Broad Locks

[William Martin]

Thanks for the feedback - much appreciated!

[Alastair]

I'm going through a broad lock in 2 week's time. Should I try to tie up, or just motor round in circles in the middle of the lock? Are there any special techniques?

 

(ps, the lock is 375ftx80ft, <g>)

[Yoda]

I'm going through a broad lock in 2 week's time. Should I try to tie up, or just motor round in circles in the middle of the lock? Are there any special techniques?

 

(ps, the lock is 375ftx80ft, <g>)

 

Well, if the lock keeper is away, you could practice your winding technique in confined spaces. That should cause meriment in others. It will also be a place to meet some new friends probably ocean going.

[Alastair]

It will also be a place to meet some new friends probably ocean going.

 

I was offered the choice of paying £35 to go through the lock by myself, or I could wait for high tide and share it with coasters . . . . I'm opting to pay!

Edited October 23, 2006 by Alastair

[William Martin]

I just did a week on the Grand Union and something puzzled me - the number of locks where the gates were left open (excluding the two where there was a specific request from BW to leave them open). Is it not 'bad manners' to leave gates open, not to mention bad practice in case of a failure of the other gates? I was tempted, though I did not secumb, to join in and save myself the bother of closing them.

 

What is the correct thing to do?

[Keeping Up]

I just did a week on the Grand Union and something puzzled me - the number of locks where the gates were left open (excluding the two where there was a specific request from BW to leave them open). Is it not 'bad manners' to leave gates open, not to mention bad practice in case of a failure of the other gates? I was tempted, though I did not secumb, to join in and save myself the bother of closing them.

 

What is the correct thing to do?

It is correct to close them. There are many arguments for leaving them open, ranging from tradition (originally of course they were always left open, a tradition which remained true south of Berkhamstead until relatively recently) to laziness (especially amongst single-handed boaters), and personally I believe that the arguments for leaving them open do outweigh the arguments for closing them, but the convention dictated by BW (and as a convention, therefore, by good manners) is to close them.

 

Of course some of them always blow open again, or if the pound is short they re-open themselves when the wave of water bouunces back from the next lock. But you should do all you can to leave them shut, and if you are following the convention it is very frustrating when others are not doing the same.

 

I do despair of BW who urge us to save water, and then make us waste it by requiring us to empty the lock after use, on the basis that a notice telling you to empty the lock is cheaper than actually doing the maintenance properly; it could be said that their requirement to close the gates is also just a cheaper option than fixing the leaks in the gates.

[John Orentas]

I do despair of BW who urge us to save water, and then make us waste it by requiring us to empty the lock after use, on the basis that a notice telling you to empty the lock is cheaper than actually doing the maintenance properly; it could be said that their requirement to close the gates is also just a cheaper option than fixing the leaks in the gates.

 

 

In my experience the request to leave the lock empty is not because of leaking gates but the lock in question usually has has been causing problems to a lock cottage or another kind of building alongside it.

 

There have in the past been one or two places on the Rochdale were the lock chamber has had a tendency to flood the cellars of adjacent buildings. Repairing the fault can sometimes involve the rebuilding of the entire lock chamber.

Edited October 30, 2006 by John Orentas

[William Martin]

Interesting - all the locks I found open were south of Berkhampsted!

 

I was going down as the Jam 'Ole-ers were coming up - I doubt if they were waiting around to empty full locks behind them though.

[alan_fincher]

I just did a week on the Grand Union and something puzzled me - the number of locks where the gates were left open (excluding the two where there was a specific request from BW to leave them open).

 

There are certainly quite a lot of locks on the Grand Union south of Tring Summit where you are asked not so much as to leave the gates open, but more specifically to leave the lock empty. The first two down from Tring Summit, (Cow Roast and Dudswell Top), are two such examples, but there are a significant number in the Berkhamsted to Hemel stretch as well, for certain.

 

I usually take this to mean that if you have come up the lock, then after you have closed the top gates on exit, you draw a bottom paddle and leave it emptying, (as long as nobody else is coming along to use it, of course!). If I'd just gone down, I'd usually leave a bottom paddle up, so that even if the bottom gate blows shut, the lock will not start to fill through leakage at the top.

 

In my experience the request to leave the lock empty is not because of leaking gates but the lock in question usually has has been causing problems to a lock cottage or another kind of building alongside it.

 

There have in the past been one or two places on the Rochdale were the lock chamber has had a tendency to flood the cellars of adjacent buildings. Repairing the fault can sometimes involve the rebuilding of the entire lock chamber.

 

Yes, absolutely correct, I believe down here it is invariably to do with lock walls leaking, rather than a set of gates.

 

My brother was the Cow Roast lock-keeper about 30 years ago, and if the lock was not drawn off at night, he needed waders to access his cellar in the morning.

