Canal Network and HS2

[Ray T]

Britain's canal network is at risk of being ravaged by the Government’s controversial High Speed 2 rail line, campaigners warned yesterday.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) says the tranquillity of some of Britain’s most idyllic waterways – and canal boat holidays enjoyed by thousands of people each year – will be destroyed by train noise and ugly concrete viaducts built as part of the project.

The group has identified more than a dozen historic canals threatened by the building of the HS2 rail line from London to Birmingham and the proposed extension to Leeds and Manchester.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2550215/Revealed-How-HS2-carve-Britains-historic-canal-network.html

 

Courtesy of Chris Brady.

[luctor et emergo]

Sounds like the local land owners some 200 years ago, when the guberment authorised large ditches to be dug through their lands...

 

Or the first trains..

 

 

 

 

'Tis called progress. Like it or not, its what got us out of the caves.

[Guest]

Sounds like the local land owners some 200 years ago, when the guberment authorised large ditches to be dug through their lands...

 

Or the first trains..

 

 

 

 

'Tis called progress. Like it or not, its what got us out of the caves.

 

Is it though as in 'real' progress.

 

It all for me hinges on the business case for spending billions and blighting the countryside in the process. We are a small country in terms of square miles not a vast one like France were the need to get from one end of the country at breakneck speed (to achieve a reasonable overall journey time) can just about be justified.

 

Personally I still don't see the justification.

 

ed. and I'm really pee'd off about it blighting one of the best bits of the A&CN at Woodlesford.

Edited February 3, 2014 by The Dog House

[IanM]

Haven't we discussed this to death before?

[Guest]

Haven't we discussed this to death before?

 

Feel free to ignore the thread.

 

The OP's post is relevant because it's the first time that I am aware of that mainstream media attention has been drawn to the detrimental affects on the Inland Waterways.

Edited February 3, 2014 by The Dog House

[johnmck]

Saw this the other day.

 

 

http://vimeo.com/84209298

[Athy]

The amount of discussion, and the amount of pressure exerted in any way possible, will not be sufficient until this immensely wasteful and damaging project is finally abandoned.

[Paul C]

Sounds like the local land owners some 200 years ago, when the guberment authorised large ditches to be dug through their lands...

 

Or the first trains..

 

 

 

 

'Tis called progress. Like it or not, its what got us out of the caves.

 

200 or more years ago, landowners welcomed a canal being built through their land because it would bring industry and prosperity to their land. What with a canal having a bank and boats being able to stop to load/unload (perhaps a small amount of work on the bankside or a wharf would need to be constructed). HS2 trains aren't planning to stop in the countryside, they'll just "whoosh" straight past.

[johnmck]

 

200 or more years ago, landowners welcomed a canal being built through their land because it would bring industry and prosperity to their land. What with a canal having a bank and boats being able to stop to load/unload (perhaps a small amount of work on the bankside or a wharf would need to be constructed). HS2 trains aren't planning to stop in the countryside, they'll just "whoosh" straight past.

 

I quite agree. It is the "Whooshing" without the benefit to the local community that does not add up for me.

[kris88]

its a very badly thought through plan,if it gets built its going to ruin alot of places on the canal network. Let alone the chaos caused by construction.

I dont think its going to get built, not because of the planed damage to the canal network. But because of its route through primrose hill and subsequent effect on house prices

Edited February 3, 2014 by kris88

[PaulD]

Britain's canal network is at risk of being ravaged by the Government’s controversial High Speed 2 rail line, campaigners warned yesterday.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) says the tranquillity of some of Britain’s most idyllic waterways – and canal boat holidays enjoyed by thousands of people each year – will be destroyed by train noise and ugly concrete viaducts built as part of the project.

The group has identified more than a dozen historic canals threatened by the building of the HS2 rail line from London to Birmingham and the proposed extension to Leeds and Manchester.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2550215/Revealed-How-HS2-carve-Britains-historic-canal-network.html

 

Courtesy of Chris Brady.

Rubbish according to NBW. Unbelievable article if you have the stomach to read it. Paul

[luctor et emergo]

Sounds like the local land owners some 200 years ago, when the guberment authorised large ditches to be dug through their lands...

 

Or the first trains..

 

 

 

 

'Tis called progress. Like it or not, its what got us out of the caves.

 

 

To add, I too think this is a red herring. A waste of money that will not achieve anything tangible.

