 | IWA Peterborough Branch www.iwapeterborough.org.uk | |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
The Inland Waterways Association (IWA) is a registered charity and a company limited by guarantee. It has some 17,000 members nationally organised into 36 branches throughout England and Wales. The objects of the Association are to campaign for the Conservation, Use, Maintenance, Restoration and Development of the Inland Waterways of this country. We are not a boater organisation but one which supports the use of waterways by all compatible users.
The Peterborough branch has been given an outline of the plans for the Great Fen Project by our member John Revell and we have seen copies of his correspondence and of your project leaflet.
The Project is clearly exciting and far-sighted. We are pleased to note that it is not intended that access to the sites should be restricted to a privileged few. Indeed, it appears that you will be making considerable efforts to attract visitors. You are, quite rightly, concerned to ensure that methods of access are devised which cause as little damage to the sites as possible. In that context we note with approval the reference to water access. This paper has been produced in an effort to assist you when formulating your plans for such access.
The overall concept of the Project is, over a period of time, to acquire land in order to link the existing Woodwalton Fen and Holme Fen nature reserves. Waterways which will become particularly relevant to the scheme as the Project proceeds are:
i) Great Raveley Drain (which lies along the eastern boundary of the existing Woodwalton Fen reserve)
ii) New Dyke (which lies to the south of the existing Holme Fen reserve)
iii) Monks Lode (which lies between the waterways at i) and ii)
Those three waterways are part of the Middle Level system of drains. They are (at least in part) navigable as is most of the Middle Level system. The Middle Level provides the link between the river Great Ouse and its tributaries and the river Nene. The river Nene in turn is linked by a series of locks at Northampton to the whole inter-connected waterway system of the country which comprises over 2,000 miles of waterway. Even now therefore (and subject to the dimension restrictions mentioned below) boats could set off from as far north as, say, Ripon or as far south as Guildford and reach the Middle Level system and therefore the area of the Project.
Currently plans are being formulated to link the Great Ouse near Bedford with the Grand Union Canal near Milton Keynes and also to link the rivers Witham at Boston to the rivers Glen and Welland near Spalding and the river Nene near Peterborough. While as explained above the area of the Project is already linked to the inter-connected waterway system what either or both of these new plans would provide would be an additional wide beam link to that system.
We should at this point explain that on the inter-connected system there are basically two dimensions standards: "narrow beam" and " wide beam". For the purposes of this report "narrow beam" means waterways which will accommodate craft of up to 7 feet in beam and 70 feet in length while "wide beam" means waterways built to accommodate craft up to 14 feet in beam with a length which could be anything up to 60 to 70 feet. It will, we hope, be appreciated that the above dimensions are maxima and that there are in the country many boats which while of greater than narrow beam width are nowhere near 14 feet in beam and equally are of less than 60 feet in length just as there are many narrow beam boats which are less than 70 feet in length.
As the Project is hoping to attract visitors by boat, not only those based locally but also farther afield, it is important to establish the maximum dimensions of craft which could reach the site. For these purposes the important restriction points are those on such of the Middle Level waterways as provide the link between the river Great Ouse and the river Nene. All of the locks on those sections of the Middle Level system will accommodate craft up to 70 feet in length. The minimum width of those locks is 11feet 4inches. It follows that all narrow beam boats and a large proportion of wide beam craft can reach the Middle Level system.
Entrance to all three of the waterways identified above is governed by Lodes End lock which is situated on the old course of the River Nene to the west of the entrance to Ramsey Lode. It is 68 feet in length but has a beam of 3.3 m. or about 10 feet 8inches. While it will obviously further restrict the numbers of craft which can visit the three waterways concerned we do not consider that the restriction is such as to render non- viable the prospect of attracting substantial numbers of boating visitors.
We propose now to discuss the present state of the waterways and to make suggestions as to improvements which should be made if it is intended to attract visitors by water, using either their own or hired craft.
This waterway runs virtually north to south and is blocked about half way along its length by the Great Raveley Drain Control Sluice of the Middle Level Commissioners. The waterway up to this point is wide and virtually straight. The Sluice is sited at a point where the Drain is alongside the eastern boundary of Woodwalton Fen reserve and immediately beyond the Sluice there is a pedestrian bridge which gives access from the eastern to the western bank of the Drain and thence into the reserve. If visitors by water are to be encouraged to visit they will basically require two things namely 1) somewhere to turn their craft given that the Drain is a dead end and 2) somewhere to moor for a few hours or overnight.
As to a turning point the Drain is fairly wide but not wide enough to turn a craft of 68 feet in length. It will therefore be necessary to construct a winding point (i.e. to dig out a section of bank) so that a boat of that length can be turned. It would probably be sensible if this point were constructed as near to the end of the navigation as the Middle Level Commissioners will allow.
