Another problem on the Rochdale Canal....
Martin Clark
"Following the extreme weather experienced this week a land slippage has
occurred on the Rochdale Canal at Hebden Bridge above Lock 13 near
Callis Mill. The offside embankment including some mature trees slid
into the canal and has thus created a blockage. Investigations are
ongoing to establish appropriate works to stabilise the embankment and
re-open the canal at the earliest opportunity. Further information will
be issued as soon as our investigation works are completed. The canal is
closed between locks 13 and 14, winding points are at lock 12 to the
East and Bridge 24 to the West. Up to date information regarding this
stoppage may be obtained from the Waterway Office Telephone:01925 847
700"
--
Martin Clark
Internet Boaters' Database http://www.auluk.freeserve.co.uk/boats
Pennine Waterways Website http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk
Martin Clark
>From British Waterways, dated 6.2.04:
>
>"Following the extreme weather experienced this week a land slippage
>has occurred on the Rochdale Canal at Hebden Bridge above Lock 13 near
>Callis Mill.
The latest information, for those interested, is that BW are expecting
to re-open this stretch of canal on 8th April, in time for Easter.
A temporary roadway through the sewage works has been built to give
access to the site. A lagoon has been created to dry out the wet soil
before it is removed from the site. The work is expected to cost a
quarter of a million pounds.
Neil Arlidge
> Martin Clark wrote...
>> From British Waterways, dated 6.2.04:
>>
>> "Following the extreme weather experienced this week a land slippage
>> has occurred on the Rochdale Canal at Hebden Bridge above Lock 13
>> near Callis Mill.
>
> The latest information, for those interested, is that BW are expecting
> to re-open this stretch of canal on 8th April, in time for Easter.
>
> A temporary roadway through the sewage works has been built to give
> access to the site. A lagoon has been created to dry out the wet soil
> before it is removed from the site. The work is expected to cost a
> quarter of a million pounds.
Where in the old days they would have just run a dredger through
it............
--
Neil Arlidge - NB Earnest
Follow the travels of the TNC at http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk
Robin Nicholson
>> The latest information, for those interested, is that BW are expecting
>> to re-open this stretch of canal on 8th April, in time for Easter.
That almost makes me decide to head south this Easter..to
Hertford..or..Bath!
--
Robin
Adrian Stott
If it's Hertford, look for my barge (Onx). The kettle works well.
Adrian
Su/Cutworks
> > A temporary roadway through the sewage works has been built to give
> > access to the site. A lagoon has been created to dry out the wet soil
> > before it is removed from the site. The work is expected to cost a
> > quarter of a million pounds.
>
> Where in the old days they would have just run a dredger through
> it............
Ah, but in the old days they wouldn't have had to stop and count each
crayfish removed from the site, build a protective shelter and restore it to
a pristine canal. At least we're not being handled by the EA who would have
insisted on just leaving the heap of soil to protect the local wildlife and
let the boats shift for themselves.
-Su
ted
aquatic creature that maybe there. The actual residues that one would be
removing ie what is in the soil.
Su/Cutworks
> >Ah, but in the old days they wouldn't have had to stop and count each
> >crayfish removed from the site, build a protective shelter and restore it
to
> >a pristine canal. At least we're not being handled by the EA who would
have
> >insisted on just leaving the heap of soil to protect the local wildlife
and
> >let the boats shift for themselves.
> >
> >
> I would have thought that the concern would be besides some form of
> aquatic creature that maybe there. The actual residues that one would be
> removing ie what is in the soil.
The Rochdale has had a number of issues regarding a rare crayfish. When the
slippage first occured there was a press release that mentioned a survey of
the aquatic life in the slippage that had to be made before any work could
be carried out.
The residues don't seem to come into it. The site is actually a sandy area
on the edge of what looks like a pasture, not an agricultural area with
pesticides. Those would have been washing down into the canal on a regular
basis as it is, so nothing new there to worry about.
If you're interested in a good set of articles on the Rochdale, the Rochdale
Observer has a section online that is devoted to the canal.
There is an article on the wildlife mangement of the canal at:
http://www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/canal/index/articles/article_id=7395.html?wildlife
-Su
Neil Arlidge
In the old days BW had a dredger! (that they were allowed to use, before
Health and Safety condemed the majority of their plant)
Bob Adams
<ba...@spam.com> writes
--
Bob Adams
Martin Clark
>There is an article on the wildlife mangement of the canal at:
>
>http://www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/canal/index/articles/article_id=7395.html?wildlife
I see they have stolen a map from my site without permission. It must
have been a few years ago as the map is out of date and has been
superseded by another.
Su/Cutworks
>
>http://www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/canal/index/articles/article_id=7395.html
?wildlife
>
> I see they have stolen a map from my site without permission. It must
> have been a few years ago as the map is out of date and has been
> superseded by another.
