Jump to content

Featured Posts

Have just been for a walk along the Montgomery canal at Redwith bridge. I live reasonably close so walk the canal every few months. The progress with restoration appears very slow. I thought there were going to be WRG work camps last year but if there were they do not seem to have made much difference. The few hundred yards between Redwith bridge and Price's bridge look as if they could be finished in a week with a WRG work camp and another section could be in water. I am sure there are valid reasons but when you read of the progress with the Hereford and Gloucester canal and the Cotswold canals and realise that the Montgomery does not have land ownership issues it is difficult to understand why restoration has not progressed faster.

 

Carl

Link to post
Share on other sites

is it down to some rare species or other, I was young when they started the restoration and I doubt i'll ever be able to chug to Welshpool. It is a waste, but when the existing system is not being maintained it's hard to justify opening more canal miles.

Casp'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just been for a walk along the Montgomery canal at Redwith bridge. I live reasonably close so walk the canal every few months. The progress with restoration appears very slow. I thought there were going to be WRG work camps last year but if there were they do not seem to have made much difference. The few hundred yards between Redwith bridge and Price's bridge look as if they could be finished in a week with a WRG work camp and another section could be in water. I am sure there are valid reasons but when you read of the progress with the Hereford and Gloucester canal and the Cotswold canals and realise that the Montgomery does not have land ownership issues it is difficult to understand why restoration has not progressed faster.

 

Carl

Carl, have a look at the Shropshire Union Canal Society website www.shropshireunion.org.uk and you will find some answers to your question.

 

It looks like lottery funding may have dried up and the work is being done by SUCS members on monthly work parties during the drier months.

 

Steve

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Monty is a sad case. When I look back at photographs taken in the 1970's I see a canal just needing tinkering with, a whollop of money and hey ho off we go. But it hasnt! 40 years on some parts look far worse than they did back then. Isnt there a point where a situation becomes stagnant to the point of being maybe a waste of time? I know a lot of work has been done, with a lot of effort but where has this got to? There WAS a hire fleet in Welshpool but this has gone, for such a beautiful waterway in magnificent surroundings there seem to be now little interest.

Maybe its time to reflect on what people want, if you want a wildlife habitat the this canal ticks all the boxes, if you want to walk it, bike it fine, all boxes ticked. But wheres the queue of boaters eager to get to Newtown, or even Welshpool?

I remember "action squads" being bought together to stop "Williams Bridge" being demolished, they didnt work, it does seem that the councils whose patches the waterway runs through do not really care even now restoration elsewhere has proved its dividends. Peraphs now we should judge these derelict waterways on the merit they can score and this would leave the Monty way down the field. And its all very odd because just look at the success of the Welshpool & LLanfair railway whose restoration roughly spanned the same period, why has that become such a thriving success and the Monty gone into decline?

 

When I first saw the Monty, I saw a canal ready to spring back to life, now after recent viewing of some sections I see a dead waterway as far as navigation throughout is concerned on a life support system, peraphs we should look at turning the system off?

 

"Ready to come to life 1974"

gallery_5000_522_105548.jpg

Edited by Laurence Hogg
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the knitting part of the boat community know about Colinettes sales room in Llanfair? If not. Tell them how they can fill their boats with cheap yarns. They have sharp needles to stab the back sides of those responsible.

 

On a more serious note I hope it will be opened one day. It's on top of my list of future cruises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a few of the large engineering projects were completed years ago now, Gallowstree bridge at the entrance to Welshpool was rebuilt about 15 years ago maybe and the canal has matured nicely around it. There is a lovely mooring basin in the town centre which would be very very popular should the canal reopen and just this winter CaRT have replaced a number of lockgates through the town, the work is being done and it will be a valued and popular place once reconnected, I think ending the restoration drive would be very short sighted and a huge waste of time and effort; anyone who has applied for lottery funding in the past 4 years will testify that the financial black hole of calcutta... sorry I mean that wonderful Olympic centre in London.... grabbed all the money that used to be available for this kind of project, it will probably be another 5 years before any money is available again on the back of the Money Pit which we are all still paying for. But this should not be used as an excuse to abandon the restoration of this waterway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter Shaw,when he was Secretary of State for Wales,was the p****k,who screwed it all up.The costs were much less at that time,the E.U.funding was in place,all that was needed was match funding from the British government.People who think the canal should be left to nature should walk along the canal bed from Newtown.It is now the route of the main sewer from Newtown to the sewage works.The reason the Welshpool bypass does not cover the canal in Welshpool is because of the work of enthusiasts in the 60s.The reason there are important sites for nature along the canal is because it has been kept in water,despite being abandond.Once you give up on the canal,official vandalism will soon destroy it.A main road or a sewer pipe have very litle visual or wildlife interest.Coming off the most popular canal in the country,at Welsh Frankton,the cruising and financial potential are huge.At the moment,overly resrictive access to the canal needs to be re-assesed,local authorities pressed to do more and local dignitaries encouraged to give their support(what is our local M.P.)doing.The towpath is in exellent condition the locks are in good order,the canal has most of its origional infrastructure(most of the lock houses and warehouses survive)it passes through some of the most pleasant countryside.Progress may be slow,but there is still progress.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just looked at the waterway recovery groups camps for this year. Not one is on the Montgomery. I tend to agree with Laurence. Maybe the Montgomery should be re-abandoned and the Norbury to Newport section of the Shropshire union could be considered instaed. Very little of this is in Shropshire and none is in Powys. I may suggest that the bed of the Montgomery could be used to put the pylons for the wind turbines on, it follows the line that they want to go.

