Tag Archives: waterways

The agency model

I have been told that, until recent years, travel agents in Germany and elsewhere would buy packages of weeks on Irish hire-boatsa and then sell them on to their own clients. I have also been told that this “agency model” ceased to be used [or became less used], perhaps because of the growth of internet booking. And it has been suggested that this was one of the factors in the decline of the Shannon hire-boat trade, to which I have repeatedly drawn attention [most recently here].

I do not know whether this phenomenon has been documented or formally studied. If it has, I would be grateful if any reader can point me to the documents or studies. I would also welcome other Comments on the proposition.

Packaging and marketing

I mention it now because, when launching the Shannon Blueway project, the waterways minister Heather Humphreys said:

The launch of the Blueway will allow local businesses [to] capitalise on an increase in demand for transport, equipment hire, accommodation and entertainment.

I think that the Blueway is an excellent idea, but I am concerned about whether small local companies will be able to package and market it effectively to overseas tourists. If the long-established cruiser-hire-firms were or are finding effective marketing difficult, why would (say) a canoe- or bicycle-hire-firm in Drumshanbo find it any easier?

Marketing to anglers

There was an interesting discussion at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport and Communications about “Depletion of Inland Fish Stocks and Impact of Estuary Poaching: Inland Fisheries Ireland” on 22 October 2014. Note in particular the contributions of Dr Ciaran Byrne from 10:25 onwards about how Inland Fisheries Ireland markets Irish angling to overseas anglers.

What struck me was not that IFI uses any particularly magical marketing methods but that it is dealing with a well-defined interest group: people who are committed to a particular activity and have invested heavily in it (buying rods and stools and nets and umbrellas and maggots and whatever else anglers use).

Identifying potential customers

Anglers form one segment of the market for inland waterways holidays, but the task of selling to other segments is harder if they lack a single compelling interest. Hence, no doubt, those rather demented attempts by Fáilte Ireland or Tourism Ireland to categorise potential customers as ‘Sightseers and Culture Seekers’, ‘Family & Loved Ones’, ‘Relaxers’ and ‘Outdoor Actives’. None of their interests strikes me as being exactly compelling: there are several countries where you can relax, engage in outdoor activities or look at sights.

What you really need is obsessive customers: folk, with money to spare, who are really interested in one thing. Then you entice them to your area and take their money from them: not, as Brian Ború would have done, by hitting them over the head and stealing it, but by selling them overpriced goods and services.

Lough Derg

If you don’t have obsessive customers, who are compelled by their inner urges to dangle maggots in your waters (or whatever else turns them on), then you might try offering a compelling attraction: something that is so interesting that folk put it on their to-do lists. Unfortunately, as Fáilte Ireland’s Lakelands Lough Derg Roadmap [PDF, 6.7MB; well worth reading] admits,

Lough Derg does not have suffient key attractions that act as a draw to the area.

The same thought has often struck me. As you drive around the lake, you see signs pointing towards it. But suppose you’re a casual tourist who hasn’t already booked an activity. When you get to the lake, about the only thing you can do is look at the water (which becomes less interesting after a while) or at the jolly people enjoying themselves on boats (ditto).

You can, in some places, go to a pub or eatery, but you don’t need to come to Ireland to do that. Or you can paddle. If you fish, you can fish, but I’m trying to think of things for non-anglers. In Killaloe, you can take a boat trip; in Dromineer, you can hire a sailing boat; in Mountshannon, you can visit Holy Island. But there is nothing you would come to Ireland for: nothing you can’t do in other places.

Roadmap remedies

The Roadmap proposes these remedies:

The following three key tourism products are proposed:

  • A Discovery Point and Trailhead at the Portroe lookout
  • A Lough Derg Canoe/Kayak trail
  • An enhanced offering and facilities at University of Limerick Activities Centre (ULAC).

Two additional tourism products are proposed:

  • Portumna eco-park (masterplanning required)
  • Publications to promote and support active enjoyment of Lough Derg and surrounds.

There is, alas, another set of categories of potential visitors:

The three market segments identified with the best potential for delivering international visitors to Lough Derg have been identified as Curiously Cultural, Great Escapers and Nature Lovers.

