David: Up the Erewash

FOR THE first time for 15 years we made an excursion up the Erewash Canal, and I was very impressed.

My memory of the last trip was of a struggling waterway, shallow, with a lot of defective equipment and generally run down. A lot of work has been put in; dredging has been done, the gates are in good condition and don't leak and nearly all the top gates have functioning gate paddles, so they fill a lot more quickly.

All the paddles have T-key operated locks, although many of them are actually missing. Incidentally, does anyone know why they find it necessary to put locks on the bottom paddles as well as the top ones? Vandalism of the bottom paddles will only drain the lock, whereas the top ones will drain the pound—surely just the top ones would be enough? Any vandal dedicated enough to jemmy open the top paddles will do the bottom ones as well, so couldn't some money be saved here?

Trent Lock pictured above, with the terminus at Langley Mill pictured below.

All the bankside vegetation had been cut and even some on the offside. Although it was school holidays we never felt at all threatened and everyone was very friendly, even the cyclists taking advantage of the excellent towpath. The only criticism is the complete lack of any rubbish facilities, except at Trent Lock. the entrance to the canal. Water points are also few; the only one I saw was at the terminus. Mind you, perhaps their absence accounts for the relative lack of continuous moorers.

Flood warnings

Afterwards we went down to Nottingham, another very pleasant run. On the way back it had rained and I was concerned about the river going into flood, so I kept a careful eye on the red/yellow/green warning boards. The first one, at the exit from Beeston Lock, was just on the yellow/green boundary, the next at the tail of Cranfleet Lock, and thus on the same reach of the river, showed two feet of green. I am no water engineer, but I don't understand how there can be this discrepancy, which I have noticed in other locations on the system. Could someone from CaRT please explain, or at least check that they have the markers in the right place.

Leeds & Liverpool problem

Last Saturday's Times carried a picture of a narrowboat (or 'barge' as they had it) stranded on the top cill of a Leeds & Liverpool lock. According to the caption this had happened 'when the gates failed' at the tail of the lock. The odd thing is that so far (Tuesday evening) there has been no mention of this on the CaRT stoppages notices—perhaps they were all on holiday. If it is true and not just a case of a newspaper getting the story only half right, perhaps we should be worrying more about the state of the system. I can think of few more worrying scenarios than the failure of a gate while I am using a lock.

Latest safety panic

From time to time British Waterways would suddenly panic about some perceived 'safety' issue, and decree that the matter be dealt with immediately and at huge expense. Who can forget the great lock bollard panic or the ones about windlass spindles or bridge numbers?

CaRT seem to be similarly infected, and the latest one seems to have taken place quietly over the winter. All the broad locks on the Grand Union Leicester section, the Soar and the Erewash have acquired neat wooden fillers in the gaps between the top of the gate proper and the balance beam. I can see why this has been done, but considering the design of lock gates has not changed for 200+ years I wonder why it has suddenly become so pressingly urgent—could it not have waited until the gates were renewed? And why does it have to be done to the bottom gates as well as the top?

David Hymers