-

Waterways and Means by Brian J Goggin available now -
Join 581 other subscribers
RSS links
Pages
- Waterways & past uses
- Saving the nation
- Turf and bog navigations
- The Bog of Allen from the Grand Canal in 1835
- John’s Canal, Castleconnell
- The Canal at the World’s End
- The Finnery River navigation
- The Lough Boora Feeder
- The Little Brosna
- The Lullymore canal as wasn’t
- The Roscrea canals
- The Monivea navigations
- Lacy’s Canal
- The Rockville Navigation page 1
- The Rockville Navigation page 2
- The Rockville Navigation page 3
- Rockingham
- The Colthurst canals
- The Inny navigation
- The lower Shannon
- The piers, quays and harbours of the Shannon Estuary
- Nimmo’s non-existent harbour
- The Doonbeg Ship Canal
- Querrin
- Kilrush and its sector lock
- The Killimer to Tarbert ferry
- The Colleen Bawn at Killimer
- Knock knock. Who’s there?
- Cahircon: not at all boring
- Ringmoylan
- The hidden quay of Latoon
- The stones of Kilteery
- The Maigue
- Sitting on the dock of the Beagh
- Massy’s Quay, Askeaton and the River Deel
- Saleen Pier
- The Lord Lieutenant’s Visit to Limerick — trip down the Shannon [1856]
- The Fergus
- The Limerick Navigation
- The boundaries of the Shannon
- The power of the Shannon
- The locks on the Limerick Navigation
- Plassey
- Worldsend, Castleconnell, Co Limerick
- The bridge at O’Briensbridge
- The Limerick Navigation and the Monmouthshire Canal
- The Limerick Navigation (upper end) in flood November 2009
- The Limerick Navigation (lower end) in flood November 2009
- The Limerick Navigation (tidal section) in flood November 2009
- Floods in Limerick (1850)
- Limerick to Athlone
- The piers, quays and harbours of the Shannon Estuary
- The middle and upper Shannon
- The Grand Canal
- Monasterevan, the Venice of the west
- The Grand Canal lottery
- Grand Canal carrying: some notes
- The dry dock at Sallins
- The Naas Branch
- The Mountmellick Line of the Grand Canal
- Dublin to Ballinasloe by canal
- The Ballinasloe Line
- A Grand Canal lock: Belmont
- South of Moscow, north of Geneva
- Water supply to the Grand Canal
- The Grand Canal Company strike of 1890
- The Royal Canal
- Water supply to the Royal Canal: the feeders
- The Lough Owel feeder
- The proposed Lough Ennell water supply to the Royal Canal
- From Clonsilla to Clew Bay
- Kinnegad and the Royal Canal
- The sinking of the Longford in 1845
- Steamers on the Royal Canal
- Leech of Killucan: horse-drawn boats on the Royal
- Horses on board
- Royal eggs
- Prothero on the Royal
- The whore who held the mortgage on the Royal Canal
- Waterways in Dublin
- The Naller
- Visit Dublin. Walk canals. Drink beer.
