Category Archives: Operations

Weed

I said recently that the water level on Lough Derg was low, as a result of a dry winter. Barge Hawthorn now reports that the weir at Clondra (Cloondara) is dry and Waterways Ireland has now issued a Marine Notice (23/2012: not yet on the WI website, but it may be there by the time you check) saying:

Waterways Ireland wishes to advise all masters and users of the Erne System that following a period of dry weather the water levels on Lower Lough Erne are below those normally experienced at this time of year.

WI Conver weed boat (and dinghy) in dry dock at Shannon Harbour

Reliable and authoritative sources tell me that the water levels in themselves are not the only problem. The dry, warm winter is likely to encourage the growth of weed, especially on the shallower waterways, including the canals and Upper Lough Erne. It seems that chemical methods can no longer be used so mechanical cutting and harvesting is the only method available. That means machinery and manpower. And with reduced resources, it’s going to be hard to keep the weeds down.

It may be wise to practise a rain dance.

Support the Clones Canal

It was suggested to me today that, because some boating organisations want the Clones Canal, the project must be worthy of support. I find that argument less than convincing. If I offer someone the benefit of a sum of money, without charge, I will not be surprised if that person likes the idea — but that won’t show that it’s a good deal for whoever bears the cost.

In this case, owners of boats are being offered the benefit of €45 million, so it’s not surprising that they like the idea. But I think they should be offered a practical method of demonstrating the depth of their support.

Accordingly, I propose that owners of registered boats on  the Shannon and the Erne be offered the opportunity to pay half the €45 million cost (the other half could be raised from a levy on the publicans of Clones, the other main beneficiaries). If there are 10,000 boats, the charge per owner, spread over three years, would be no more than €750 a year. Willingness to pay would provide more convincing evidence of support and would also make the project better value for the taxpayer.

 

Clever chaps in Youghal

No, not the one in Cork: the one in North Tipperary.

Youghal Quay ~1900

Youghal Quay and Bay ~1900

Formerly used for landing turf from the west side of Lough Derg, Youghal Quay is now a swimming area.

Ladder and diving board. Note the barrier at the landward end

The business end of the barrier

The other side supports a seat

Nice idea.

 

 

 

 

Shannon 1 design

If you don’t like hanging around airports, Shannon offers you a choice: you can go and look at the estuary instead, which is much more interesting.

Shannon Foynes Port Company workboat Shannon 1 passing Shannon Airport; Ringmoylan Pier in the background

Shannon 1, the successor to Curraghgour II, is a Damen MultiCat.

Shannon Foynes Port Company has updated its website.

 

Royal Canal: speed of lock operation

From Robert Mallett MRIA, MSCEI “On certain improved Methods of constructing Valves or Sluices, as applied to Canal and Dock Gates, &c, and similar Works of Hydraulic Engineering” in The Architectural Magazine 1837.

 

A target for WI to aim for?

Liffey barges

From The Dublin Penny Journal Vol 1 No 18 27 October 1832

Waterways salaries

There is a complete list of officers’ salaries here.

 

Commenting on waterways budgets

DCAL writes:

Following the Executive’s Draft Budget, the Department of Culture, Arts and  Leisure (DCAL) published a consultation paper on its own spending and saving proposals over the period 2011-15 on 31 December 2010. The public consultation period on these ran in tandem with the wider consultation on the Executive’s Draft Budget.

The document records all the representations it received about specific business areas. So which body was the only one to make a representation about the budget for Waterways Ireland?

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which

Supported the continued funding of Inland  Waterways and Inland Fisheries.

DCAL, DAHG and WI

I was interested to see that DCAL has its own research programme [DOC file], but also makes use of other research services including the NI Continuous Household Survey:

To monitor engagement in culture and sport in Northern Ireland

The Continuous Household Survey (CHS) and the Young People Behaviour and Attitudes Survey (YPBAS) will continue to monitor engagement in sport, arts, museums and libraries in Northern Irelandfor adults and children. The CHS will also capture engagement by people in Northern Irelandat fisheries and waterways under DCAL’s control as well as engagement in Irish and Ulster-Scots languages and events. The barriers and benefits to engagement will also be explored.

DCAL and non-navigaBLE Waterways

I don’t know whether “waterways under DCAL’s control” are deemed to include those managed by Waterways Ireland as well as those directly controlled by DCAL:

The Department also has ownership of, and custodial responsibility for, those remaining sections of the Lagan and Coalisland Canals that remain in Government ownership following abandonment of navigation in the 1950s. An ongoing programme is in place for each of these highly popular towpaths to upgrade access for pedestrians, cyclists and disabled access.

I don’t suppose it would make much sense to ask questions about just two derelict waterways while ignoring those that are navigable, but the results are not shown on the CHS web pages: interested folk must ask DCAL direct.

