Tring Summit closure

[mykaskin]

A lot of summit pounds were designed to have a large operating range to act as their own reservoir, I don't know what the actual bottom level is of the Tring pound, but since the dam just isn't working, why not leave the levels as is and let boats through (allowing enough water in for lock usage if needed). Eventually the traffic will wash the silt away and allow deeper boats through until the bottom of the cut is actually reached - should be around 4.5 foot at least from 'normal' water levels.

 

If BW want to measure the direct loss - just stop boats from using it for a few days without adding any extra water and see what happens.

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

[alan_fincher]

<SNIP>

The big plastic pipe is connected to a weir in a sort of 'box' under the concrete planks. Excess water runs over the weir and off into the side ponds via a smaller plastic pipe, or a bywash pipe at the middle lock. The big pipe is well below the normal water level so that floating cr@p doesn't get drawn into the weir but goes on down to the lock heads where the standard GU Back-of-Paddle weirs are.

</SNIP>

Your words are better than mine, but (unless you want to tell me otherwise!), you are largely telling me more or less what I think I have worked out by observation.

 

Yes, well aware that usual GU practice is to let excess flow through the weirs on the ground paddles and/or over bottom gates.

 

I suppose other routes are added to ease that flow, to help minimise the "can't get the gates open, even with all the paddles up" problem. Even with the bye wash arrangements, when a lot of excess water is coming down the flight, actually getting some of the gates open can be a bugger at times.

 

Didn't fully know the "lock 39" bit, so thanks for filling me in on that.

 

Any idea why the side-pond at the middle lock got completely in-filled ? I may be wrong, but I'm 95% certain that in the 1970s all were present, and usable.

[Ray]

I'm sure that I remember all (or most) side ponds working in the mid 80's. The ones at lock 39 being frequently responsible for flooding the lower floor of what is now the tea room and was, at that time, lived in by a chap called Sam who would empty the lock and side pond of an evening if we left them full when working the trip boats part way up the flight and back.

 

If I remember correctly the wall of lock 42 started to move one season and they fixed it that winter by rebuilding it and removing the side ponds at the same time.

[BEngo]

Your words are better than mine, but (unless you want to tell me otherwise!), you are largely telling me more or less what I think I have worked out by observation.

 

Yes, well aware that usual GU practice is to let excess flow through the weirs on the ground paddles and/or over bottom gates.

 

I suppose other routes are added to ease that flow, to help minimise the "can't get the gates open, even with all the paddles up" problem. Even with the bye wash arrangements, when a lot of excess water is coming down the flight, actually getting some of the gates open can be a bugger at times.

 

Didn't fully know the "lock 39" bit, so thanks for filling me in on that.

 

Any idea why the side-pond at the middle lock got completely in-filled ? I may be wrong, but I'm 95% certain that in the 1970s all were present, and usable.

 

 

 

The can't get the gates open bit happens because BW management don't understand how the system works and measure up for gates that are the wrong height. I have complained about this regularly since the days of Caroline Clark (who was otherwise closely focused on keeping the water where she wanted it), but without result. If the pound is overfull and the lock is full and the top gate is higher than the bottom gate the only way to open the tops gates is to wait until the pound drops to near weir level.

 

The top gates at the bottom lock of Buckby (Whilton to Nicholsons) have been modified by taking away a chunk of the gate top beam to ease (but not cure) the same problem. Sometimes its just quicker to run water thriogh the lock to lower the overfull pound.

 

N

[koukouvagia]

Here's the latest on the closure:

 

 

The ‘consumption’ of water on the Tring summit has slowed dramatically over the last 2 weeks due to actions taken

 

 

In summary :-

 

- No water was taken out of the Tring reservoir group last week

 

- No water was extracted from either Cowroast or Northchurch boreholes

 

- The summit level (on Mon) was -350mm, having stabilised in the immediate period reasonably well

 

- 10 ML (megalitres) has been lost (through the walls/bed) – this water , effectively, came from the natural stream feed on the Wendover arm

 

- The Tring group of reservoirs received 57 ML of inflow, leaving them overall at 50% of capacity (Startops is clearly the lowest at 21% capacity)

 

By comparison the Tring group was at 74% holding same time last year and built to 89% holding by end of February 2011

 

Please see the refill graph for the Tring group below (as at Mon 30^th Jan), modest upturn but still a long way to go !

 

Many boaters are quite understandably asking when we will lift the restrictions currently in place. Particularly those who are planning trips in March.

 

At this stage I do not want to commit to anything more than 4 -5 weeks away, as I’m sure you will understand. A lot can happen in a few weeks and it will influence the

 

actions we take in March one way or another.