Other, less exploitable, market segments are identified too, but I can’t bring myself even to name them.

Finding the punters

I’d hate it to be thought that I was a marketing expert, but it seems to me that this segmentalisation is coming at things from the wrong end. In effect, it’s saying “We have these things; what sort of person might be induced to buy them?” Then you give each of those sorts of person a category and say that you’ve found your market.

But compare that with what the fisheries folk do. They can identify magazines that anglers read, maybe (for aught I know) television programmes they watch, trade shows they visit. Identification is easy: the titles will include words like “fishing” or “angling”.

But what magazines — other than those on the top shelf — have “Curiously Cultural” or “Nature Lovers” in the title? How do you track down “Great Escapers”? It seems to me that these categories might help you to tailor a message that is broadcast to large audiences through mass media: in such cases it doesn’t matter if you appeal to only 1% of the audience, provided that that audience is large enough. However, that’s not an option available to those with small budgets: they need cheaper marketing through channels that will provide much higher returns.

Small operators

And that’s where we come back to the fact that most of the potential tourism operators around Lough Derg are pretty small. Who is going to put together packages of activities that will appeal to the curiously cultural? I’m interested only in filling my B&B and you’re interested in hiring out bicycles. I’m happy to refer customers to you and vice versa, but are we going to get together to provide packages and to share our marketing budgets? There is a Lough Derg Marketing and Strategy Group, but it seems to be dominated by representatives of public sector bodies, and there is a limit to what they can do.

To compete on a European scale, what’s really needed is a large commercial organisation. I suggest, therefore, that the best thing to do would be to get Goldman Sachs to advise on how Lough Derg might be privatised.

Second-best would be the formation of a tourism cooperative.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Royal Canal water supply

On 26 November 2012 I noted that

The Royal Canal water supply applications have been approved by An Bord Pleanala. There were two separate applications […] but they were in effect treated as one.

There were conditions attached, but I concluded that

If I remember correctly, the amount of water available from Lough Ennell will not always provide enough (eg in a dry season) to keep the canal full. Still, this is a significant advance for Waterways Ireland and for Royal Canal enthusiasts.

So here we are, almost two years later, and the work of providing a supply from Lough Ennell to the Royal Canal, reckoned to be about a five-month job, has doubtless been long completed, no?

No.

The work has not yet started and Waterways Ireland will be lucky if it gets done within the next year.

As I understand it — and if, Gentle Reader, you have more information, do please leave a Comment below (your name can be kept out of public view if you like) — there are three sources of delay:

  • first, I understand that there is a technical issue about one of the conditions attached to the approval; it is felt that the condition is unworkable, but that getting it changed might take some time. I presume it’s one of the conditions 2(a) to 2(d) that I quoted two years ago and, looking at the proposed orders published in the press [PDF], I suspect it might be the requirement to maintain the lake level at or above 79.325 mOD Malin Datum. However, I don’t really know
  • second, Waterways Ireland took over Clonsingle Weir, at the outlet from Lough Ennell, by Compulsory Purchase. Owners of mills, who generate electricity from the Brosna, have submitted claims for compensation. I understand that an arbitration hearing, lasting four days, is scheduled to be help in May 2015
  • third, responsibility for the scheme has moved from Westmeath County Council to Irish Water. Which may have other things on its mind.

Irish Water has published its proposed Capital Investment Programme [PDF] but Appendix 1, the Investment Plan Project Summary, is in a separate file [PDF]. Category B is headed Review Scope and Commence Construction and it includes

Mullingar Regional Water Supply Scheme (G) … Lough Ennell Abstraction.

I can’t work out what “(G)” means. A few items are so marked; a few others are marked “(H)”; most items have neither.

The Capital Investment Programme [CIP] document says:

 The CIP is dominated by contractual commitments entered into previously by Local Authorities, and which have now transitioned to Irish Water. In the 2014-2016 period, Irish Water will fund these contracts to completion and bring forward programmes and prioritised projects to commence. At the same time, it will progress a large portfolio of projects that are at the planning and design stage, reviewing their scope, budgets and, where appropriate, timing to favour maximising the performance of the existing assets through intensified capital maintenance that might allow deferral of major capital investment.

