Category Archives: Foreign parts

Inland fisheries

There was an important debate in the Northern Ireland Assembly on this subject yesterday. While the salmon received much of the attention, the state of the Lough Neagh eel fishery was also discussed.

UC@NIA

The Northern Ireland Assembly mentioned the Ulster Canal twice on 20 February 2012; the Lagan was mentioned too. Nothing new, really.

NSMC

The joint communiqué issued after the last North–South Ministerial Ccouncil  Inland Waterways Meeting, held on 14 February 2012, is available for download here [PDF]. Perhaps the most important part is the set of four recommendations from the review of Waterways Ireland under the St Andrews Agreement:

ST. ANDREWS REVIEW – WATERWAYS IRELAND RECOMMENDATIONS

6. The Council considered four specific recommendations concerning Waterways Ireland and agreed to refer the following recommendations for endorsement to the June 2012 NSMC Plenary:

– Sponsor departments to consider options around the setting up of a Board comprising less than twelve members and to present proposals for consideration at a future NSMC Inland Waterways meeting;

– Sponsor departments to implement as appropriate, through changes to the legislation or other administrative means, a de minimis provision for dealing with Waterways Ireland disposal of a waterway or part of a waterway;

– Sponsor Departments to review the current provisions in relation to Waterways Ireland’s commercial activities to ensure that these are adequate and to report to a future NSMC Inland Waterways meeting; and

– taking account of the current economic and fiscal circumstances, no further action is taken at this time to extend the remit of Waterways Ireland.

Given that British Waterways is to become a trust, with various user representatives on its board, it is hard to see why Waterways Ireland should have no board. I was not convinced by the reasons that Éamon Ó Cuív TD gave me when I asked him about it some years ago.

 

 

Value for money

Regular readers will be aware that I think the proposed canal to Clones is a bad investment. I thought it might be useful to look for information about other Irish canal restorations to see what they cost and what the return on investment has been. I understand that there was a study of the Shannon–Erne Waterway, but I can’t find a copy on tinterweb (if anyone has one to lend, please get in touch).

I therefore asked Waterways Ireland about the restoration of the Royal Canal:

I would be grateful if you could tell me the cost of the restoration of the Royal Canal, the annual cost of running it and the revenue it generates.

The reply (for which I am, as always, grateful) said:

Restoration of the Royal Canal commenced in 1987.

€37m Capital Expenditure on the restoration project funded through (1) Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-1999 (2) National Development Programme 2000 – 2007 and (3) National Development Plan 2007-2013.

The Maintenance Cost for 2012 is €2.46m.

The revenue generated by the canal in 2011 is not available.

I didn’t really expect that there would be a meaningful figure for revenue. A full assessment of the benefits would cover far more than the (probably minimal) direct revenue; I think such an assessment should be done, but that’s not what really got my attention.

According to Waterways Ireland, the Main Line of the Royal is 146 km long and has 46 locks and many bridges, some of them newly built as part of the restoration. Harbours have been improved, slipways have been provided and service blocks have been built. And all of this was done for €37 million (I don’t know whether that’s in constant prices and, if so, at which year’s rates: I’ve asked a supplementary question).

A canal to Clones would be 13 km long and, according to WI’s final restoration plan [PDF], would have one double lock (staircase pair). Some dredging would be needed on the River Finn and a new canal 0.6 km long would have to be provided; the work at the Finn end would cost €8.5 million altogether. On the line as a whole, work would be required on up to 17 bridges, some major and some minor or private bridges. And there would be a cost for land acquisition, although the Updated Economic Appraisal put that at a mere £1,268,280, a very small portion of the total cost. And then there would be the pumps and pipes to take water from the Erne, pump it to Clones and let it flow back down; it is not clear whether WI would have to pay for the water. And the total cost of this lot would be €38m + VAT, which I am told is about €45 million altogether.

Now, even allowing for the facts that there had been some voluntary and FÁS scheme work on the Royal, that no land had to be acquired and that parts of the canal were in water, I still find it difficult to see how a 13 km canal with one double lock can cost more than a 146 km canal with 46 locks. I have asked WI for a comment, but perhaps readers — especially if any of them are engineers or accountants — would be able to help to explain the mystery. Maybe it’s something simple like a mistake in the figures or maybe I’m missing something about the nature of restorations …. Enlightenment welcome.