- The Broadstone Line of the Royal Canal
- Effin Bridge: its predecessors
- Between the waters
- The abandoned Main Line of the Grand Canal 1
- The abandoned Main Line of the Grand Canal 2
- The abandoned Main Line of the Grand Canal 3
- The abandoned Main Line of the Grand Canal 4
- Waterways of the south-east
- Waterways of Cork and Kerry
- Waterways of the west
- Waterways of Ulster and thereabouts
- People
- Systems & artefacts
- Irish waterways furniture
- Irish waterways operations
- Miscellaneous articles
- Irish inland waterways vessels
- Cots -v- barges: defining Irish waterways
- Waterways Ireland workboats
- Wooden boats on Irish inland waterways
- Traditional boats and replicas
- Non-WI workboats
- Older Irish working boats
- The barge at Plassey
- Dublin, Athlone and Limerick
- Waterford to New Ross by steam
- The steamer Cupid
- Liffey barges 1832
- Steam on the Grand Canal
- The Mystery of the Sunken Barge
- Steam on the Newry Canal
- Guinness Liffey barges 1902
- Up and under: PS Garryowen in 1840
- Watson’s Double Canal Boat
- The Cammoge ferry-boat
- The ’98 barge
- Late C19 Grand Canal Company trade boats
- Chain haulage
- Ballymurtagh
- The Aaron Manby and the Shannon
- A sunken boat in the Shannon
- Sailing boats on Irish inland waterways
- Some boats that are … different
- Square sail
- 4B mooring
- Irish waterways scenery
- Engineering and construction
- Irish navigation authorities
- Opinion
- The folly of restoration
- The Ulster Canal now
- The Ulster Canal 00: overview
- The Ulster Canal 01: background
- The Ulster Canal 02: the southern strategic priority
- The Ulster Canal 03: implementation
- The Ulster Canal 04: Ulster says no
- The Ulster Canal 05: studies and appraisals
- The Ulster Canal 06: the costs
- The Ulster Canal 07: the supposed benefits
- The Ulster Canal 08: the funding
- The Ulster Canal 09: affordability
- The Ulster Canal 10: kill it now
- The Ulster Canal 11: some information from Waterways Ireland (and the budget)
- The Ulster Canal 12: departmental bullshit
- The Ulster Canal 13: an investment opportunity?
- The Ulster Canal 14: my search for truth
- The Ulster Canal 15: spinning in the grave
- The Ulster Canal 16: looking for a stake
- The Ulster Canal 17: the official position in November 2011
- The Ulster Canal 18: Sinn Féin’s canal?
- The Ulster Canal 19: update to February 2012
- The Ulster Canal 20: update to April 2013
- The Ulster Canal 21: update to August 2018
- The Barrow
- A bonfire at Collins Barracks
- Living on the canals
- Waterways tourism
- Guano
- The Park Canal: why it should not be restored
- The Park Canal 01: it says in the papers
- The Park Canal 02: local government
- The Park Canal 03: sinking the waterbus
- The Park Canal 04: the Limerick weir
- The Park Canal 05: cruisers from the Royal Canal
- The Park Canal 06: What is to be done? (V I Lenin)
- The Park Canal 07: another, er, exciting proposal
- Accounting for risk
- Tax-dodging boat-owners
- Rail
- Waterways & past uses
Blogroll
boats
- Canal steamers [UK]
- Chris Deuchar's boating page
- Douglas Self retrotech and steam
- Grace's Guide: British Industrial History
- Heritage Boat Association
- Historic Inland Working Boats
- Irish maritime history
- irish shipwrecks database
- Kilrush & District Historical Society
- Lough Corrib charts and scans
- Railway and Canal Historical Society
Book sales
Industrial heritage
Inland waterways
Ireland
Overseas
Seafaring
Sources
Tag Archives: Ireland
Mathew Bridge
Posted in Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Ireland, Irish inland waterways vessels, Operations, Safety, Shannon, Water sports activities, waterways, Waterways management
Tagged Athlunkard, boats, bridge, Ireland, Limerick, Mathew Bridge, Operations, rescue, Shannon, vessels, waterways, Waterways Ireland
Clobber
Clothing
The action of paddling keeps you warm above the waist and the canoe and spray cover keep you warm below the waist, so that heavy clothing is rarely necessary when canoeing, whatever the time of year. For normal purposes all that is necessary is a shirt and shorts and a pair of light rubber or string-soled shoes or sandals.
Carry warmer clothing in a waterproof bag to put on when you go ashore.
For windy weather a hooded ‘Anorak’ is useful (Fig 41).
For wet weather wear a sou’wester and an oilskin or plastic jacket (and trousers for going ashore). If you wear gum boots when you are ashore TAKE THEM OFF before getting into your canoe.
That’s from Know the Game: Boating: rowing, canoeing, punting published by Educational Productions Limited of East Ardsley, Wakefield, Yorkshire in 1960.
Its cover has a drawing of three chaps: one is canoeing, clad as recommended in shorts and shirt; one is punting; the third is sculling, and he has a passenger, a young lady wearing a (below the knee) frock who is steering the boat using the rudder lines. Apart from the cover, none of the book’s 86 illustrations shows a female.