Emphasis mine. So that raises the possibility that Irish Water will decide not to fund the abstraction scheme but will rather opt to pay for continued pumping.

It is, of course, quite possible that I have misunderstood these difficult matters, so I will be glad to hear from anyone with better information.

Incidentally, reviewing Irish Water’s documents suggests to me that there are people there who know what they are doing and who have the expertise to manage large and complex operations. That differentiates them from the politicians in government and opposition, few of whom (as far as I can see) have any experience of running anything more complex than a parish social.

 

 

DCAL

What is the top priority of the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure?

Is it to promote culture?

No.

To promote the arts?

No.

To promote leisure?

No.

It is

… to promote social and economic equality and tackle poverty and social exclusion.

Ne sutor ultra crepidam?

 

Airholes

My attention was recently drawn to an article [PDF] by Mike Clarke about airholes.

The article is in Clogs and Gansey, the newsletter of the Leeds & Liverpool Canal Society, of which Mike is Founder and President. He is an extraordinarily knowledgeable person and it is well worth while looking around his website: for instance, there’s some material of Irish interest here, a list of publications here and material about the Leeds & Liverpool Canal here including a really excellent document about locks [PDF].

But back to the airholes.

Not being an engineer, or at all technically competent, I’m always reluctant to try explaining these mysteries, so I’ll welcome corrective Comments from any more technically-minded folk.

Water levels

If the water level on the upstream side of a lock gate is higher than that on the lower, the gate will be difficult to open. If the gate is the tail gate [bottom or lower gate] of a lock, you can raise a rack [paddle] and allow water to flow from the upstream side, which is the chamber of the lock, to the downstream side, thus making a level and allowing the gate to be opened easily.

If the gate is the breast gate [head or upper gate] of a lock, the same applies: you can lift a rack [paddle] in the upper gate, allowing the excess water to flow into the lock chamber.

However, the relationship between the heights of the two gates (or pairs of gates) then becomes important: if the breast gates are higher than the tail gates, the water level in the lock chamber will not be able to reach the height of the water above the lock (at least until you’ve drained down the entire level [pound] back to the next lock upstream).

But for efficient operation, you want to reduce the amount of adjustment that has to be done after the boat reaches the lock but before it can enter the lock chamber. You want a system that is, as far as possible, automatically self-adjusting. That means, in particular, one that ensures that the level of water above the lock is not too high.

Byewashes

On many English canals, that is done by using byewashes.

Byewash on the Huddersfield Narrow Canal (E) at Marsden

Byewash on the Huddersfield Narrow Canal (E) at Marsden

As far as I know, though, few Irish canal locks have them, and I have heard British boaters comment on their absence. If memory serves, the canal (Leitrim) end of the Shannon–Erne Waterway does, but I have no suitable photo. I should confess that I have no idea what proportion of Irish and English canal locks are so equipped; I will be glad if anyone who can supply, or point to, the information will leave a Comment below.

Airholes

Mike Clarke’s PDF article, to which I pointed at the top of this page, provides a possible explanation for the absence of byewashes on Irish canals. He says that airholes were used instead on canals “built or influenced” by William Jessop. Jessop worked on the Grand Canal as assistant to John Smeaton from 1773 and was consultant engineer to the Grand Canal Company until 1802 [Ruth Delany The Grand Canal of Ireland David & Charles, Newton Abbot 1973].

Mike Clarke also says that Jessop trained John Killaly: Killaly joined the Grand Canal Company in 1794 and became its engineer in 1798 [Delany op cit]; furthermore, his designs were used on the Royal Canal from Coolnahay to the Shannon [Ruth Delany and Ian Bath Ireland’s Royal Canal 1789–2009 The Lilliput Press, Dublin 2010].

If I’ve understood Mike Clarke’s article correctly, the airhole system uses the channel for the ground paddle [land rack] sluice instead of building a separate byewash channel. From his photograph, I gather that there is a separate letterbox-like slot in the recess for the rack mechanism: I presume that excess water flows in through the slot, falls to the level of the sluice or channel from there to the lock chamber and thus flows into the chamber. If the tail [lower] gates are left open, or with one rack [paddle] lifted, the water can then flow out into the lower level.

Questions about Irish locks

Is my understanding correct?

