Tring Summit closure

[classicstove]

I seem to remember that there is reated sewage water pumped into the pound (Wendover Arm) which must add/maintain/reduce loss to the water level in the summit pound

[LEO]

I was supposed to be in the Leighton Buzzard area this winter (I'm still pointing north!) just can't go anywhere now.

 

You could have moved North as soon as you heard about the stoppage (07th Jan), instead you reversed 50 yards south.

 

 

I've cruised three counties just this winter and seven in the last year. [/b]

 

It's possible to cross into 3 counties doing the 4 miles from Ivinghoe to Bulbourne.

Edited January 21, 2012 by LEO

[LEO]

I'm still not totally convinced that BW have got things right (unless I misunderstand how some of these things work, which is always possible and highly probable).

 

I presume their means of metering lock usage relies on a device that measures how often water reaches a specific level in the chamber. Surely, this won't measure any leakage that flows straight through the chamber when the lock is (effectively) empty. Whilst I didn't use the Marsworth flight too much in 2011, I did for the 20 plus previous years. From memory few of the chambers in the flight held their water for any significant time period although I do recognise that some have been re-gated recently. Lock 39 certainly leaks heavily and seems to have defied all attempts by BW to at least resolve the problems with the top gates - I'm not aware of any attempt to stop water flowing around the top offside gate, water that can clearly be seen flowing into the chamber around the heel post when you're descending in the lock and the level has dropped.

 

Are they still pumping from Tringford? If not, has the water now found its own level because it doesn't seem to have dropped that much over the last few days judging by all the pictures that have been posted on here and from what I believe I read, pumping from the borehole has only just resumed.

 

Whilst the water level isn't ideal I've seen it at least this bad on a fairly frequent basis in years gone by and have cruised the summit many times with a laden trip boat, at no more than tickover because of the limited depth.

 

Perhaps the summit problem isn't quite as bad as is made out. I'd suggest that the limited amount of locally stored water appears to be far more of a problem that I can't see a means of resolving unless we have an extensive period of wet weather. Is all this nonsense about the summit intended to take our eye off the fact that poor water level monitoring in the reservoirs has meant that they are far far lower now than they should be because they didn't impose restrictions when they should have done so to save face after saying that they wouldn't need to?

 

Hi,

 

Water levels now low on the summit, I'm back on the bottom!

 

I don't think BW have understated the problem.

 

I think someone else may be posting in more detail on this mornings findings later.

 

Leo.

[koukouvagia]

Hi,

 

Water levels now low on the summit, I'm back on the bottom!

 

I don't think BW have understated the problem.

 

I think someone else may be posting in more detail on this mornings findings later.

 

Leo.

 

Update.

 

As Leo says, the level on the summit is low and there has been no more pumping from the borehole this week. BW acknowledges that the stop planks have not worked and there is a plan B and, if that fails, a plan C.

 

Plan B is to build a dam. Posts will be driven into the bed and these will support another line of planks. The space between the two sets of stop planks will be filled with clay.

Plan C is to drive a line of piling across the canal!

 

There is also talk of pumping up water from Wilstone reservoir into the Wendover Arm feeder. This reservoir used to feed the summit, but many years ago the connecting pipes were removed. It may be possible to lay temporary pipes across the fields. However, the capacity of Wilstone is, apparently, not great.

 

By chance I met former BW water expert Gavin. He said, as someone else mentioned in this very long thread, that if the top 450 mm of the unpuddled banks dry out, the canal will leak like a sieve when the level is restored. He confirmed what I think we already know, that only a prolonged period of rain will replenish the water table. Even if we have a wet summer, most of this rain will be lost through evaporation. A long term alleviation might be to chop down all the trees on the summit and restore the banks as they were intended - free of vegetation. A large tree can, so I'm told, remove 150,000 litres of water from the ground per year.

 

Usually this stretch at Bulbourne is full of winter moorers and cc-ers at this time of the year.

 

The long pound between locks 39 and 40 on the Marsworth flight

 

Leo has his own solution to improving the levels at Cowroast

[sheriff]

we are all doomed

[LEO]

Update.

 

As Leo says, the level on the summit is low and there has been no more pumping from the borehole this week. BW acknowledges that the stop planks have not worked and there is a plan B and, if that fails, a plan C.

 

Plan B is to build a dam. Posts will be driven into the bed and these will support another line of planks. The space between the two sets of stop planks will be filled with clay.

Plan C is to drive a line of piling across the canal!

 

There is also talk of pumping up water from Wilstone reservoir into the Wendover Arm feeder. This reservoir used to feed the summit, but many years ago the connecting pipes were removed. It may be possible to lay temporary pipes across the fields. However, the capacity of Wilstone is, apparently, not great.

