Close the canal so nothing moves—okay for CaRT

Published: Monday, 05 August 2019

CLOSING the whole of the Macclesfield Canal, the Lower Peak Forest Canal and the Upper Peak Forest Canal is, I think, nothing but a knee-jerk reaction, writes Bill Ridgeway.

On the basis of if it is closed, nothing can move so therefore the comeback on CaRT is mitigated.

Justifiable

Closing the Upper Peak Forest Canal (seven miles) Whaley Bridge to the junction with the Macclesfield Canal/Marple top lock is justifiable. However, I wonder if any head of water would be dissipated in this seven miles stretch (which includes the Furness Aqueduct at which it may overflow)?

Closing the Lower Peak Forest Canal (seven miles) which includes (shortly after Marple Bottom Lock) Marple Aqueduct (another point at which a head of water may overflow into the Goyt) is arguable. Closing the whole of the Macclesfield Canal (26 miles) is very questionable.

Lack of thought for canal users

CaRT's weak logical thinking demonstrates a lack of thought for canal users (providers of CaRT funds) and customer service. Closing just the Upper Peak Forest Canal is an acceptable precaution to all (most). Closing the whole of the Lower Peak Forest Canal and the Marple Canal is just overkill which prevents their use (assuming there are no local stoppages).