O tempora, O mores! Buoyancy aids, helmets and fluorescent clothing are now required, as shown in the pics on the Shannon Blueways site. [Incidentally, if there’s a link to that site from the Waterways Ireland site, I was unable to find it.] I’m all in favour of safety, but I wonder whether the amount of extraneous kit and clobber needed to go boating nowadays is a deterrent to potential newcomers.
Hard sums on Lough Derg
According to the Clare Champion, a Clare county councillor called Pat Hayes, who is a member of Fianna Fáil [an excitable lot, Fianna Fáil], is boycotting something or other for some reason that is not clear to me [and, to be honest, is probably entirely unimportant]. Mr Hayes thinks that water from Lough Derg should be sent to the Atlantic, where it is wasted, rather than to Dublin, where it might be used, and the newspaper cites the River Shannon Protection Alliance as estimating that
… up to 350 million litres of water could be taken from Lough Derg by 2030.
The River Shannon Protection Alliance itself doesn’t agree with those figures. It says:
The central principal and immediate purpose of the organisation is to prevent the proposal of Dublin City Council to abstract in excess of 350 million litres of water on a daily basis from Lough Ree on the river Shannon, and to oppose any action that may be harmful to the well being of the river Shannon system. Since then, the abstraction options have been considered and the current recommended proposal is to abstract upwards 500 million litres of water from Lough Derg and store it in a depleted bog hole to be developed by Bord na Móna at Garryhinch bog, (near Portarlington) where the water will then be treated and pumped on to Dublin.
Eek. That’s a bignum: a lot of litres. Let’s all panic.
On the other hand, 500 000 000 litres is 500 000 cubic metres. Each of Ardnacrusha’s four turbines uses 100 cubic metres per second. So the amount of water to be sent to Dublin every day is less than Ardnacrusha uses in 21 minutes.
If the Alliance wants to save the Shannon, shouldn’t it be trying to get Ardnacrusha closed down first?
Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Canals, Drainage, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Natural heritage, Operations, People, Politics, Sea, Shannon, Sources, waterways, Waterways management
Tagged Ardnacrusha, Dublin, ESB, Ireland, irish water, Lough Derg, Operations, River Shannon Protection Alliance, Shannon, water level, waterways
Please don’t look at these photos
I regret to say that I have published, on these pages, several photos of the Shannon, Parteen Villa Weir, Ardnacrusha hydroelectric power station and its headrace and tailrace canals.
The storage basin between the road bridge over the River Shannon at Killaloe and the weir and canal intake at Parteen, including the right and left embankments constructed to form the said storage basin, together with the land outside and along the said right embankment delimited and separated from the adjoining land by post and wire fencing and also the land outside and, along the said left embankment delimited by the left bank of the Kilmastulla River Diversion.
The weir and canal intake, the embankments constructed to form abutments to the said intakes, the syphon under the said canal intake, and adjoining lands inside and bounded by post and wire fencing.
The head race between the canal intake and the power station including the right and left embankments constructed to form the said head race, together with the land outside and along the said embankments delimited and separated from the adjoining land by post and wire fencing, and also the road bridges over and the syphons and culverts under the said race.
The power station, the intake to the said power station, the locks and all adjoining buildings and land within the area around the said power station, all of which are delimited and separated from the adjoining land by post and wire fencing.
The tail race from the power station to the River Shannon, the branch railway running along the said tail race, and the land on either side of the said tail race, all of which are delimited and separated from the adjoining land by post and wire fencing.
And I have lots more photos … here and here and here, which I ask readers not to look at either.
You see the thing is, Your Honour, Sir, I didn’t know. I didn’t realise that, under Statutory Instrument 73 of 1935 Shannon Electricity Works (Declaration of Prohibited Place) Order 1935, the places as described are prohibited places under paragraph (d) of Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act 1911, as amended by the Official Secrets Act 1920, and as adapted by or under the Adaptation of Enactments Act 1922 (No 2 of 1922). That’s because
information with respect thereto, or the destruction or obstruction thereof, or interference therewith, would be useful to an enemy.
Apparently, under those acts, giving anyone information about a prohibited place is a felony, punishable by imprisonment for up to fourteen years.
Wikipedia says that, in Ireland, those acts were repealed by the Official Secrets Act 1963, but was the statutory instrument repealed? I don’t know, but I’ve written to the Department of Justice to ask.