What proportion of locks on each Irish waterway are equipped with airholes?

Are they still maintained and used?

Belmont Lock May 2009 IHAI 5_resize

Land rack [ground paddle] outlet, Belmont Lock, Grand Canal

Royal Lock 43 Killashee 18-02-2007 01_resize

Ground paddle [land rack] outlet, Lock 43 Killashee, Royal Canal

Royal Lock 6 02_resize

Possible inlet, Lock 6, Royal Canal

The next three photos were taken at Coolnahay, on the Royal Canal, during the period of very low water levels in 2012.

Coolnahay in drought April 2012 08_resize

Letterbox-like slot at Lock 26, Coolnahay, Royal Canal. I must look for similar features on Grand Canal locks and photograph them (if they exist)

Coolnahay in drought April 2012 19_resize

A second slot forward of the first (hidden by the land rack mechanism in the previous photo)

Land rack locked open at Lock 35_resize

Land rack mechanism locked slightly open: the slots were well above the water level at the time

It is of course entirely possible that all of this is so obvious that everybody else already knows all about it, but that I just didn’t understand what I was looking at. I read WI’s Heritage Survey of the Royal Canal [PDF], but it didn’t say anything about this sort of thing: or at least if it did I didn’t spot it. The report uses some non-standard terminology [eg “head gates”] so I may have missed its identification of the canal’s water-management features.

If, Gentle Reader, you know of the existence of papers or other published materials on these arcana, do please leave a Comment and, if possible, relevant links to online sources. It seems to me that there is a shortage of information about these technical matters as they apply to Irish waterways; it would also be nice if we were able to say which technologies were applied when to which waterways. I do not know whether, for example, we can assume that the lock gate designs in use today were always used on all Irish waterways.

Pumps and crisps

Thanks to Colin Becker, I have updated this page to show the location of the ESB’s third pumping station between Meelick and Portumna: I had known only where two of them were.

I have also added to the page some rude remarks about the ESB’s policy of not revealing the clearance of their cables above navigable waterways. If, dear reader, you know of a change in the policy, or if you can effect such a change, or if you know the clearances, do please let me know by leaving a Comment.

 

DCAL and water recreation

Noting that the NI Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure [DCAL] has a Water Recreation Development Programme, I emailed the department to find out more:

I would be grateful if you could let me have a copy of your 2013-14 Inland Waterways Water Recreation Development Programme and of any subsequent equivalent programmes, policies or documents. I have been unable to find anything on your website.

I am grateful for the reply, which read:

[…] we wish to advise you that we do not have a formal Water Recreation Development Programme document. How the Water Recreation Development Programme is operated is that we apply each year for capital funding. If successful, we then go out to local authorities seeking to work in partnership with them and other public bodies to co or match fund appropriate and inclusive capital projects. Such projects should provide water related access: for example riverside paths, canoe steps or other similar facilities on public owned land which is free for the public to access and use.

The process we follow is when we receive details of the projects from local authorities we complete an assessment of the project taking into account the following criteria

  1. Does the project provide water access
  2. Are there funding or delivery partners
  3. How the project links to the community
  4. How will the project be maintained in the future
  5. Does it enhance or improve disability access
  6. How does it promote social inclusion.

If DCAL is content that these criteria are met we would then consider funding for the project.

During the 13/14 year we had a capital fund and we were able to support six projects; however due to budget constraints we do not have a capital fund this year 14/15.

The Water Recreation Development Programme appears to be distinct from the Water Recreation Programme covered here and to apply to waterways other than those managed by Waterways Ireland.

This site has what purports to be the department’s business plan for 2013–4. I expected to find it here on the DCAL site but that page seems not to have been updated for some years. If anyone can point me to a link on the DCAL site, I would be grateful for guidance.

I cannot, therefore, be certain that the purported plan is actually DCAL’s plan, but I quote it anyway.

DCAL Inland Waterways

In partnership with local authorities and the voluntary and community sector, DCAL continued to manage canal towpaths in 2012-13. In addition, under the Inland Waterways Water Recreation Development Programme, in conjunction with local councils the Department grant aided 6 projects which included a canoe slalom, interpretative signage and the installation of an outdoor exercise ‘Trim Trail’. These facilities are free for everyone to use and it is a stipulation of the Programme that projects address social exclusion. The Water Recreation Programme is continuing in 2013-14. Funding was also made available to the Lough Neagh Partnership to engage with local rural communities around the lough to explore how they could develop the cultural and leisure tourist potential of the Lough.