Turning to moorings, they can come in a number of forms. On waterways in this area it is often necessary because of the shallowness of the edges of the channel and/ or the steepness of their banks to construct wooden staging into the waterway coupled with steps up the bank. Having inspected the site we noted that the eastern bank of the waterway in the area immediately before the Control Sluice is reached is relatively low. As such we believe it would suffice if that bank were straightened up and lined with wooden planks against which boats could lie. It may also be necessary to dredge the edge of the Drain in this area to give an adequate depth for the boats when moored. Such an arrangement would allow boaters more or less to step off of their boats directly onto the bottom of the bank. It would be preferable, when funds permit, if a set of steps could be constructed so that those who are less able could climb to the top of the bank and then walk to the bridge which leads to the reserve. Boats of course need to be tied to something on the bank. It would be feasible for boaters to hammer in their own mooring stakes to the area of the bank immediately beside the water. However if there are large numbers of boaters or if conditions became particularly wet this could lead to considerable damage to the surface of the bank. One solution might be to sink into the ground at the beginning and end of the moorings and say every 30 feet small concrete or metal piles or spikes on the top of which would be fixed flexible metal rings to which the mooring ropes of boats could be attached. We suggest that the moorings should initially be 100 feet in length. If further lengths are required they can be added at a later date. At the time of our visit fishermen were active in the area. Conflict with fishermen should be avoided. While there is no objection to fishermen fishing from moorings when not in use by boats the moorings should, we suggest, be governed by a sign making it clear that boaters have priority on those moorings.
Equally to ensure that the moorings are not "blocked" by boaters who overstay their welcome we suggest that the moorings should be made the subject of a 48hour maximum time restriction. This is we understand likely, shortly, to be the standard time limit applied throughout the Middle Level system.
Of the three waterways identified above this is the only one which currently gives access to an existing reserve. It would therefore seem that this should be the first to be tackled when seeking to make improvements designed to increase water-borne visitor numbers.
This waterway is on what is virtually an east-west alignment until it reaches the main East Coast railway line near the village of Holme. It then turns north to run alongside the railway for, say, 300 yards finally ending beside the railway crossing on the B660. On the other side of that crossing is the Admiral Wells public house and then the village of Holme proper. If we have understood the Project correctly this waterway will, when the Project is complete, lie in the middle of the enlarged fen. Indeed it, together with a section of the old course of the river Nene, will cut east to west through the whole reserve. That stretch of the waterway which runs beside the railway is overgrown and silted. Immediately before the waterway makes its turn north a full size winding point has been constructed. To the east of that point the banks of the waterway are relatively straight but lined with reeds.
It would be tempting to think that the area of the waterway that lies beside the railway could be cleaned out and used for moorings. We believe that there are three problems with such a suggestion. In the first place the railway line is one of the busiest in the country and carries frequent traffic each day until past midnight. We cannot imagine that this would be a popular mooring by day or night. Secondly our information is that the possibilities of dredging out that section of waterway have in the past been discussed with the railway authorities who were unwilling to agree fearing possible adverse effects on the stability of the railway line. The third problem is that such moorings would only be useable if a turning point were constructed at the end of the railway section of the waterway i.e. by the level crossing. This would involve the realignment of the private road which runs alongside the waterway at this point. The owner may not be prepared to contemplate such a realignment.
The conclusion which we have reached is that the better plan would be to seek to retain the existing winding hole and to construct moorings immediately to the east of that hole on the north bank. At that point the waterway is relatively straight although there are reeds in evidence. They could be cleared, the banks straightened and moorings constructed. As in the case of the Great Raveley Drain site the bank immediately beside the water is low so that we put forward exactly the same solutions as for that waterway. The suggested site for moorings has the added advantage that it is not immediately beside the railway lines.
Additional points:
1) A Bridge
As the Project proceeds the reserve will at this location be created on both sides of the waterway. This could create a need for a bridge to be constructed across the waterway. If visitor numbers increase the level of mooring provision would also need to be expanded.
2) Why this Location?
As previously mentioned a private road runs beside the proposed moorings and right to the B660 near the railway level crossing. From there it is easily possible to walk to the Admiral Wells public house and to the other facilities of the village. The creation of these suggested moorings at an early stage of the Project could be justified by the proximity to the public house. In other words they would fulfil a number of purposes both short-term and long-term.
In the short-term by using the whole of the New Dyke you, the Project leaders, would be able to take visitors by water across the full width of the area of the Project and to explain in a leisurely way as the landscape unfolded what you intended to do in the various locations. The existence of the proposed facilities would make it possible for you to turn your craft and moor at the western end of the Dyke. Your visitors would then have the option to take refreshments at the public house before making the return journey either by water or coach.
The existence of the proposed moorings would in the short-term also encourage use of the New Dyke by boaters. It is not a much frequented waterway so that the more that craft can be encouraged to use it the more likely it is that the habit of visiting the New Dyke by water will have become established by the time that the Project is able fully to welcome visitors to that area.
In the longer-term, when the Project is complete the suggested moorings would constitute one of the mooring areas along the length of the New Dyke. It would no doubt be possible and desirable to construct other moorings along the line of that waterway to enable visitors to moor and visit areas of interest. As the siting of such moorings is dependent on your detailed plans (to which we are not privy) we have not at this stage considered where such moorings might be sited.