In the meantime, please don’t look at the photos, especially if you’re a Foreign Agent: a term that, under the 1963 act,
includes any person who is or has been or is reasonably suspected of being or having been employed by a foreign power either directly or indirectly for the purpose of committing an act (whether within or outside the State) prejudicial to the safety or preservation of the State, or who has or is reasonably suspected of having (whether within or outside the State) committed or attempted to commit any such act.
I wonder whether that includes the European Central Bank.
Posted in Ashore, Built heritage, Canals, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Industrial heritage, Ireland, Non-waterway, Operations, People, Politics, Rail, Safety, Shannon, Sources, Waterways management
Tagged Ardnacrusha, boats, bridge, canal, ESB, foreign agents, Ireland, Killaloe, Limerick, lock, Lough Derg, Official Secrets Act, Operations, Parteen Villa Weir, Shannon, spies, Waterways Ireland
Bloody Fianna Fáil …
… obviously didn’t get the memo. [They didn’t get the marriage equality memo either, thus losing one of their better people — who needs to update the banner under her photos.] But a nos moutons ….
According to Northern Sound, Monaghan County Council wants the Monaghan Minister for Fairytales, Heather Humphreys, to meet her Northern Ireland counterpart, the Minister for Marching Bands [and boxing clubs, football stadiums and various other things about which MLAs ask questions: they’re as bad as TDs], to do something about the Clones Sheugh.
I suspect this means that FF, and perhaps the citizens of Monaghan, have realised that, despite the Momentous Day on the Ulster Canal [oops: sorry; not that one, this one], the Clones Sheugh has been hijacked by Co Cavan and is not actually going to reach Co Monaghan in the foreseeable future [which means until the next round of election promises].
As far as I can see, the deal was that Sinn Féin would shut up about the Sheugh provided that they got photos of activity before the UKoGB&NI general election. By nicking the money from other navigations in WI’s budget, the Minister for Fairytales was able to deliver the photos. And, as far as Google Alerts can tell, there hasn’t been a word about the Sheugh from the Shinners, north or south, since then. Of course I could be wrong about the deal and, if both departments will send me their full files on the subject, I’ll be happy to use that evidence to correct the story.
Now, though, a Fianna Fáil councillor in Monaghan has
… put forward the motion requesting the Ministers to meet to advance the project and asking Sinn Féin and Fine Gael members of the council to arrange the meeting urgently.
I don’t suppose he’d be trying to embarrass the parties that made the deal, would he? [If they did make a deal, of course, which they may not have, but we won’t know until the departments send on their files.]
SF has 7 members on Monaghan County Council, FG 5, FF 4 and there are two non-party members.
Speaking of parties, or their aftermath, a thought struck me:
Posted in Built heritage, Canals, Economic activities, Engineering and construction, Extant waterways, Foreign parts, Industrial heritage, Ireland, People, Politics, Restoration and rebuilding, Tourism, Ulster Canal, waterways, Waterways management
Tagged bridge, canal, Carál Ní Chuilín, Clones, Clones sheugh, department of arts heritage and the gaeltacht, Erne, Heather Humphreys, Ireland, Lough Neagh, Minister for Fairytales, Minister for Marching Bands, Monaghan, Operations, Saunderson's Sheugh, Ulster Canal, Waterways Ireland
Big it up for the OSI
I don’t know whether there is any official award scheme for contributions to historical research but, if there is, I reckon Ordnance Survey Ireland should get one. By making available, free, online versions of the OSI 6″ [~1840s] and 25″ [~1900] maps, they have provided amateur historians with an invaluable resource.
Using their public viewer, you can go to somewhere like Lecarrow, on Lough Ree, and look at what it was like before the Famine, around the start of the twentieth century or, using the Ortho options, in 1995, 2000 and 2005. As well, of course, as a bang-up-to-date map of Lecarrow today.
The most recent map was updated recently and the site fell over altogether for a while, then operated without the historical maps for another while. I suspect that I wasn’t the only person to realise, while it was down, how valuable the site was (and how far superior, at least for historical study, to the godawful Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland version).