Nothing worse than a copyright thief. Perhaps you should complain? Or
would that give them the incentive to be inconsiderate again?
Do you recall which press release it was that discussed the need to examine
the site where the slip happened in order to asses the invertebrate
population? I can't locate it at the moment.
-Su
tim noakes
"Su/Cutworks" <cutw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c2ukam$r1b$2...@hercules.btinternet.com...
docks on the Dee Estuary? 3 or so years ago it was decided that the new
Airbus A800 wings, made at BAE's Broughton works, would be loaded onto
barges on the Dee, taken 2-3 miles downriver, then transhipped at Mostyn
docks for the jorney to France. Everything proceeded well, but it was noted
that the channel leading up to the docks would have ot be dredged a bit -
this needed doing anyway as there were plans to route some Irish ferries
thereas well - bit of a renaisssance for the docks really.
The EA said - there may be an issue on the dredging, we'll check and come
back to you. Since then the EA have been officially notified by Welsh Nature
that there *may* be an issue with the wildlife, although I hav't seen which
wildlife specified anywhere, it seems to be shrouded in mystery.
Scroll forward to now, the current situation is:
1. The EA still havn't come off the pot and are claiming the only way the
dredging will happen is if 2 jags officially overrules them
2. The first wings need to ship out in 6 weeks, & it's a three week dredging
programme (minimum)
3. Two jags & blair are making sympathetic ineffective noises
4. there is a looming risk that the works (x thousand local jobs) will be
closed and wing manufacture transferred to Filton
5. Oh, and Irish ferries quit after less than 1 year for the same reason
I used (as many waterway types) to be generally pretty sympathetic to the
reasonable needs of the natural history that we co-exist with on the cut and
elsewhere. But the actions of these offical tree hugging jobsworths, both
here and on the cut, has utterly sickened me. I have fantasies of sneaking
up to the end of the Mont and tipping in a few drums of potent weedkiller or
something...... (spits out dummy and throws tantrum...)
Cheers
Tim
Martin Clark
>Martin Clark wrote:
>
>>http://www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/canal/index/articles/article_id=7395.html
>?wildlife
>>
>> I see they have stolen a map from my site without permission. It must
>> have been a few years ago as the map is out of date and has been
>> superseded by another.
>
>Nothing worse than a copyright thief. Perhaps you should complain? Or
>would that give them the incentive to be inconsiderate again?
>
the entire content of a web page from another of my web sites
(non-canal-related). When I emailed to complain I received a very rude
and unco-operative reply from the webmaster. I decided at that time that
it wasn't worth the hassle factor to argue back.
>Do you recall which press release it was that discussed the need to examine
>the site where the slip happened in order to asses the invertebrate
>population? I can't locate it at the moment.
>
No, sorry.
Su/Cutworks
> There was another website, also based in Rochdale, that copied almost
> the entire content of a web page from another of my web sites
> (non-canal-related). When I emailed to complain I received a very rude
> and unco-operative reply from the webmaster. I decided at that time that
> it wasn't worth the hassle factor to argue back.
Depending on where the site is hosted, a complaint to the hosting service
can work wonders.
> >Do you recall which press release it was that discussed the need to
examine
> >the site where the slip happened in order to asses the invertebrate
> >population? I can't locate it at the moment.
> >
> No, sorry.
Ah well. Perhaps it's simply my overactive imagination again. Or
something.
-Su
Adrian Stott
wrote:
... and your point is?
Adrian
Robin Nicholson
>If it's Hertford, look for my barge (Onx). The kettle works well.
>
>Adrian
Sounds like a good idea..I have been to Bishops Stortford but not to
Hertford..plain sailing I guess?
--
Robin
Peter Stockdale
"tim noakes" <tim.noakes...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c2uoom$ll$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
pete
Adrian Stott
Much easier than the Stort.
Adrian
Andy B
Martin Clark <mar...@spl.at> typed:
> Su/Cutworks wrote...
>> Martin Clark wrote:
>>
>>>
http://www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/canal/index/articles/article_id=7395.html
>>> ?wildlife
>>>
>>> I see they have stolen a map from my site without permission. It
>>> must have been a few years ago as the map is out of date and has
>>> been superseded by another.
>>
>> Nothing worse than a copyright thief. Perhaps you should complain?
>> Or would that give them the incentive to be inconsiderate again?
>>
> There was another website, also based in Rochdale, that copied almost
> the entire content of a web page from another of my web sites
> (non-canal-related). When I emailed to complain I received a very rude
> and unco-operative reply from the webmaster. I decided at that time
> that it wasn't worth the hassle factor to argue back.
>
It is rife. This article appeared yesterday in Silicon.com
http://newsletters.silicon.cneteu.net/t/6332/427024/2573/0/
--
Andy B
for personal replies, given email address will return to sender. Please
use Andrew<full-stop>Belton<curly-at>btopenworld<full-stop>com instead.
tony
Adrian Stott <ba...@spam.com> wrote:
Agreed.