 

And most land owners where not happy with their land being carved up by a canal, or railway line. As with the propsed HS2, the canal and railway only has stops in very few places. I think that is why the canals needed acts of parliament in the first place, to force the provision of land for the canals. And Sydney gardens in Bath, was created specifically so that the good burghers of Bath did not have to suffer the sight of those uncouth bargees, that brought their coal to the wharf. Most land owners, and any land dwellers for what its worth, did not regard the boat gypsies very well..

[KevMc]

HS2 is 'needed' because the current lines are overcrosded due to commuting.

 

Commuting is a 19th century solution to a 19th century problem.

 

We are in the 21st century and should be looking for 21st century solutions.

 

If we reduce commuting then the need for HS2 evaporates.

 

Tis simples but you try and explain that to a poltician

[Nightwatch]

Often wondered why we still, in the main, all have to be at work between 0730 and 0900. But we leave at differing times. The morning rush to work is slightly more congested that the evening get away. We trade world wide now, there are time differences.

 

There's no need for anyone to get from A to B fifteen minutes sooner.

 

Martyn

Edited February 3, 2014 by Nightwatch

[sassan]

I'd rather have new train lines than new roads. The odd ugly viaduct isn't so big a deal.

 

The only concern I have is the impact on several active restoration projects.

[Nightwatch]

Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Have you just contradicted yourself there?

 

Martyn

[bassplayer]

Luckily for many of us we can move to another back yard...that's the beauty of living on a boat.

 

I'm in 2 minds about it really. I do think it will improve the infrastructure of this country and I quite like trains (sorry!). On the other hand, it won't add to the beauty of our countryside and maybe there's better things to put our money into.

[Morat]

I think "Landowners" is an emotive term. I would imagine that most owners of large areas of land are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of the government coming to buy land for the HS2 route. "Landowners" employ Land Agents who specialise in maximising this sort of opportunity for their bosses.

It's the people living in modest homes who have the most to lose. Their houses are less likely to be listed, more likely to be closer to the route and they probably don't have much say in the matter overall.

[Guest]

Luckily for many of us we can move to another back yard...that's the beauty of living on a boat.

 

I'm in 2 minds about it really. I do think it will improve the infrastructure of this country and I quite like trains (sorry!). On the other hand, it won't add to the beauty of our countryside and maybe there's better things to put our money into.

 

I am a bit of a train anorak too - but I'm still no fan of HS2.

 

If I want to see trains belting along at that sort of speed I find a trip to France once a year normally suffices.

[Higgs]

Let them stick it underground, if it doesn't stop anywhere inbetween. They can mole away to their hearts content without bothering anyone.

[kevinl]

The point of high speed trains is to cover long distance quickly, I'd hardly call the 180 miles from Manchester to London a long distance compared to the distances the French or the Spanish trains cover. Right now there's a lot better thing to do with the money IMO.

K

[Higgs]

What types of people will be using this rail service and who will want to pay the King's ransom for the tickets?

[bassplayer]

The point of high speed trains is to cover long distance quickly, I'd hardly call the 180 miles from Manchester to London a long distance compared to the distances the French or the Spanish trains cover. Right now there's a lot better thing to do with the money IMO.

K

I think some of the money should be spent on finishing the new canal link between Bedford and Milton Keynes. Perhaps this country needs to slow down, not speed up....

[deckhand]

 

It's the people living in modest homes who have the most to lose.

We ALL lose if huge chunks of countryside are lost, as well as the people in the future.

We have a train network, which from what I read and hear, cant run efficiently as it is. How can adding another make things better for the main users of the network. Improve what we have and add where necessary but we don't really need a whacking great new line that is just going to shoot people from one end of the country to the other.

[Athy]

Mr. Bassie, I have been keen on trains for over half a century. I must admit that most of my favourites go chuff-chuff rather than brrrrrrr, but I do have time for modern lines such as Eurostar and TGV. But I can see no reason for this proposed new line: obviously it is not aimed at tourists, so business people and commuters would be its main users. Ah, but more and more people work from home now, and business meetings are conducted increasingly by video telephone links, so this customer base will shrink, not grow, as the years pass. So in ten years we'll see half-full trains operated by skint companies hurtling through once-beautiful countryside. Wowie zowie.

 

In any case, anything which makes it easier for the population of Brum to reach London should surely be discouraged.