In 2013-14, key challenges include work towards registration of assets on the Lagan Canal and investigations into the provision of a safe system of navigation markers for Lough Neagh. DCAL will also be considering the outcomes of a study into the potential for re-opening the former Lagan Navigation.

DCAL’s target for y/e 31 March 2014 was:

By 31 March 2014, to fund at least 5 water recreation projects which provide accessible opportunities for all and target those experiencing poverty and social exclusion.

Its “opening allocations” for 2013–4 were:

  • Inland Fisheries and Waterways: current £5.87m, capital £0.17m
  • North/South Body – Waterways Ireland: current £5.42m, capital £0.25m.

 

Before Ardnacrusha

Waterworks sluices 06_resize

 

The power of the Shannon, falling 100 feet in 15 miles from Killaloe to Limerick, is nowadays tapped by the hydroelectric power station at Ardnacrusha. But in earlier times it did not go entirely unused. I have already written about the bleach mill at Doonass; here is a page about the other bleach mill, at Clareville, and about the water works in the same area. These works are on a stretch of the Shannon navigable only by cots (then) and kayaks and canoes (now).

 

Carpenters Road Lock in London

Carpenters Road Lock in 2003

Carpenters Road Lock in 2003

Here is a page about an art (craft?) project happening at Carpenters Road Lock on the Bow Back Rivers in London: the lock has changed quite a bit since I took the photo (above) in 2003.

I should warn you that the link is to a very long web page, but the section headings stay on top so you can move around. However, if you allow Javascript, you’ll find that two places on the page show those very annoying sequences of photographs that change automatically.

What I thought was most interesting was the set of events organised at the lock. Canals of Dublin organises canal walks in, er, Dublin, but what about Waterways Ireland having lockkeepers doing talks and demonstrations?

Here are some links to sites with more information about the Bow Back Rivers in London:

London Canals and associated blog

An extensive Wikipedia article with schematic diagram

A political view from Mick Hartley

London’s Lost Rivers on pre-Olympic scenery (black background makes the text hard to read but the photos are good)

The most informative page I found: a superb piece of work. Well done Richard Thomas, to whose Steamers Historical site I have a permanent link.

h/t celr

The Slaney cot: photos

I wrote here about a Slaney cot, built by Larry Duggan, which we had spotted on its way to Wales. The owner has very kindly sent some more photos of the cot’s construction, of Larry Duggan and of the cot on the Usk; I have put them on a separate page here.

Longford

Longford is a town about five miles from Clondra, the junction of the Royal Canal with the River Shannon near Tarmonbarry.

Some of the local cargo-cultists seem to believe that, if the Longford branch of the Royal Canal is restored, fleets of vessels (probably from Limerick) will bring untold prosperity to the town. And the unfortunates of Waterways Ireland have been told to produce a feasibility study on the matter. According to the minister for waterways, the study will be available on the Waterways Ireland at the end of October.

Irrespective of whether the restoration is feasible, the question is whether it would be sensible. I see two possibilities:

(a) some of the thousands of vessels already using the Royal Canal will be attracted to Longford, where the attractions of the night-life will entice them to spend more money than they would otherwise have spent in, say, Clondra. If they don’t spend more than they would otherwise have spent, the spending is simply displaced from one place (eg Clondra) to another (Longford). If that is so, it might be worth the while of the publicans of Longford to pay for the restoration, because they will benefit from it, but there is no benefit to the taxpayer in paying for it because the spending is simply moved from one place to another

(b) the attractions of Longford are so great that thousands of visitors who would not otherwise have visited the Royal Canal will now do so. Again, the displacement argument applies, so these thousands of visitors must come from overseas, attracted by the reputation of Longford for metropolitan sophistication. Or something. Now, if that reputation were enough to attract overseas tourists, they would already be visiting Longford in their droves. Are they?

I am sure that Longford has many attractions apart from the alternator repair shop.