Canals,Green Corridors and Drought

[nightshade]

This country used to have a fine network of both railways and canals
which linked even large villages together and could be said to have
delayed the development of the motor car for years!
The wildlife along these waterways is diverse,as is the plant life,it could
have been (with a little foresight) a method of moving water around this island
could it be too late to utilise and expand this facility I wonder?
I know the water leisure industry has along with various charities
and British Waterways have done sterling work to maintain and reopen
many stretches should not this be a government priority to get some
of the heavy freight off our roads

[Echo]

Hi Nightshade -
I totally agree with you - a balance between increasing canal transport pressures and the surrounding wildlife is however a real problem, erosion of the banks scare away the Water Voles !! I for one would love to sail my way to work!

Echo

[honeybee]

I know there was talk of reopening the canal near Cirencester/Stroud but it would cost millions. Also the place is a haven for wildlife as it is now in it's redundant state.
I think the disuse of the railways was a terrible thing, with lots of small stations being closed. When you look at all those big lorries on the motorway it would be much safer and less polluting to transport via canals and railways.

[nightshade]

I wish Dr Beeching was around today,I would personaly kick his ass

[honeybee]

Me too!

They've even stopped transporting mail by railway now, even though most post office depots are next to a railway. Those who know Potteric Carr will have seen the depot there and the one in Gloucester's being shut down adding to the traffic congestion. I used the train all the time when I lived in Cardiff as there are still lots of small stops. I don't think any of the Virgin trains stop at Gloucester anymore and we have the longest platform in Britain! Still the service from Virgin is enough to put you off for life, my regular journeys were rarely without a hitch or glitch.

[Paul mabbott]

I suspect that the canals are being revived for the leisure business rather than for industrial transportation. Another thing I've noticed (from limited experience) is that where canals are revived they tend to be accompanied by house-building, marinas &c which promptly wipes out the surrounding green areas.
It is indeed a shame that many of the railway branch lines were closed although many of them make very good wildlife corridors and cycleways! It is, however, much easier to rebuild the railways, especially light railways for human transport but why not light goods as well. Even Eddie Stobart sees the sense of railways over lorries in some circumstances: Stobarts Launch Rail Freight Service

Originally Posted by honeybee

I know there was talk of reopening the canal near Cirencester/Stroud but it would cost millions. Also the place is a haven for wildlife as it is now in it's redundant state.
I think the disuse of the railways was a terrible thing, with lots of small stations being closed. When you look at all those big lorries on the motorway it would be much safer and less polluting to transport via canals and railways.

[John]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I wish Dr Beeching was around today,I would personaly kick his ass

Unfortunately I suffered at his hands. I was a steam engine driver back in the 60's and was made redundant. I have since worked in the Railway Private sector for ten years and it is an absolute disgrace the way they have let our rail system go.

If they had ploughed the money in correctly the railways would have been a godsend to the industries. There were many types of wagons developed that would have been very useful to use but the type of terminals needed for them were deemed too expensive. How short sighted can you get.

The thinking of some of our governments is beyond me. They have lost the plot when it comes to shelling out on projects that are future driven. Profits have to be immediate otherwise funding will not be found.

I lost the most fantastic job that a man can have because of all this cutting back and I have never forgiven them for it.

Regarding waterways. Brilliant idea but not workable in our fast paced life. I suppose some industries could trot along at a slow pace but I can't think of any. Manufactured goods need to be at point of sale quickly so I can't see the waterways fulfilling that criteria.

John

[henrya]

Quote
Regarding waterways. Brilliant idea but not workable in our fast paced life. I suppose some industries could trot along at a slow pace but I can't think of any. Manufactured goods need to be at point of sale quickly
Enqduote

Only because almost everyone is so impatient - if we all slowed down a bit and didn't demand everything 'next day' then we'd all be a lot better off. But I don't expect us to change!

henrya

[Garden Carpet]

Originally Posted by nightshade

I wish Dr Beeching was around today,I would personaly kick his ass

shhhhh nightshade.. they will have you for cruelty to donkeys if you arent careful lol
jaki

[nightshade]

Oooops silly me, kick his tender behind (that is the coal/water carrying part of,some types,
of steam locomotive)

[Paul mabbott]

There are rumours that one of the rail companies is going to take on someone in management who knows about railways .... a first ... your time may still come!

It's depressing enough for us passengers - must be even worse for you.

Originally Posted by John

............. was a steam engine driver back in the 60's and was made redundant. I have since worked in the Railway Private sector for ten years and it is an absolute disgrace the way they have let our rail system go.

If they had ploughed the money in correctly the railways would have been a godsend to the industries. There were many types of wagons developed that would have been very useful to use but the type of terminals needed for them were deemed too expensive. How short sighted can you get.
John

[henrya]

Don't blame Dr Beeching - it wasn't his idea. He just did the job he was asked to do. Blame his bosses. And as for the state of the railways today, has everyone forgotten how dreadful they had become under British Rail before they were privatised?

henrya

[honeybee]

I don't think we're allowed to get political are we?

[Paul mabbott]

Most railways had not become all that bad although the suburban lines into London were becoming pretty grim. *But* it was generally possible to go to any major town and get reasonably fast transport elsewhere at a reasonable price.

Why the railways were disintegrating (and still are) is due to governmental policy decisions, as you say.