 

By chance I met former BW water expert Gavin. He said, as someone else mentioned in this very long thread, that if the top 450 mm of the unpuddled banks dry out, the canal will leak like a sieve when the level is restored. He confirmed what I think we already know, that only a prolonged period of rain will replenish the water table. Even if we have a wet summer, most of this rain will be lost through evaporation. A long term alleviation might be to chop down all the trees on the summit and restore the banks as they were intended - free of vegetation. A large tree can, so I'm told, remove 150,000 litres of water from the ground per year.

 

 

 

KK,

 

A slight correction, the reservoir they are trying to pump from is WESTON TURVILLE, which although BW owned, consent is needed to cross some land they don't own to lay pipes to discharge into the Wendover Arm.

 

The other interesting info gleaned, was that lots of weed cutting has been carried out on the Arm, on the Wendover side of the sump to improve flows into the reservoirs. This has overcome the 'damming' effect and water flow has increased.

 

You are correct about the trees.

 

Leo

 

Prefer not to comment about some of the pics.............. Except to say the tug deck is normally level with the piling I am standing on.

Edited January 21, 2012 by LEO

[Hairy-Neil]

 

 

You are correct about the trees.

 

 

 

Who needs trees. Cut them all down....

[ditchcrawler]

Who needs trees. Cut them all down....

With the cost of fire would it should make BW a couple of quid into the bargin

[tree]

Who needs trees. Cut them all down....

I aint done nowt hairy

[bigcol]

Just about to renew my licence fee tried online last night.but somthing was wrong with the site! wouldnt take my money

 

Now for a stupid question!!

 

do we pay our licence fees to sit on the water in the canal ? im online but private marina, so pay marina fees

 

Or do we pay a licence fee for use of the waterways?

 

Im thinking we pay a TV licence to watch BBC, but if the system broke down long term say? would we still have to pay for somthing we couldnt use?

 

last year i had the draft reduced, had a weed hatch installed. after 2 sorties out on the Canal. and having to go in and free prop,

 

now where i am the 6 inches choped of the rudder and skeg. has been again countered lossed anyway due to the falling water level

but if i wanted to cruise down to the thames apart from normal stopages. theres talk of the tring closure being a long term deal.

 

so like many folks we will stay put

 

Im totaly gobsmacked that folks are now stuck in the cowroast pounds for no fault of their own. and being made to pay to be moor their.

 

I hope everyone that have found themselves marroned in these affected pounds are able to break through soon

 

col

[bigcol]

re the above post

 

I blame the morphine patches lol

 

curently on a different planet! where theres canals full of loads of blue water, new lock gates. refurbished bridges, and diesel is 20p per litre

 

col

[koukouvagia]

Just about to renew my licence fee tried online last night.but somthing was wrong with the site! wouldnt take my money

 

Now for a stupid question!!

 

do we pay our licence fees to sit on the water in the canal ? ..... Or do we pay a licence fee for use of the waterways?

 

 

 

I reckon it's a forlorn hope trying to get some sort of refund. This is what it says in the "General Terms and Conditions for Boat Licences" (Nov.2011)

9.1. We will do our best to keep the Waterway open for cruising. The Licence fees are calculated on the

assumption that you will be affected by closures from time to time and accordingly refunds of

Licence fees will not be made for closures as described in this condition.

[sheriff]

Looking forward to Monday to hear anymore updates on plan b or will just jump straight ahead and do plan c...

[AJLintern]

Plan B is to build a dam. Posts will be driven into the bed and these will support another line of planks. The space between the two sets of stop planks will be filled with clay.

Someone must have read my suggestion a few pages back

[Ray]

A colleague has just sent text to say summit is about 12" down at north end (and throughout if the stop planks are still not working). There's no apparent evidence of any pumping from Tringford which suggests that either everything is being maintained by pumping at Cowroast, Tringford pumps are only off temporarily or the summit level has now dropped below that at which is leaks substantially.

 

Marsworth flight appears to be all but drained with little (if any) water in each pound and all bottom lock gates open (presumably except lock 39 which I assume is locked).

 

On the basis that I doubt BW would have a reason to actualy drain the Marsworth flight, it would seem that the flight itself may not be entirely innocent in the great leakage scandal.

 

Hope this helps.

 

BTW the pound through MK appeared to be normal on Saturday.

[alan_fincher]

BTW the pound through MK appeared to be normal on Saturday.

There seem to be very mixed messages about the Milton Keynes area.

 

I was at Fenny Startford on Saturday, and the long pound from there to Cosgrove was fully up.

 

But curiously the pound above Fenny lock, back south past Willowbridge to Stoke Hammond seemed fine too.

 

This simply doesn't square with accounts of people on the bottom in that pound, and it is long enough I'd not expect it to be up and down like a yo-yo.

 

So I really can't explain that one at all.

 

I'll be back at Fenny tomorrow, so I'll report back then.

[Ray]

Saturday wasn't a quick glance, I moved the playboat from Pennylands to Campbell Park and back to turn it around.

 

There's some new piling just south of the Monks Way bridge (79A) and the water wasn't that far off of the top of the lowest piece of piling (which was a tad lower than I would have thought it ought to be). There was also one largish puddle on an otherwise dry bit to the rear of the towpath a bit further south. I suspect this was water that has escaped from the cut.

