels at one end of the Wolverhampton level would rise with the oncoming fleet of Hampton boats heading one way loaded, pushing water before them. Don't doubt for a moment the wind could do likewise.

[Laurence Hogg]

Reminds me of the 'Hampton Tides'. Someone recalled that the levels at one end of the Wolverhampton level would rise with the oncoming fleet of Hampton boats heading one way loaded, pushing water before them. Don't doubt for a moment the wind could do likewise.

If you approach the narrows in Gas st fully loaded at fair speed and then shut off it floods the cafe tables on the lockside......... honest

[Heartland]

I believe that the stop lock on the Birmingham & Warwick Junction was indeed a slight fall. It is difficult for it to be any other way. Yet having picked up on an alternative, thought I would check opinion. Many thanks for the comments.

 

It is also interesting to see when more than a standard set/ pair of stop gates apply. On the Stratford Canal at Kings Norton the lock gates were originally a pair of mitered gates at each end of the lock only to be replaced by that special arrangement once the lock was narrowed to a guillotine gate at each end. Thinking about other canal junctions, I wonder how the arrangement at Leigh between Leeda & Liverpool and Bridgewater was made?

 

Ray Shill