Carl

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Montgomery and Ellesmere & Chester restoration from Frankton has been a long process and has a certain similarity to the lengthy Droitwich Restoration, but whilst the Droitwich link is now there and available for boaters use. The long grind of getting the link through Llanymynch to Welshpool seems to go on forever. There are of course some interesting canal features on this length which include locks and the aqueduct over the Vyrnwy. It would be nice to see boats there again.

 

Ray Shill

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just looked at the waterway recovery groups camps for this year. Not one is on the Montgomery. I tend to agree with Laurence. Maybe the Montgomery should be re-abandoned and the Norbury to Newport section of the Shropshire union could be considered instaed. Very little of this is in Shropshire and none is in Powys. I may suggest that the bed of the Montgomery could be used to put the pylons for the wind turbines on, it follows the line that they want to go.

Carl

 

 

No just no

 

 

oh and dont mention the pylon idea in the local area because its difficult to go boating with one of those pylons inserted sideways in your least accessible orifice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly, sorry for the mega-multi-quote! :P

Have just been for a walk along the Montgomery canal at Redwith bridge. I live reasonably close so walk the canal every few months. The progress with restoration appears very slow. I thought there were going to be WRG work camps last year but if there were they do not seem to have made much difference. The few hundred yards between Redwith bridge and Price's bridge look as if they could be finished in a week with a WRG work camp and another section could be in water. I am sure there are valid reasons but when you read of the progress with the Hereford and Gloucester canal and the Cotswold canals and realise that the Montgomery does not have land ownership issues it is difficult to understand why restoration has not progressed faster.

As one of the volunteers doing the restoration, I'm sure we can all agree that we'd like restoration to be faster! Some background for those who don't know... From the Llangollen Canal several miles have been restored and are navigable, and have been for several years now. There is then a 1/2 mile section (from Gronwen Bridge to Redwith Bridge) which has been restored (by contractors) and was rewatered 2 or 3 years ago. It is not navigable (except to portable craft) as there is no winding at the end, and the plant growth is having time to flourish as a result. The next 1/4 mile section (from Redwith Bridge to Prices Bridge) is currently being restored by volunteers from Shropshire Union Canal Society. The towpath side was piled by the contractors who did the Gronwen-Redwith section, and all other work is being undertaken by SUCS. This includes towpath wall building, retaining wall building, towpath laying, creating an invert under Prices Bridge, channel shaping and channel lining. Because everyone is a volunteer, work parties take place for one weekend a month. During winter conditions for working in the channel are not ideal, so this year and last year no winter work was undertaken. So that leaves about 9 weekends per year to work on it. The current situation on that length is that most of the remaining work is channel shaping and lining, which is very approximately 50% complete.

 

WRG did some work on this length when work here started (a few years ago), but none since.

 

WRG had a canal camp on the next 1/2 mile length (from Prices Bridge to Crickheath, which lasted 4 or 5 weeks, in 2011. I don't believe they returned in 2012. I believe they encountered some technical difficulties on that section. Parts of seem to be basically built in peat, there has been some subsidence, and in one part the offside is basically missing! Personally I think it's big enough to need a contractor and big pile of money.

Of course money is always an issue...

 

is it down to some rare species or other, I was young when they started the restoration and I doubt i'll ever be able to chug to Welshpool. It is a waste, but when the existing system is not being maintained it's hard to justify opening more canal miles.

Floating Water Plantain is the main species that gets mentioned. I'm no ecologist, but I believe there have been many issues caused by its presence.

...just this winter CaRT have replaced a number of lockgates through the town...

Not just Welshpool Town lock, which won't see much traffic as it's an isolated section, but at least it's navigable. All lock gates or the two locks at Carreghofa have been replaced too this winter. These won't have seen a narrowboat for about 70 years! I only know of them being used by portable craft once in the last 5 years.