 

All the boats we passed to seem to be floating quite normally.

 

I was amazed at how few boats there were at Campbell Park - the offside was full (including the short term moorings) and there were only three (I think) boats on the towpath side. That's a lot less than during the summer months.

[bigcol]

looked out side yesterday evening, noticed the level sligtly up from the the past few days

today is up even more.(wifes using the washing machine alot lately) lol

i can push the boat about now,so am floating nicely

 

We paid our licence renewral fee this morning!

can this be the reason why we have more water, or is it just the wifes washing machine??

the measuring device is still showing the canal is lower than normal,

 

col

Edited January 23, 2012 by bigcol

[alan_fincher]

I had another look at the summit today.

 

There seems to be no developments on the " Plan B" or "Plan C" that BW management has discussed with local moorers - that is the need to form an effective dam of some sort at New Ground.

 

It's still exactly as it was - stop planks and plastic sheet.

 

Here are today's pictures.....

 

It is down by a bit less than "one brick" over what it was 4 days ago, so has fallen not quite another 3" in that time. At the moment most boats in the Cow Roast "lagoon" still seem to be floating normally, as do those in the marina, but the summit must now be getting down to a level where navigation would be problematic, (even if those planks were not there!).

 

 

 

AN ADDED THOUGHT:

 

Also been to Fenny Lock.

 

Levels fine on long pound North of lock, but maybe about 6" down back towards Stoke Hammond.

 

Back-pump was running at Fenny, but it doesn't exactly shift a lot of water.

[sheriff]

I had another look at the summit today.

 

There seems to be no developments on the " Plan B" or "Plan C" that BW management has discussed with local moorers - that is the need to form an effective dam of some sort at New Ground.

 

It's still exactly as it was - stop planks and plastic sheet.

 

Here are today's pictures.....

 

It is down by a bit less than "one brick" over what it was 4 days ago, so has fallen not quite another 3" in that time. At the moment most boats in the Cow Roast "lagoon" still seem to be floating normally, as do those in the marina, but the summit must now be getting down to a level where navigation would be problematic, (even if those planks were not there!).

 

 

 

AN ADDED THOUGHT:

 

Also been to Fenny Lock.

 

Levels fine on long pound North of lock, but maybe about 6" down back towards Stoke Hammond.

 

Back-pump was running at Fenny, but it doesn't exactly shift a lot of water.

has it stopped raining up your way alan..

[Keeping Up]

Also been to Fenny Lock.

 

Levels fine on long pound North of lock, but maybe about 6" down back towards Stoke Hammond.

 

Back-pump was running at Fenny, but it doesn't exactly shift a lot of water.

 

Almost a level through Fenny then?

 

ETA my boat must be sitting on the bottom now

Edited January 24, 2012 by Keeping Up

[alan_fincher]

Almost a level through Fenny then?

Am I now allowed to see if Sickle can open the gates without winding any paddles, then ?!?

 

(That is an attempt at a joke, peeps, before anybody once again brands me a potential canal hooligan!).

[Ray]

Only potential?

[alan_fincher]

OK here's a question for those like Jim and Mike who get to discuss this with BW management.

 

The original proposal, in Jim's very first post on this, was to drop the summit by 300mm, (so a foot in "old money").

 

My pictures clearly show that it is down by more than "4 bricks" now, so at least 300mm or 1 foot.

 

This has been inadvertently achieved by dropping the Cow Roast "lagoon" and marina that 300mm or 1 foot as well.

 

But no boats in either appear to yet be in any great distress, due to the reduced level, (and presumably if just one or two were, they could be moved into one of the deeper bits ?).

 

So why, if 300mm was the objective can it not now all just be maintained as it is, without worrying about the stop planks, please ?

 

Have I missed something ?

 

Like have they now increased the amount by which they want to drop the bit North of New Ground ?

 

Dead serious question.....

 

Has the plan moved, or has it not now kind of already been achieved, without driving piles across the cut at New Ground bridge ?

 

Jim ? Mike ? What is the latest from Mr Whyatt, please ?

[koukouvagia]

A couple of points, Alan.

 

The revised statement, issued last week by Jeff Whyatt was that the summit would be allowed to drop no more than 450mm, originally it was 300mm

 

It may well be that the summit has dropped to pretty near the 450mm mark. However, if it drops much more then the boats in the lagoon and in the marina will be in trouble. In that case effective stop planks or a dam still needs to be in place. Otherwise the whole of the summit would have to be topped up from the borehole just to keep the boats in the lagoon and the marina afloat.

 

If having reached the 450mm mark the canal is still leaking, then the plan will be to pump water over the stop planks/dam. Or, presumably admit that the whole experiment is a failure and remove the planks. The important question is whether there is now less than 61 megalitres loss per week as a result of the measures taken so far. I'll try to get an update tomorrow.