I note that the DCAL Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2011 [PDF] show that DCAL “Estimates provided for expenditure on […] certain inland waterways (including payments to the Rivers Agency), Waterways Ireland, […].” Later, we read:

Inland Waterways

DCAL manages and maintains 11 miles of the Lagan Towpath from Stranmillis to  Sprucefield; 3.5 miles of towpath at Soldierstown, Aghalee; 4.5 miles of towpath on the  Coalisland Canal; 22 water recreation sites; and shooting rights over the foreshore of Lough Erne. Work on the development of a policy on the re-opening of abandoned canals is in the preliminary stages.

Given that DCAL can own and run waterways, I wonder why the supporters of the Newry Canal did not seek to have it taken over by DCAL rather than by Waterways Ireland.

Water recreation

The non-navigable waterways are the second of DCAL’s three main activities. The first is this:

We are committed to developing the recreational potential of inland waterways through our Province-wide Water Recreation Programme.

Applicants, such as Local Authorities, are encouraged to work in partnership with the Department in providing and promoting water recreation facilities such as riverside paths and boat moorings for public use. Wherever practicable, works will incorporate disabled access facilities.

Again, the DCAL Resource Accounts for the year ended 31 March 2011 [PDF] provide more details:

Inland Waterways

[…] The Department continued to administer an annual Water Recreation Programme, amounting to £430k in 2010-11, aimed at developing the recreation and navigational potential of Northern Ireland’s Inland Waterways. Applicant organisations, primarily local authorities, were encouraged to work in partnership with the Department in the provision of water recreation facilities, such as riverside paths and canoe trails, complementing the Department’s continued commitment to upgrading the Lagan and Coalisland Canal towpaths for shared pedestrian and cyclist use. 9 new projects were completed during 2010-11. Funded projects were required to have an identifiable strategic value and where possible, contribute to the Department’s commitment to provide at least 5 kilometres of new or improved access for disabled persons each year.

This too would cover cooperation with the four local authorities who control the Newry Canal.

Oddly enough, inland waterways and fisheries are grouped together on DCAL’s website but they are in two separate divisions: waterways, for some reason, are in Culture whereas inland fisheries come under Sport, Museums and Recreation. DCAL does not, however, put waterways under southnorthery.

DCAL and DAHG

There is a useful contrast here with DAHG, which thinks that waterways exist purely to serve northsouthery: despite what WI thinks it is for

Waterways Ireland has responsibility for the management, maintenance, development and restoration of inland navigable waterways principally for recreational purposes.

… DAHG does not appear to have adopted the view that waterways are for recreation. Perhaps if it gained responsibility for some waterways outside WI’s scope, it would develop a policy on recreational use of waterways. That would mean that, like DCAL

The Department is also the sponsor department in Northern Ireland for Waterways Ireland which is the Cross-Border Body responsible for the management, maintenance, development and restoration of operational waterways throughout the island of Ireland.

… DAHG would be the department responsible for recreation on waterways, one (large) set of which are managed by WI, which in turn is controlled by the two departments.

The difficulty with DAHG’s current arrangements is that there is a division between theory and reality, but DAHG has organised its functions on the basis of theory. In reality, waterways are for recreation (or, if you prefer, leisure), but DAHG insists that they’re for northsouthery. Because that’s now been successfully routinised, waterways receive relatively little attention and are not, as far as I can see, considered as part of state provision for leisure or recreation. There can be no proper policy-making for the sector unless it’s grounded in reality.

More on WI’s non-houseboat policy

A year ago, in March 2011, I wrote about Waterways Ireland’s attempt to reorganise the liveaboard boats on the Grand Canal at Sallins. That attempt ultimately failed, and WI’s provision of houseboat moorings at Shannon Harbour was likewise unsuccessful: usually reliable sources tell me that two spaces have been allocated, but to non-residential boats.

Amongst the concentrations of boats parked on the Grand Canal (most of them disregarding the five-day rule), the proportions of residential boats are [I think: I know of no reliable statistics] higher at Hazelhatch and Sallins, both at the eastern end, rather lower at Lowtown and lowest at Tullamore and Shannon Harbour.

It seems that WI’s focus has shifted away from the residential boats, which it tried to tackle last year, to the non-residential boats: it has recently issued Marine Notices warning that the five-day rule will be enforced at hard-edged [ie the best] moorings on Tullamore’s “spur line” and between the 35th Lock and Griffith Bridge at Shannon Harbour. However, no notices have so far been issued about Lowtown, Sallins or Hazelhatch.

I think WI is right to separate the residential issue from the parking, but it will be interesting to see what is planned for the eastern end of the canal.

Incidentally, all of this smacks of Kremlinology, trying to deduce policy positions from minor clues, and is necessarily speculative. It would be really nice if WI published policy proposals on its website, invited comments and then formally promulgated the final policies.