Beeching ccame in the context of a general transport policy which had at least been thought out (badly, to be sure). The assumption was that most people would get a car and therefore investment should go into building bigger and faster roads. This was obviously self-fulfilling because when the branch lines (simultaneously with removal of support for country 'bus services) people needing to travel the countryside had no choice but to drive a car. The chaos and pollution that road-centric transport would have on towns and cities was hardly considered.

Even when the effect of car travel and lorry transport was becoming obvious to most people, there was no attempt to revive the railways - in great contrast to what happened in France, Germany and most other west European countries. Indeed some governments were actually opposed to railways per se, thus further reduced investment and subsidy leading to the state of rail that you mention.

The privatisation of the railways, done in the last months of a dead-duck government, was one of the most corrupt political acts that we've known. But it was done in the name of 'competition' splitting the railways into numerous fragments "would improve services" which clearly cannot happen *physically* on railways. What happened was that we got smarter, prettier trains (in some places) but continued to pay huge subsidies (which went to shareholders, not into wages or investment in infrastructure) for higher fares and an enormous bureaucracy to manage just the ticketing system (last week, booking a train to London, I had twenty-three ticket options - no longer just first/second, single/return, day/period varying in price from £8 to £163 ..... ).

It's not the way I'd run the railways!

Originally Posted by henrya

Don't blame Dr Beeching - it wasn't his idea. He just did the job he was asked to do. Blame his bosses. And as for the state of the railways today, has everyone forgotten how dreadful they had become under British Rail before they were privatised?
henrya

[Alan]

Getting back to the green corridors, since many segments of the disused railway lines where sold to private individuals or were made into bridleways/footpaths, the suggested re-opening of the lines wouldn’t go down too well with people who now live on them. I would also think that the current condition of many of the railway/embankments etc, are of far more use to wildlife now, than if they were to be brought back into service, with the necessary cutting back of trees, undergrowth and the electrification of the lines etc. Not to mention the re-establishment of the railway crossings and further infrastructure – I’m sure the cost would be extreme, and no doubt it would come out of our pockets.

As for the canals, the crystal clear water of some of them would no doubt be churned-up again in to a muddy soup by passing boats, and of course the bank erosion issue that has already been brought up. Again I think cost would not be excessive, and again as mentioned, it is just too slow for modern life.

Leave them both as wildlife corridors I say.

[Paul mabbott]

Yes, in my earlier comment I nooted that light railways are a lot easier to build - they might follow the old lines but could be elevated, as they say in USA. Ditto, they could go high over roads - or the roads could be closed! Generally, building light railways doesn't involve the massive structures that steam trains used. We are talking about *local* railways here.

Again, with regard to the canals, as the climate is getting drier they are increasingly problematic to keep boatworthy *but* as the original mail, I think, mentioned - could some of the major ones be linked up and could new canals be built to transport water as well as boats to the southlands?

Broadening the green corridors topic - which has hardly been mentioned. This is a matter of critical importance because all the interesting species in southern England will need them as escape routes as the climate changes. Canals, rivers and (paradoxically) motorways all provide these. I would like to see planning law incorporate a veto on all building within 5km of any waterway ....

Originally Posted by Alan

Getting back to the green corridors, since many segments of the disused railway lines where sold to private individuals or were made into bridleways/footpaths, the suggested re-opening of the lines wouldn’t go down too well with people who now live on them. I would also think that the current condition of many of the railway/embankments etc, are of far more use to wildlife now, than if they were to be brought back into service, with the necessary cutting back of trees, undergrowth and the electrification of the lines etc. Not to mention the re-establishment of the railway crossings and further infrastructure – I’m sure the cost would be extreme, and no doubt it would come out of our pockets.

As for the canals, the crystal clear water of some of them would no doubt be churned-up again in to a muddy soup by passing boats, and of course the bank erosion issue that has already been brought up. Again I think cost would not be excessive, and again as mentioned, it is just too slow for modern life.

Leave them both as wildlife corridors I say.

[Alan]

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

Yes, in my earlier comment I nooted that light railways are a lot easier to build - they might follow the old lines but could be elevated, as they say in USA. Ditto, they could go high over roads - or the roads could be closed! Generally, building light railways doesn't involve the massive structures that steam trains used. We are talking about *local* railways here.

Yes you have a point here, but I would still say the cost would still be prohibitive though. One other point worth mentioning (at least regarding this area) is that new roads have been built on many of the old routes of railway lines, so it has become somewhat fragmented.

Again, with regard to the canals, as the climate is getting drier they are increasingly problematic to keep boatworthy *but* as the original mail, I think, mentioned - could some of the major ones be linked up and could new canals be built to transport water as well as boats to the southlands?

Again I feel that it would be much cheaper to use pipelines for the same purpose of trasporting water.

Broadening the green corridors topic - which has hardly been mentioned. This is a matter of critical importance because all the interesting species in southern England will need them as escape routes as the climate changes. Canals, rivers and (paradoxically) motorways all provide these. I would like to see planning law incorporate a veto on all building within 5km of any waterway ....

I agree with that one, with special flyovers and underpasses especially for wildlife - as was mentioned on another thread I believe.

I agree in principle on a lot of these ideas, I just feel a will and the way would be difficult in our present climate of 'want every thing now' but 'don't want to pay' culture..