 

I know this is not ideal and is adding to concerns – but early restrictions that stretch water resources further into the boating season for the benefit of all have to be the focus for February.

 

If the situation does improve sufficiently as we progress through February we will of course seek to lift restrictions as early in March as is feasible – BUT we cannot commit to this yet

 

 

 

 

 

...and here's the latest refill graph:

 

[alan_fincher]

Jim,

 

Is the decision at New Ground now to "do nothing", please ?

[koukouvagia]

Jim,

 

Is the decision at New Ground now to "do nothing", please ?

 

Probably yes, since the levels on both sides of the ineffective stop planks have stabilized at around -350mm. BW feels that the long term moorers and the marina are not suffering undue hardships with this level. However, they are going to have another look at the stop planks next week.

 

The action taken so far seems remarkably effective - down from around 75 mls per week to just 10 mls.

 

In order to allow BSP to escape from the lagoon, BW will probably fill the Dudswell pound - which is now empty - by back pumping from the Northchurch pound. They haven't decided about this yet.

[BEngo]

 

...and here's the latest refill graph:

 

 

Thanks KK

 

 

 

That looks a bit more encouraging. Extrapolating linearly would give us about 75% by Mid-March.

 

N

[alan_fincher]

The action taken so far seems remarkably effective - down from around 75 mls per week to just 10 mls.

Would that we were only talking millilitres (mls) rather than mega-litres (Mls) !

[koukouvagia]

Would that we were only talking millilitres (mls) rather than mega-litres (Mls) !

 

Oops

[alan_fincher]

Anyone fancy bidding on a mooring where you will only be able to travel in one direction for the next few months, even though three ought to be available ?

 

BW Marsworth towpath mooring vacancy

Edited February 2, 2012 by alan_fincher

[lexicon]

Anyone fancy bidding on a mooring where you will only be able to travel in one direction for the next few months, even though three ought to be available ?

 

BWN Marsworth towpath mooring vacancy

 

oh if only it started in july or august not march then i might be tempted.

[alan_fincher]

oh if only it started in july or august not march then i might be tempted.

If it is like some tow-path moorings around here, there is a fair chance that it, 9or a similar one) will be advertised again in a few months. Then in a few more months after that, then in a few more months after that......

[Ray]

I'm confused - easy done at my age - by the latest statement from BW.

 

It appears to me that the slight improvement in the water stock has only been achieved by means of effectively not maintaining the normal summit level. As I doubt that BW physically drained what was in the summit when they stopped puumping, my guess is that the level has now reached that of the water table or has dropped below the most porous part of the bed as 10ML still appears to be being lost (although not necessarily any/all is off the summit).

 

I doubt there is much boat movement either side of the summit at present so no significant amount of water is being "used", a situation that will change as soon as boats start moving.

 

The statement says that the reservoirs are now at 50% capacity whilst the graph appears to show them about 5% below that.

 

Last week's reservoir gain was still below what BW say was being lost from the summit. There has still not been any significant rainfall and no huge amount appears to be forecast for the next few weeks at least. As a result the water table is liable to drop further which may have an impact on the summit's current level let alone the normal cruising water level.

 

I'd planned a trip across the summit with friends at the end of March so I'd like to see the summit re-opened as much as anyone else but I fear that doing so will be at the expense of any capability of maintaining general water levels in the area from April onwards without draconian restrictions in lock opening times.

 

We know where we are at present. I wonder whether people would prefer be able to (reasonably) reliably plan their cruising for the year ahead based around, say, the present situation, rather than find that water losses resume as a result of the summit being refilled causing restrictions to be implemented with the possibility of those restrictions being gradually worsened if the drought remains.

[koukouvagia]

We know where we are at present. I wonder whether people would prefer be able to (reasonably) reliably plan their cruising for the year ahead based around, say, the present situation, rather than find that water losses resume as a result of the summit being refilled causing restrictions to be implemented with the possibility of those restrictions being gradually worsened if the drought remains.

 

If there is no significant rainfall between now and March then we're going to be in trouble. It's true replenished reservoirs are vital but they are not the only means of keeping the summit open. It might be possible to open the summit, but keep the level low. This would minimise water loss through seepage, but would mean that deep draughted boats like mine wouldn't be able to make it across. But as Ray points out, if the water table falls lower then this won't be an option.

 

Most of the water lost through lockage at either end of the summit could be back pumped.

 

Also there will be water available for topping up from the Cowroast borehole. The annual extraction licence runs from October to October. BW is being frugal at the moment with the volume it's pumping, thereby conserving the water until it's needed during the season.

