On my old photographic website I had a page of photos of an abandoned barge at Plassey, on the River Shannon. I have now moved those photos to here and added some text.
I am hoping that someone expert in old iron barges might be able to make a guess at the age, and perhaps even the origin, of the barge. I will, in the meantime, be trying to pin down the date of its abandonment.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish inland waterways vessels, Irish waterways general, Operations, Sources, Steamers
Tagged Annabeg, Annaghbed, boats, bridge, canal, Clare, docks, ferry, floods, Gilloge, Gillogue, Gully, Hannan, Ireland, John Laird, Killaloe, Limerick, lock, lost, Montpelier, O'Briensbridge, Operations, Plassey, quarry, Rainsford, Shannon, Sheehy, stone, University of Limerick, vessels, waterways
To Limerick City Council offices this evening, where the family of Cecil Mercier, Mill Manager of Bannatyne’s in Limerick and later supervisor of all Ranks mills in Ireland, were handing over his papers to the Limerick City Council Archive.
No photos of the Ranks boats that worked on the Shannon, alas, but perhaps there are some in the archives.
A booklet, Cecil Mercier & the Limerick Rank Mills, was distributed (free): an interesting account of the man and the industry. But it contains this sentence:
At the turn of the twentieth century there were other flour and animal feed mills in and around the city such as the Lock Mills at the junction of the Abbey River and the Grand Canal and the maize mills in Mount Kenneth and Mallow Street.
The canal in Limerick is one of five sections of the Limerick Navigation, and has recently been dubbed the Park Canal. It was not constructed by the Grand Canal Company. It was not owned by the Grand Canal Company. It was not operated by the Grand Canal Company. The only connection between that canal and the Grand Canal is that the Grand Canal Company was permitted to operate its boats on the route and was provided with premises at the canal harbour in Limerick. It put its name on the transhipment canopy, and perhaps that may have given people the mistaken idea that the Grand Canal Company owned the canal. But during the period when the GCC operated its boats, the canal was owned and operated by the Board of Works (Shannon Navigation).
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Operations
Tagged Bannatynes, Board of Works, boats, bridge, canal, Cecil Mercier, Grand Canal, Grand Canal Company, Ireland, Limerick, Limerick City Council, lock, Lock Mills, mill, Office of Public Works, Operations, Park Canal, Ranks, Shannon, Shannon Navigation
Last Saturday, I had just checked that the nineteen members of the Inland Waterways Protection Society, and accompanying walkers from O’Briensbridge Community Group, IWAI Lough Derg Branch and elsewhere, had successfully crossed the Shannon at Plassey, using the University of Limerick’s road-bridge instead of the Black Bridge, which is still closed after last year’s floods.
I was walking back to my car, so that I could drive to meet the group at Gillogue and ensure that they were getting their sandwiches at the Lame Duck, when I was accosted by a woman in a car. It was pouring rain and my dogs were getting impatient, but I listened politely while she asked if I would participate in a survey. “For whom?” I asked. “For Waterways Ireland,” she said. So I thought I’d better play along.
The survey was conducted as she sat in her car, dry, but obstructing the traffic, while I stood outside in the rain, keeping an anxious eye on the dogs. I was not inclined to prolong the time spent answering questions.
Now, I was told recently (after submitting an FOI request) that the towing-path and bridge at Plassey were leased by the Department of Finance to Limerick County Council, so it’s not entirely clear what Waterways Ireland has to do with the current management of that stretch or why it wanted user views. Did the interviewer choose that stretch as a bit of Limerick in which she could see water while staying in her car?
I was asked what I thought of the facilities “toilets and so forth”, and pointed out that there weren’t any. I struggled to convey the fact that, although I was walking before I was accosted, I disliked the activity intensely (especially in the rain) and that, although I visit Plassey several times a year, it is because I am interested in industrial archaeology, not because I want exercise. And there didn’t seem to be a way of conveying that I had organised for about twenty-five other people to walk the towing-path, but that I wasn’t myself participating.