So big it up for Ordnance Survey Ireland: delighted it’s back up again.
Archives strategy
If you boogie on over to the National Archives of Ireland website, you can download a copy of its Strategic Plan 2015–2017 [PDF], whereof the NAI says:
The National Archives’ Strategic Plan 2015 – 2017 outlines the challenges and priorities for us as an organisation. In it, we have identified the key areas we wish to develop, grounded in our vision, mission and values.
Well, yes, I suppose that is so. The thing is, though, that the Plan as published has only six pages, of which the first is a cover page and the last has the Vision, Mission, Values and Strategic Priorities set out in boxes. There are only four pages of meat.
So, although the Vision, Mission, Values and Strategic Priorities are present as advertised, there’s very little else. Using Rumelt’s three-part kernel structure as a model, we find that the NAI’s published strategic plan
- lacks diagnosis
- does have a guiding policy
- has no action plans.
Perhaps the NAI has a lengthier document that, for diplomatic reasons, it is keeping out of public view.
Diagnosis
There is a sad little paragraph on the second page:
We are progressing these responsibilities in a time of restrained financial resources and significant reductions in staffing. We are operating with only 75% of our sanctioned numbers and this is a major obstacle to meeting our statutory requirements with regard to accepting annual accessions, dealing with backlogs and providing services to government bodies. There are technical and legislative changes being progressed which will directly impact on our role and function as they relate to the records of government. The ubiquity of digital information requires earlier intervention in the approach to current records management. Collectively these present huge challenges for us in meeting our obligations and in trying to deliver existing and develop enhanced services.
I’m sure all of that is true, but — apart from the “sanctioned numbers”, which may or may not be relevant to the required workload — there is nothing to enable the concerned citizen [the singular citizen mentioned on the third page] to grasp the scale of the problems.
I have been told [but have no evidence] that there are unopened boxes or archival material that the NAI hasn’t got the staff to deal with [but if that’s not so, please leave a Comment so that I can correct this]. I can see that the amount of material made available on tinterweb is very small. And I can guess that there is difficulty in coping with public sector record management, not just because of “the ubiquity of digital information” but because some departments may not write everything down lest they have to release it under Freedom of Information legislation. But in these and other areas of activity it would be nice to have some figures to go on.
For diagnosis, then, the plan does very little to inform the concerned citizen.
Action plans
There aren’t any. There are no targets, goals, aims, performance measures, milestones … and no concrete plans for reaching, meeting, achieving or otherwise carrying them out.
What we get instead is a list of “five key strategic priorities”. Priority 1 is
Develop a secure footing for the National Archives
but
Priority 1 is foundational in that it directly addresses physical and staffing resources and the overarching legislative framework in which we operate. Priority 1 is also directly related to external factors with which the National Archives has limited influence. The inability to deliver on priority 1 will impact upon our core functions.
I don’t like that. If there is something you can do little or nothing about, it shouldn’t be in your strategic plan: it should be in your letter to Santa or your when-I-win-the-lottery wishlist.
Nor do I like the use of the verb “develop”, which is in three of the five strategic priorities, with the equally weak “improve” in a fourth:
- Develop a secure footing
- Improve the visibility and accessibility of our services
- Transition to digital
- Develop our people
- Develop collaboration.
They, and most of the other verbs used in the text, are all about making unquantified changes but not about reaching goals. What’s lacking is any sense that the organisation knows exactly what needs to be done to bring itself to some defined state [which might be that of coping fully with its legal obligations or handling some quantity of material or serving some number of clients or …]. I want some specific targets and some hard-nosed verbs about how they’re to be met.
I’m sure, for instance, that it’s nice to
… provide all staff with opportunities for professional development …
but I’d be more interested in knowing what capabilities the organisation lacks and how it proposes to acquire them.
I’m generally on the side of the poor buggers in public service bodies who have to cope with the contradictory demands and short-term agendas of nitwitted politicians, and it seems to me that the NAI is probably suffering from both of those. But I would be more reassured by a more detailed strategy, with achievable targets and concrete plans for reaching them, than I am by the short document made available to the public. I hope that some longer, more explicit version has been developed for use by NAI management.
