 

I think most people, having read this thread will come to the conclusion that the Southern GU is best avoided this summer and head north to where the water is. Mind you, it might be difficult for those of us in the south to make it to the north.

 

I think it'll be a summer for barbecues on the mooring and an opportunity to finish off all those maintenance jobs I've been putting off for the last twenty years!

[BEngo]

I'm confused - easy done at my age - by the latest statement from BW.

 

It appears to me that the slight improvement in the water stock has only been achieved by means of effectively not maintaining the normal summit level. As I doubt that BW physically drained what was in the summit when they stopped puumping, my guess is that the level has now reached that of the water table or has dropped below the most porous part of the bed as 10ML still appears to be being lost (although not necessarily any/all is off the summit).

 

I doubt there is much boat movement either side of the summit at present so no significant amount of water is being "used", a situation that will change as soon as boats start moving.

 

The statement says that the reservoirs are now at 50% capacity whilst the graph appears to show them about 5% below that.

 

Last week's reservoir gain was still below what BW say was being lost from the summit. There has still not been any significant rainfall and no huge amount appears to be forecast for the next few weeks at least. As a result the water table is liable to drop further which may have an impact on the summit's current level let alone the normal cruising water level.

 

I'd planned a trip across the summit with friends at the end of March so I'd like to see the summit re-opened as much as anyone else but I fear that doing so will be at the expense of any capability of maintaining general water levels in the area from April onwards without draconian restrictions in lock opening times.

 

We know where we are at present. I wonder whether people would prefer be able to (reasonably) reliably plan their cruising for the year ahead based around, say, the present situation, rather than find that water losses resume as a result of the summit being refilled causing restrictions to be implemented with the possibility of those restrictions being gradually worsened if the drought remains.

 

It looks to me as though the reservoirs could be about 75% full (1500Ml) by Mid-March IF the present rate of inflow goes on. (Its not really a big enough graph to extrapolate easily). At the pre-Christmas rate of consumption of 60Ml a week that would give about 25 weeks to empty.- about 20 weeks to a more realistic level of 20% (fish conservation). There will of course be a water bill to re-fill the pounds and the summit which will reduce this further, but I am aguessing this to be offset by back-pumping from Northchurch and through the Northern engines. There may also be some input from Cowroast pump once the extraction licence period re-starts. As rate of loss is not much affected by lockage, boating has not much effect on the numbers.

 

Additionally, while I have no idea what effect a partial lowering of the summit might really have on loss rate, a reduction of 150-200 mm from the zero level might not inconvenience too many (slow going for a working boat, but still navigable I think) whilst also effecting a reduction in loss to the ground and giving a longer open period.

 

So, from where I sit it looks like the Tring summit could be open for the summer. I can think of options for how BW might manage the water- for example, an Easter window followed by re-closure to the Spring half-term, or a delay opening until the start of the busiest period to ensure that traffic heading for and from profitable Olympic vistor moorings is accommodated. The first of these has two re-fill costs so might give a shorter overall useable period.

 

Where are the boaters organisations in all this? And how do the users influence the BW/CART decision?

 

 

N

Of course it might P... down until the end of April!

[carlt]

Where are the boaters organisations in all this? And how do the users influence the BW/CART decision?

 

 

Well...

 

According to SueB, if there are no NABO members on the summit then they're not interested.

 

IWA are happy because boaters won't be hindering the other waterways users that they claim to represent.

 

RBOA are happy because their members never go anywhere.

 

I admit that the RBOA comment is grossly unfair but it fitted the joke and I am displaying my Comedic Licence.

[alan_fincher]

Well...

 

According to SueB, if there are no NABO members on the summit then they're not interested.

 

IWA are happy because boaters won't be hindering the other waterways users that they claim to represent.

 

RBOA are happy because their members never go anywhere.

 

I admit that the RBOA comment is grossly unfair but it fitted the joke and I am displaying my Comedic Licence.

And (stretching it a bit, because they insist they are not an organisation) the Boater's Manifesto people are too busy arguing with anybody who doesn't agree with them to the litre how much water is actually being wasted, and that Robin Evans is personally responsible for every bucketful......

[koukouvagia]

Well...

 

According to SueB, if there are no NABO members on the summit then they're not interested.

 

IWA are happy because boaters won't be hindering the other waterways users that they claim to represent.

 

RBOA are happy because their members never go anywhere.

 

I admit that the RBOA comment is grossly unfair but it fitted the joke and I am displaying my Comedic Licence.