Then I was asked if I had heard of Waterways Ireland and if I knew what they did ….
The 2004 survey is available from WI’s website here. But I wonder whether WI commissioned any surveys between 2004 and 2010 and, if so, where they are to be found.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Operations, Weather
Tagged Black Bridge, bridge, canal, Clare, dogs, floods, Gillogue, Inland Waterways Protection Society, Ireland, IWPS, Lame Duck, Limerick County Council, O'Briensbridge, Operations, Plassey, rain, Shannon, survey, towing-path, walking, water level, waterways, Waterways Ireland
I spent today helping the skipper of a barge to carry a cargo of Guinness by water to Limerick, fifty years after the last Grand Canal Company commercial cargo, which was of Guinness to Limerick. (Actually, my help was minimal, confined mostly to acting as ballast, a role I fill very well, and taking 1,439 photographs.) There will be a ceremony at Dolan’s in Limerick tomorrow at the appropriate time.
Folk in other parts of the country may find it easier to undertake a pilgrimage to Uncle Arthur’s final resting place. Here are links to some maps:
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Non-waterway, Operations, Scenery
Tagged 1759, Ardclough, Arthur Guinness, Arthur's Day, boats, bridge, canal, Dolan's, Grand Canal, Guinness, Ireland, Ireland canals Grand Royal, Limerick, Operations, porter, Shannon, stout, Uncle Arthur, vessels, waterways
I have now completed an examination of the proposals for the reconstruction of a section of the Ulster Canal from Lough Erne to the town of Clones in Co Monaghan. My conclusions are linked from this page, which also contains a brief summary of my views.
Ulster Canal 0: overview presents the main points of the argument in about 3,600 words. It does not contain most of the quotations and omits the references; it also omits some sections of the argument. However, it’s about one fifth of the length of the whole thing.
Ulster Canal 1 to Ulster Canal 10 present the argument under ten headings, amounting to about 18,500 words in all. That may be too much for most people. There are no photos or other illustrations, and most of the argument is about economics or politics.
It will be clear that I do not have full information; I will be glad to have Comments from anyone who can fill the gaps or correct anything I’ve got wrong.
For anyone who can’t wait, here is a copy of the summary of my views.
The Irish government has been pushing, since the 1990s, for the restoration of the Ulster Canal. Several studies have been commissioned; all of them show that the project is uneconomic. At no stage has either the UK or the Northern Ireland administration shown any willingness to commit funding to the project. As a result, the Irish government has scaled back its ambitions, proposing to fund the construction of a canal from Lough Erne to Clones in Co Monaghan: it would cross the border several times, but it would pass through no significant conurbation on the northern side.
However, this scaled-back project makes even less sense than the proposal for full restoration, and there is no reason to believe that the canal will ever get any further than Clones. The Irish government might, I suppose, decide to dig on to Monaghan, as a form of famine relief work, but there is no evidence that the Northern Ireland Executive will ever put money into completing the route to Lough Neagh.
The costs of the proposal have not been reexamined for many years (or, if they have, the results have not been published), and the economic analyses may overstate the likely benefits. Even if they are accurate, though, the main benefits seem to come from casual visitors rather than from boaters. The benefits will go to service providers in the area, rather than to the waterways authority, but even if they went to Waterways Ireland they would not pay the running costs, never mind repaying the capital cost. The project has failed every economic test to which it has been subjected: it simply does not provide the sort of return that would justify the project.
There seems to be some doubt over the source of the proposed funding. The Irish government said that it canal to Clones would be paid for by the Irish Exchequer, but it later said that Waterways Ireland would sell surplus assets to pay some or all of the cost. It is not clear that Waterways Ireland’s surplus assets would, in current economic conditions, bring in enough money; nor is it clear that the Department of Finance is willing to make up any shortfall.