 

The steamer Firefly at Crom in 1850

Some time ago I posted a query, asking whether anyone could identify the location shown in this drawing on the National Library of Ireland website. Click on the thumbnail to expand it; you may then need to click “PRINTABLE VERSION”. I said:

The black object between the sailing boats and the church looks to me like a paddle steamer, but the image is quite blurred so I’m not certain.

I have now seen the original in the National Library. I have also seen a print of a painting that is, I think, based on the drawing; the painting was done by Henry Brocas junior and is entitled “Lord Clarendon’s visit to Crom Castle, Co Fermanagh, 1850” (tiny thumbnail here).

According to the Erne papers [PDF]:

The earliest known steam boat at Crom was the “Firefly”, which is recorded as having brought the Viceroy, Lord Clarendon, from Crom to Lanesborough Lodge [Belturbet] on his visit of 1850.

It may be that the view is pretty well south from Crom Old Castle with its yew gardens  (Historic 6″), which might explain the odd shapes in the foreground, but it could also be from Crom new castle or even from Inisherk: I don’t know the lie of the land well enough, and would welcome enlightenment. The church on the right-hand side of the picture is Holy Trinity (C of I) church at Derryvore, which originally had a steeple. The drawing shows the island of Innisfendra (Inishfendra) on the left, after which Waterways Ireland’s latest tug has been named.

Another Brocas pic on the NLI site seems to complement the first image: it shows a view to the right of the other, with Gad Island and with Corlatt in the background. I suspect that The regatta  was done (perhaps from a boat) at the same event: the ruins look to me like those of Old Crom Castle.

A note for a councillor

Councillor Pat Treanor is a Sinn Féin member of Monaghan County Council. According to the Clones Regeneration Partnership’s website,

Cllr Treanor referred to the recent economic appraisals carried out by Fitzpatrick Associates on behalf of the Government and made reference to the large job creation and physical regeneration that would flow from the [Clones] canal proposal.

As far as I know, the most recent Fitzpatrick study was published in 2007. It said (Ch 10):

In terms of formal quantified economic appraisal, all restoration options involve significant net costs over benefits.

In other words, the Clones canal is a waste of money.

Clones folk might like to have a large wodge of public money spent in their area; Waterways Ireland might like to be able to keep engineers in employment. But neither of those wishes should weigh with those charged with the care of the state’s finances. If proposals like this are seriously considered by Irish government departments, then the sooner Angela Merkel appoints an official to run the place, the better.

Perhaps, though, a household tax in Monaghan could be used to pay for this, er, investment?

 

Unrealistic expectations

1818

It has not been shown that sobriety increased in Co Leitrim after the canal to Lough Allen was built.

1845

The waterway, completed in 1859, closed in the 1860s. It is not clear that any Killaloe slates ever reached Ulster by the waterway.

2007

The Clones canal today, a united Ireland tomorrow?

 

Show me the money

The Clones dudes have got Jimmy Deenihan to say that the canal to Clones is a great idea.

They haven’t got him to fund it. Or to say where money is to be found (perhaps the Monaghan gold mines?)

Is it kind to keep these chaps hanging on in this way? I blame the department. I begin to suspect that its northsouthery section fears that it will never gain fame and fortune from Tha Boord o Ulster-Scotch (whatever about its companion, Foras na Gaeilge) and is reluctant to kill off its chance of getting its photo in the papers at the ceremonial turning of a sod. Brendan Howlin might usefully direct his department‘s attention to the matter.

WI’s latest tug

The Maritime Journal covers it.

Why there won’t be many more new orders.

I love it when you talk tough to me ….

Mooring Warning for Lough Erne Public Jetties

As a result of continual breaches of the mooring bye-laws, Waterways Ireland intends to prosecute using the penalties set out in the Lough Erne Bye Laws (Northern Ireland) 1978 as authorised by Department of Culture Arts & Leisure (DCAL).

From Waterways Ireland press release 12/01 of 27 January 2012.