 

That's about right! I belong to NABO and HnBOC. The latter got in touch almost immediately and asked me for an update on the local situation. Not a peep from the former - and there's at least three NABO members stuck in the lagoon.

[carlt]

Not a peep from the former - and there's at least three NABO members stuck in the lagoon.

You mean they haven't been craned out and transported to wherever they like, courtesy of BW?

 

This is when it is good to belong to a user group such as NABO or RBOA as they can sort out BW on your behalf.

[BlueStringPudding]

Thought you guys might like an update. Last Friday I received a very polite letter from BW followed up by an email from the local enforcement officer telling me there would be an opportunity to move my boat south through Cow Roast lock at 10am tomorrow morning. And again through Northchurch lock at 3pm in the afternoon. So I booked the day off work and hired myself a delightful crew member who can be paid in fried egg sarnies for the day.

 

During the week I contacted the Philip Brogan for confirmation that:

1. The level of the Cow Roast pound would be raised enough by Friday morning that I would no longer be aground as I was currently stuck at an angle and not able to move

2. That the pound south of Cow Roast lock will be navigable (as it was at that time completely empty)

3. That the stoppage at Northchurch lock is on schedule so I won't get stranded there (that pound was also quite shallow at the weekend)

 

The response was that all these things would be sorted and that the pounds will be filled using the Cow Roast Bore Pump (so much for water conservation).

 

This morning I took the following photos:

 

This is the pound below Cow Roast Lock

 

and the view from the stern deck of my boat looking past the winding hole to Cow Roast lock:

 

 

That has been frozen for three days now and as of last night the ice was no longer breakable (and it's certainly not breakable in reverse into the winding hole, to turn 180 degrees then proceed through the lock).

 

There has been no further contact from BW to let me know there has been a change of plan or that they've been monitoring ice or water levels - bearing in mind they know there are boats who have been ordered to move tomorrow and have made arrangements to do so. If I use up a day's holiday from work and am unable to move the boat, that reduces the days I can move the boat in the future to just weekends - and not even every weekend.

 

I have now emailed Philip Brogan yet again and attached these photos to say that unless he tells me otherwise I am cancelling my day's leave and cancelling the generous help of my crew member, as I don't believe passage through will be either possible or safe.

Edited February 2, 2012 by BlueStringPudding

[matty40s]

Thought you guys might like an update. Last Friday I received a very polite letter from BW followed up by an email from the local enforcement officer telling me there would be an opportunity to move my boat south through Cow Roast lock at 10am tomorrow morning. And again through Northchurch lock at 3pm in the afternoon. So I booked the day off work and hired myself a delightful crew member who can be paid in fried egg sarnies for the day.

 

During the week I contacted the Philip Brogan for confirmation that:

1. The level of the Cow Roast pound would be raised enough by Friday morning that I would no longer be aground as I was currently stuck at an angle and not able to move

2. That the pound south of Cow Roast lock will be navigable (as it was at that time completely empty)

3. That the stoppage at Northchurch lock is on schedule so I won't get stranded there (that pound was also quite shallow at the weekend)

 

The response was that all these things would be sorted and that the pounds will be filled using the Cow Roast Bore Pump (so much for water conservation).

 

This morning I took the following photos:

 

This is the pound below Cow Roast Lock

 

and the view from the stern deck of my boat looking past the winding hole to Cow Roast lock:

 

 

That has been frozen for three days now and as of last night the ice was no longer breakable.

 

There has been no further contact from BW to let me know there has been a change of plan or that they've been monitoring ice or water levels - bearing in mind they know there are boats who have been ordered to move tomorrow and have made arrangements to do so. If I use up a day's holiday from work and am unable to move the boat, that reduces the days I can move the boat in the future to just weekends - and not even every weekend.

 

I have now emailed Philip Brogan yet again and attached these photos to say that unless he tells me otherwise I am cancelling my day's leave and cancelling the generous help of my crew member, as I don't believe passage through will be either possible or safe.

 

one for sorrow....

 

Can we still come round for fried egg sarnies???

[BlueStringPudding]

If you cook em yourself yes, coz I'll be working, unless Philip Brogan advises me otherwise! I'll leave you a key...

 

On the plus side, they haven't wasted water by filling that pound to force one or two boats through. Which at a time when they've published that they need to conserve water and reduce pumping from the bore hole, will at least not antagonise those boaters and businesses negatively affected by the stoppage.

Edited February 2, 2012 by BlueStringPudding

[alan_fincher]

A great shame! - I was looking forward to some serious ice-breaking with somebody else's blacking!

[LEO]

Hi,

 

The water level on the summit had increased by about 35mm since yesterday.

 

L.