There might be something to be said for acquiring the land and creating a walking and cycling route, but the current proposal for a canal to Clones is utterly unjustifiable and should be dropped.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Operations
Tagged Assembly, Éamon Ó Cuív, Blackwater, boats, bridge, Caledon, canal, Clones, Dáil, Dublin Docklands Development Authority, Erne, Executive, Finn, Good Friday agreement, implementation body, Ireland, lock, lost, Lough Neagh, MLA, Monaghan, Nelson McCausland, North/South Ministerial Council, Northern Ireland Assembly, Operations, Plot 6, Seanad, TD, Ulster Canal, vessels, waterways, Waterways Ireland
Here is the latest (and almost the last) in this series of posts: an examination of the expected benefits of the canal to Clones. My conclusion is that the benefits cited are higher than those likely to arise in current conditions.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish inland waterways vessels, Non-waterway, Operations, Water sports activities
Tagged boats, bridge, British Waterways, canal, Clones, Erne, fungible boats, Ireland, lock, lost, Lough Allen, Lough Neagh, Operations, Quivvy, Shannon, Ulster Canal, vessels, waterways, Waterways Ireland
The figure of €35 million is widely quoted as the cost of the canal to Clones, but the basis for that figure is not clear. Here are some thoughts on the subject.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Operations
Tagged boats, bridge, canal, Clones, Erne, Ireland, jetties, lock, lost, Lough Erne, Lough Neagh, Operations, Ulster Canal, vessels, water level, water supply, Waterways Ireland
The next page of the Ulster Canal series is now up. It is, I’m afraid, rather boring: an account of the various reports (“studies and appraisals”, in the jargon) commissioned since 1994. It may help in sorting out who said what where and when.
Waterways Ireland intends to build a canal to Clones at the instigation of the Irish government. I believe that this proposal is an unjustifiable waste of money, at a time when public expenditure (and especially capital expenditure) is being cut.
This page provides links to a series of pages about aspects of the proposal. At time of writing, there are four pages up; there will be more, concentrating on the economic and financial aspects.
I have had limited access to documents:
Neither the Department of Community, Equality and Gaeltacht Affairs nor Waterways Ireland has answered all the questions I asked them. Accordingly, I may have got some things wrong, and I would welcome correction. I would also welcome copies of confidential documents: this could become WikiLocks.
Posted in Economic activities, Extant waterways, Forgotten navigations, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Non-waterway, Operations
Tagged Blackwater, boats, bridge, Caledon, canal, Clones, Erne, Ireland, Lough Neagh, Lower Bann, Monaghan, Northern Ireland Assembly, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways Ireland
Several ports on the Shannon Navigation have old cranes (or parts thereof), most of them nicely painted. Their age may not be apparent, but it is possible that they date back to the days of the Shannon Commissioners in the 1840s; at least one of them may be even older than that.
This page shows photographs of those cranes I know of, and discusses their possible ages. But there is much that remains unknown, and readers may be able to cast light on some of the mysteries.
Posted in Ashore, Economic activities, Extant waterways, Industrial heritage, Irish waterways general, Operations, shannon estuary, Sources, Steamers, The turf trade
Tagged Ballylongford, Banagher, Bath Street Foundry, Board of Public Works, Board of Works, boats, bridge, canal, Carrick-on-Shannon, Clare, Clarke, Connacht Harbour, Connaught Harbour, Courtney & Stephens, Cow Island, foundry, Grand Canal Company, Haughtons Mills, Ireland, John Grantham, Kerry, Kilgarvan, Killaloe, Kirkland, Leitrim, Limerick, Liverpool, lock, Lough Derg, Mather Dixon, Offaly, Operations, Pete Brown, Portumna, quay, Ringsend, Saleen, Scarriff, Shannon, Shannon Commissioners, Shannon Navigation, Shannonbridge, Tipperary, turf, vessels, waterways, Waterways Ireland, Williamstown
Irish waterways history