Canals closing in Scotland

Thanks for posting the link to the petition. Time to join the IWA?

Tried to join but decided not to when I discovered my nearest branch is in Cumbria, if I find a Scottish equivalent I might try it.
 
Last edited:
Interesting reading, as a West Coast yachty a bit disappointed that so much of the focus of the petition is on the Lowland Canals but hopefully the message will extend to all of the system. Neither the chairman or the last CEO come out of it with much credit. Perhaps a more representative Board would be more effective than an ombudsman. The petition for the latter was a good vehicle for getting some attention but this was a general committee and the whole issue needs to be considered by Transport and Finance. Some worms coming out of the can regarding contracts and favouritism. Could see some reluctance after the much criticised former CEO has recently been appointed to head Scottish Enterprise.
 
i thought it was interesting in the IWA response that the contract to repair the bridges on the F&C has been awarded with work to start in Jan '19....nothing like that on the SC website and when i emailed recently about 2019 transit they told me they didn't know and any info would be published on the website.

I think the current focus on the F&C is probably correct as it is the most in danger of closure but many of the issues seem to be common across the network with a focus on regen/development projects and a the lack of maintenance of the core assets coming to a head with more frequent closures and disruption.

I just want to know if i can transit in 2019 and go and do west highland week!
 
ProDave said:
Yes no mention of this project aiding or even helping to fund maintenance to keep the canal navigable.

Would you want to live on drained land that relies on technology to pre emt a flood and lower the canal level so there is somewhere for it to flood to? Not me.

And this lowering of the water level is not going to help navigation is it? Once more those pesky boats are a bit of a nuisance to the canal operators.

If they were serious about maintaining navigation, I would expect that statement about this drainage system to have an assurance that navigation of the canal would not be affected.
Click to expand...
Do you think occasionally altering the depth of the canal by a massive 4 inches between lock 20 near Castlecary and lock 21 at Maryhill, and in the dead-end spur to Speirs Wharf, would have a significant effect on navigation?
https://www.scottishcanals.co.uk/wp...Canals-Lowlands-Skippers-Guide-WEB-May-16.pdf
The £4.7million NGIWMS – part-funded by the Glasgow City Region City Deal – will use the Summit Pound (the canal’s highest section between Locks 20 and 21) and its Glasgow Branch as a conduit to transport surface water from North Glasgow to the River Kelvin.
http://www.scottishhousingnews.com/...-agreement-paves-way-for-2500-glasgow-homes/#
Click to expand...
The stretch of the Forth and Clyde canal.........that runs through Scotland’s largest city is to be equipped with “sensor and predictive weather technology”. According to Glasgow City Council, this will provide warning ahead of imminent wet weather, meaning water can be moved away from residential and business areas accordingly, and into parts of the canal where water levels have been pre-emptively lowered by up to 10cm.
https://www.publictechnology.net/articles/news/glasgow-launches-pioneering-‘smart-canal’
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Are you convinced that a storm drainage catchment of the areas referred to which when developed will be mostly hard surface can be discharged to the section of canal and only change the level by 4"?
My experience is of the Crinan, it changes much more than that every night, when it overtops the lock gates the lower pair of gates in the lock can not be opened until it is discharged, some mornings it takes 4 hours with sluices up to run off the surplus, unusable locks have a significant effect on navigation, and this is with a controlled catchment, not a massive random public storm drainage system. If Scottish Canals were minded to maintain navigation you might expect they would make a point of explaining that this development would not compromise it, however it would surprise me if any of them even understand that water management is necessary, the guys who do it here have given up trying to explain it to the 'managers'.
 
Quandary said:
Are you convinced that a storm drainage catchment of the areas referred to which when developed will be mostly hard surface can be discharged to the section of canal and only change the level by 4"?
My experience is of the Crinan, it changes much more than that every night, when it overtops the lock gates the lower pair of gates in the lock can not be opened until it is discharged, some mornings it takes 4 hours with sluices up to run off the surplus, unusable locks have a significant effect on navigation, and this is with a controlled catchment, not a massive random public storm drainage system. If Scottish Canals were minded to maintain navigation you might expect they would make a point of explaining that this development would not compromise it, however it would surprise me if any of them even understand that water management is necessary, the guys who do it here have given up trying to explain it to the 'managers'.
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert - apologies.
If you read the info at the links I posted the plan is to drain from the canal into the River Kelvin, before heavy rainfall, temporarily reducing the level by 4 inches - so overtopping of lock gates or opening sluices or inability to open gates on the Crinan Canal seems somewhat irrelevant. Think of it as the "waster" from above lock 4 at Ardrishaig into the sea.

The straight line distance from Castlecary to Maryhill is 22.34km (13.88 miles) - so the length of the canal between the locks is obviously more than that. Straight line distance from the "Y junction" near Ruchill Golf Course here: https://www.google.com/maps/@55.8977737,-4.292557,2486m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en-GB to Spiers Wharf is 2.93km or 1.82miles - so longer than that as the canal wends its way between the two. So at least 15 miles and a lot of water to play with!

Edit:
The canal and the river are closest at Maryhill, so common sense would suggest a big pipe under Collina Street to the Kelvin:
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.8902662,-4.2953133,240a,35y,328.71h,44.93t/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en-GB
It would need to be ned proof!;)
 
Last edited:
I used to have to design storm drainage systems for new housing developments 2m. dia. outfall pipes were not uncommon, you could get a blast motoring past the end of one of those, and this area is many times the 200 (or so) house developments we were doing. Also while there are regs. controlling what is discharged with separate systems it might surprise you what finds its way into the storm system, though most canals already do have the odd dead dog or cat and since it is Glasgow not Dublin there are less horses to dispose of.
I am not suggesting that it is a bad idea, just that it seem not to pay much heed to the needs of navigation which if you have read Neil's links seem no longer to have been the priority.
 
Last edited:
"The work at Fort Augustus is to begin as soon as possible with the aim of having it completed by spring next year for the start of the season. Other works being funded include phase one of plans to replace lock gates at Kytra and Cullochy, 24 new moorings at Laggan Locks, 4 pairs of lock gates for the Forth & Clyde Canal, new water monitoring systems for the Crinan Reservoir and the Forth & Clyde summit pound, a review of remote operations for Bonnybridge and Twechar bridges and new dredging plant to enable Scottish Canals’ staff to improve the navigation channel across the network."

Doesn't seem terribly encouraging for the Crinan.

Donald
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

R
My boat trip hopefully in May Around Scotland
2 3
Replies
57
Views
1K
lustyd
lustyd

Share this page

Top