 

But it's not always just to do with potentially flooding buildings. Most of the affected locks south of Berkhamsted don't have any lockside structures. Additionally we've just returned from the Aylesbury Arm, where at least half a dozen of the locks have to be left empty. From memory, leaking lock walls would only flood a building in about one of the cases involved.

 

I'm not sure these things are always logical, but not being a rebel, if there's a notice giving specific instruction on how to leave things, I'll always try to.

[Keeping Up]

In my experience the request to leave the lock empty is not because of leaking gates but the lock in question usually has has been causing problems to a lock cottage or another kind of building alongside it.

That was what I was actually intending to say. There are an increasing number of locks whose walls leak, often into the cellars of adjacent properties, and which you are requested to leave empty as a cheaper alternative than BW doing the necessary (and ultimately inevitable) repairs to the lock walls. I would feel happier about adopting water-saving techniques such as waiting half an hour for a boat to share with, if this maintenance had been done. There is one gate I know that bears two notices, one telling you to shut the gates to save water and another one telling you to empty the lock and leave the gate open!

 

The other half of my sentence was separately trying to say that in addition to this, you could regard the entire "close the gates" scenario as being a cheaper alternative to fixing leaky gates.

[alan_fincher]

The other half of my sentence was separately trying to say that in addition to this, you could regard the entire "close the gates" scenario as being a cheaper alternative to fixing leaky gates.

I fear that as the funding cuts start to bite, we may be seeing more notices and less repairs

 

That said, I'm assuming there must be many locks where nothing short of completely replacing the lining at both sides and base will actually cure the problem of water escaping through the surrounding banks. Apart from the fact that costs must be astronomic, I shudder to think how long the stoppage might be in such cases.

 

I suppose in some cases, if it's only going out through the sides, not through the bottom, it might just be possible to dig down BEHIND the walls, and coat it all in something waterproof. Still a mighty big job though.

[GUMPY]

Interesting - all the locks I found open were south of Berkhampsted!

 

I was going down as the Jam 'Ole-ers were coming up - I doubt if they were waiting around to empty full locks behind them though.

 

At the risk of getting shot at.

 

It has always been convention ( at least since I started boating in 1974) south of cowroast to leave the gates open, the reason is that for the most part its river fed.

 

As for emptying locks behind you its a pain, the one where I moor has had a notice on it for over 6 years and thre has been at least one gate replacement in that time.

 

Last night I got home to find the pound down two feet because the last person up had pulled a bottom paddle and forgot to shut the top one

 

Julian

[William Martin]

Interesting!

 

I was wondering - what is it that gives the southern Grand Union a different set of protocols?

[GUMPY]

Interesting!

 

I was wondering - what is it that gives the southern Grand Union a different set of protocols?

 

I think if you were to ask BW it hasnt but it has always been common practice.

The reason being its almost all river fed so no shortage of water.

 

For example the pound that I moor in was 2ft down on Sunday because someone had left paddles up at both ends of the lock, it has to be left empty, and it was back up to normal levels in a few hours.

 

J

[alan_fincher]

I think you need to be a little careful with your definition of "Southern Grand Union", particularly as a reference was made to "South of Cowroast".

 

Whilst what Julian is saying about water supplies may be reasonable south of Berkhamsted, it certainly doesn't apply from Cow Roast down to (and through) Berkhamsted. If the pounds above or between the "Gas" locks go low, for example, they will not automatically get refilled in a hurry.

 

I'm confident of my facts here, as my brother was the lengthman who looked after the stretch down from Cow Roast for a while back in the 1970s, and spent large amounts of time on his bike letting down controlled amounts of water from the summit to re-fill low pounds. His counterpart in Berkhamsted used to be pretty busy too.

 

Thirty years ago, if there was a convention, I'd say it was nomal to leave gates open on all broad canals like the GU, (not just the Southern bit), whereas you were usually advised to close gates on narrow canals.

 

Over time the accepted protocol moved to shut all agtes on narrow or broad canals, unless advised otherwise

 

If Julian thinks there is a different protocol now south of Berkhamsted (or Cow Roast ?), as a Cow Roast based boat owner, nobody has ever made me aware of it previously. In my experience far more people shut gates on those more southerly reaches than leave them open.

[fender.]

I think if you were to ask BW it hasnt but it has always been common practice.

The reason being its almost all river fed so no shortage of water.

 

For example the pound that I moor in was 2ft down on Sunday because someone had left paddles up at both ends of the lock, it has to be left empty, and it was back up to normal levels in a few hours.

 

J

 

No wonder BW couldnt be arsed to prevent the Cowley breach taking so much water out of the system - they expected these poor chiltern watercourses (Colne, Glade etc) to make up for BW's shortcomings!