IN ANSWER to Pete Early, no I have not been through the Standedge Tunnel. The section of canal between Huddersfield and the tunnel is notorious for its low water levels, writes Keith Gudgin.
When I tried I could not get to it as there was not enough water in it to allow me to make the passage. Also when I tried to book the tunnel I was given a date that was 18 days away, as only nine boats are allowed through it each way each week, I didn't bother trying any more. I didn't think they would allow me to wait on a 24 hour mooring for 18 days whilst waiting to get through!
Not helping
I understand the main reason for it not being possible to travel up or down the Marsden Flight on certain days is due to the constant lack of water in this section of canal. This being the case then wasting more by emptying pounds to repair boats is not helping overcome this shortage in the slightest. We all know how much water it takes to fill a lock, so one has to ask how many lock-fulls were wasted in this operation? If this is using initiative then I fail to see how!
If there is not enough water in this canal to allow boats to travel along it unhindered, then how come there is enough water to allow CaRT to drain a pound and then refill it whenever it wants to repair a boat?
Hardly the right way
I don't care how far it is to the nearest dry docking for these boats. I would not be allowed to drain a pound to repair my boat any time I wished. To do so on the off chance that I would not get caught is hardly the right way to go about things. If everybody did this then none of us would be able to travel anywhere as all the pounds would be drained of water and filled with boats being repaired or blacked or what have you.
Just think of the problems boaters have when a pound is emptied by vandals and the problems that are sometime encountered when trying to refill it. To suggest that anyone engages in action of this nature is, in my opinion, very irresponsible.
Damage outweighs advantages
As for showing initiative I don't agree that CaRT staff are. The damage that could be done far outweighs the advantages. The wild life that would be put at risk, i.e. dead fish etc., the damage that could be caused to banks and other infrastructure is immeasurable, plus again, the loss of water. This is the same no matter who were to empty the pound.
Did they engaged in a fish capture programme and do a structural analysis of the pound to ascertain what, if any, damage would be caused? There has already been a discussion on these pages about the damage caused by the constant changing of water pressure on lock walls and the effect it has on them.
Can't get there
Doing things properly to drain a pound would, I think, involve more expense and time than taking the boat to a yard for repair. Perhaps the reason they don't take it to a yard is the fact that there is not enough water in the canal to get it there! There is a slipway at Apsley Marina in Huddersfield which I'm sure they could hire if they so wished, just like the rest of us.
Just because BW/CaRT staff have engaged in the practice of draining pounds in order to repair boats before doesn't make it right. As far as I can see, my opinion of one rule for them and another for us still holds true. If CaRT want us all to do things right then they need to lead by example, and this, in my opinion, is not the way to do it.