Clearly the owners of the Admiral Wells public house should benefit financially from the creation of the suggested moorings. Indeed it is conceivable that the owners could be persuaded to become partners in this part of the Project. The potential problem is the private roadway, for boaters could only have access to the public house and the village if they had the right to walk along the road. We have consulted the relevant OS Map but there is no sign that there is any public right of access. This would therefore have to be a matter of negotiation with the owners of the land over which the road runs, unless or until the land is acquired by the Project itself.
This waterway runs in a generally southerly direction from a junction with the New Dyke. It is virtually straight with steep-sided banks. After about 1.5 m. i.e. about 0.9 of a mile a boater comes to Conington Fen Bridge which has a headroom of 0.5 m. or 1 feet 7 inches and provides the current effective head of navigation. Thereafter the waterway continues on its southerly course. On our visit the waterway contained a considerable amount of reed and would benefit from some dredging. The bridge platform rests on steel girders which in turn rest on two concrete piles. It did not appear that it would be a major job to raise the bridge. The roadway appears to be private and to be a farm service road only. Whether the navigable section of the waterway terminated at the bridge or some distance to the south it would still constitute the only waterway which terminated within the enlarged reserve and may for that reason be of particular long - term interest depending on which sections of the reserve you will wish boaters to visit. As to boating facilities it would again be necessary to construct a winding point somewhere near the end of the navigable section. As the banks are steep any moorings would in our view need to be built out over the edge of the water itself with steps up the bank. We suggest that the construction takes place in wood. The exact location will depend on how this waterway fits into the detailed plans for the enlarged reserve.
The New Cut/ Old Course of the Nene/ Black Ham
If we have correctly understood the Project leaflet the ultimate intention of the Project is to make these waterways part of the northern and eastern boundary of the enlarged reserve. They are all navigable and it would no doubt be possible to select a site or sites for the construction of moorings along them. We have not in this report attempted such a task for two reasons:
1) We have no idea where on the perimeter of the completed reserve you wish water -borne access to take place. On our existing proposals you will already have one boating access on or near the perimeter in the shape of Great Raveley Drain and two access routes deep into, or through, the heart of the reserve in the shape of New Dyke and Monks Lode. There may be a case for further access on the perimeter but this must be a matter for you to consider.
2) There is a navigational problem to overcome to which we have no immediate solution. It will be remembered that access to all three of the waterways we have previously discussed is gained via Lodes End lock; after clearing the lock a boater would travel south after reaching Nightingales Corner. To reach the New Cut/Old Course of the Nene/ Black Ham a boater would similarly pass through Lodes End lock but turn north at Nightingales Corner. Shortly thereafter he would come to Exhibition bridge which has a headroom of only 1.2m or about 3feet 11 inches. It is consequently too low to allow all but the smallest craft to proceed farther. It is also a substantial concrete and steel structure which it would clearly cost a considerable sum to alter. While therefore the construction of moorings on the New Cut/ Old Course of the Nene/ Black Ham to the north of Exhibition bridge might be thought to be a worthwhile long -term aim it is not one that could be achieved without a substantial investment on Exhibition bridge.
Water Trip Boat
We understand that in addition to seeking to encourage water-borne visitors using their own or hired craft you are also considering the introduction of some sort of trip boat to journey initially into Woodwalton Fen. We would applaud such an initiative which could be used by both local and more distant non-waterway visitors to the area. As we understand the idea it would be to base such a trip boat at Ramsey which is by water about an hour's travel from the two existing reserves. There is however currently a problem in seeking to collect and return those who wish to make such a trip to/ from Ramsey. Ramsey has its own basin which is navigable. Unfortunately the moorings at that basin are in a deplorable and unsafe condition such that it would not be prudent at the present time to use them for this or any other purpose. We understand that Huntingdonshire District Council is interesting itself in the problem but a solution is still awaited.
Publicity
We do not believe that there is as yet a great deal of knowledge of your Project either amongst the boating fraternity or the public in general. We would suggest that there are a number of sites in and around the relevant area where simple publicity would be effective.
Lodes End lock: As we have made clear throughout this paper water-borne access to the area of the Project has to be made in all cases through Lodes End lock. We would suggest that it would be sensible if, with the consent of the Middle Level Commissioners, you placed information panels relating to your plans beside that lock so that boaters became aware of your intentions and were encouraged even at this early stage to take a look at the area for themselves.
Ramsey Basin: Ramsey is not only the nearest town to the site of the Project but is itself directly connected by water to the site. It is we suggest somewhere where information panels should be positioned to encourage water -borne and other interest. Once the problems with the Ramsey Basin moorings have been resolved we suggest that the panels be placed in the area of that Basin.
Holme: While Holme is also connected by water to the area of the Project there is at present no access to that water link for the general public. It would not be sensible for safety reasons to place information panels near the end of the navigation by the railway level crossing. In order to raise general awareness it might be worth investigating whether the owners of the Admiral Wells public house would be prepared to allow information panels to be erected in the car park of that property so that they were visible to the general public.
All material on this site is copyright, © IWA Peterborough Branch unless otherwise stated. The Inland Waterways Association may not agree with opinions expressed on this web site, but encourages publication as a matter of interest. Nothing here may be construed as policy or an official announcement unless otherwise stated.