I have just looked at the waterway recovery groups camps for this year. Not one is on the Montgomery. I tend to agree with Laurence. Maybe the Montgomery should be re-abandoned and the Norbury to Newport section of the Shropshire union could be considered instaed. Very little of this is in Shropshire and none is in Powys. I may suggest that the bed of the Montgomery could be used to put the pylons for the wind turbines on, it follows the line that they want to go.

The Shrewsbury Canal has "challenges" too, like the first bit of restoration needing 17 locks restoring (assuming you restore, and don't replace with a boat lift).

With regard to Powys Council, I'm sure I heard that there attitude was along the lines of "we support restoration, but there's no point us doing anything until the restoration reaches the Powys border at Llanymynech". I can see their point! Anything they did to improve the canal would only affect the currently isolated section.

 

All comments my own etc. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to that site a hell of a lot is ongoing with restoration, the suggestion it should be abandoned now because of the speed of restoration is absurd; incidentally following the course of the canal using google maps I noticed a full length motor apparently sunk at 52.720104, -3.109798 I wondered which one it was, looking at the very good AMModels site :P I realised it was Effingham the admiral motor, how the heck did it get onto the Monty and when it was sold off why on earth wasnt it offered to the restoration society as its workboat as has happened to other 'historic' boats and canal societies?

 

:banghead:

 

My reply was writted before hmallet's excellent reply above. (slow fingers( mine not his)) :cheers:

Edited by AMModels
Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Pete's Montgomery website there were supposed to be 4 summer weeks of working groups on the Montgomery canal. I cannot understand why the section from Redwith bridge to Price's bridge could not have have been finished in one of these weeks. I am sure that the weather would have been bad but the Hereford and Gloucester managed to dig a section out of the earth at the same time of the year. If anyone can create canal from mud the wrg should be able to accomplish this. Why did this not happen.

 

Carl

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to that site a hell of a lot is ongoing with restoration, the suggestion it should be abandoned now because of the speed of restoration is absurd; incidentally following the course of the canal using google maps I noticed a full length motor apparently sunk at 52.720104, -3.109798 I wondered which one it was, looking at the very good AMModels site :P I realised it was Effingham the admiral motor, how the heck did it get onto the Monty and when it was sold off why on earth wasnt it offered to the restoration society as its workboat as has happened to other 'historic' boats and canal societies?

 

:banghead:

 

My reply was writted before hmallet's excellent reply above. (slow fingers( mine not his)) :cheers:

 

It got there on a lorry and got sunk through lack of care and use, ie no one had need to use it. I removed "Effingham" from that site in 2007 for the "Moving Forward" project. They failed to do anything with it. It has since been returned to the then BW and sold to private owners and currently is at top of the Erewash undergoing restoration to my belief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It got there on a lorry and got sunk through lack of care and use, ie no one had need to use it. I removed "Effingham" from that site in 2007 for the "Moving Forward" project. They failed to do anything with it. It has since been returned to the then BW and sold to private owners and currently is at top of the Erewash undergoing restoration to my belief.

 

Seems daft theyd shift it there when its not as far as I am aware a BW water yet, do they have a statutory duty of care for the in water sections? As they had put it there I wonder if they offered it to SUCS for restoration use, at least its now going to be used but the whole transport it in and then not use it was a waste of BW money in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems daft theyd shift it there when its not as far as I am aware a BW water yet, do they have a statutory duty of care for the in water sections? As they had put it there I wonder if they offered it to SUCS for restoration use, at least its now going to be used but the whole transport it in and then not use it was a waste of BW money in the first place.

are you suprised at BW wasting money?? -

Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone interested in the Montgomery Canal could I suggest joining the Shropshire Union Canal Society (who also install the excellent visitor moorings which people so often comment about)?

It is a very modest £10 a year and includes a quarterly magazine (going colour this year) which includes reports on the Montgomery restoration.

Join at www.shropshireunion.org.uk/the-society/membership

 

My link

 

Edited by dor
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hoping that someone from WRG or from the Shropshire union canal society would be able to explain why a WRG workgroup could not finish the section from Redwith to Pryces bridge. Looking at the SUCS website the distance is 400 metres. Since 2008 200 yards has been completed. 100 metres per year!!! According to PETE's excellent Montgomery website there were 4 weeks planned last year but nothing seems to have happened. Why? This year nothing seems to have been scheduled. Why? I also note that the gates at Welshpool have been replaced and there are another two stoppages on the welshpool length which at this rate will not see boats for another 100 years!! Could they not have been repaired cheaply until navigation is nearer and the money spent increasing the navigable length. I am not a member of SUCS although have joined the Norbury to Newport community interest group as there seems to be an optimism that the people of Newport are keen for this to happen.

 

 

Carl

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.