The Lee is an ugly river with an attractive finish in Hertford.
The Stort is an attractive river with a dreadful finish in Bishops Stortford.
I was glad we went up both, though.
--
Tony Clayton tony.cla...@pem.cam.ac.uk or to...@tclayton.demon.co.uk
Coins of the UK : http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk/coins.html
Values of Coins of the UK : http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk/values/coins.html
Metals used in Coins : http://www.tclayton.demon.co.uk/metal.html
Sent using RISC OS on an Acorn Strong Arm RiscPC
... Children: Pure love contained in soft packages.
Tony Brooks
"tim noakes" <tim.noakes...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c2uoom$ll$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
>
> news:c2ukam$r1b$2...@hercules.btinternet.com...
> > Martin Clark wrote:
> >
>
> I used (as many waterway types) to be generally pretty sympathetic to the
> reasonable needs of the natural history that we co-exist with on the cut
and
> elsewhere. But the actions of these offical tree hugging jobsworths, both
> here and on the cut, has utterly sickened me. I have fantasies of
sneaking
> up to the end of the Mont and tipping in a few drums of potent weedkiller
or
> something...... (spits out dummy and throws tantrum...)
The time is right - just buy it from the middle east & make sure its labled
for domestic consumption.
We'd be in the clear
Tonyu Brooks
Su/Cutworks
> "tim noakes" <tim.noakes...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
> news:c2uoom$ll$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
> >
> > "Su/Cutworks" <cutw...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > news:c2ukam$r1b$2...@hercules.btinternet.com...
> > > Martin Clark wrote:
> > >
> >
> snip
If you'd trimmed even more Martin and I would have been free and clear of
the discussion entirely. I've altered the subject line as it's getting to
be a bit annoying to see a Usenet convention used so predictably.
-Su
David Long
<cutw...@btinternet.com> writes
heading. I think you have to cut the posting out and paste it into under
a "New Thread" subject heading to make an effective subject line change.
--
David Long
Sankey Canal Restoration Society http://www.scars.org.uk/
St. Mary's http://www.geocities.com/andrew_fishburn/stmary1.html
http://www.scars.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/roadtopier.jpg
Su/Cutworks
> Didn't work for me - it still arrived under the original subject
> heading. I think you have to cut the posting out and paste it into under
> a "New Thread" subject heading to make an effective subject line change.
Must be the difference in newsreaders. Your reply came under the altered
header.
-Su
David Long
<cutw...@btinternet.com> writes
on all readers.
Neil Arlidge
> The Lee is an ugly river with an attractive finish in Hertford.
>
> The Stort is an attractive river with a dreadful finish in Bishops
> Stortford.
I agree with you about the ends, but I actually quite like the Lee........
Molly Mockford
in <acYoq3In...@scars.org.uk>:
>In message <c3a1gm$d3$1...@titan.btinternet.com>, Su/Cutworks
><cutw...@btinternet.com> writes
>>David wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't work for me - it still arrived under the original subject
>>> heading. I think you have to cut the posting out and paste it into under
>>> a "New Thread" subject heading to make an effective subject line change.
>>
>>Must be the difference in newsreaders. Your reply came under the altered
>>header.
>>
>Seems you have to do it the way I suggested to get the heading changed
>on all readers.
Or, if you have access to all headers[1], remove the References: line.
[1] Which I don't with my chosen software - but some people do.
--
Molly Mockford
I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that
lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be!
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.)
Adrian Stott
wrote:
>The Lee is an ugly river with an attractive finish in Hertford.
The Lee is definitely ugly and relatively uninteresting between, say,
the North Circular and Enfield. It is ugly but quite interesting
between Bow locks and Tottenham. Above Enfield, it is attractive.
>
>The Stort is an attractive river with a dreadful finish in Bishops Stortford.
The waterway at Bishops Stortford has much improved in the last few
years.
>I was glad we went up both, though.
Adrian
Nick Atty
wrote:
>In message <c3a1gm$d3$1...@titan.btinternet.com>, Su/Cutworks
><cutw...@btinternet.com> writes
>>David wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't work for me - it still arrived under the original subject
>>> heading. I think you have to cut the posting out and paste it into under
>>> a "New Thread" subject heading to make an effective subject line change.
>>
>>Must be the difference in newsreaders. Your reply came under the altered
>>header.
>>
>Seems you have to do it the way I suggested to get the heading changed
>on all readers.
As yet another discussion slides slowly into how to use news software,
I'll try to help by providing some background.
Threads are, err threaded, by what are called "references" tags. If
you look at the full message, with headers, you'll see a line that looks
a bit like:
References: <dbiWDrC3...@no.spam.please>
<ka0IjuNc...@no.spam.please>
<c2qsqh$201553$1...@ID-27576.news.uni-berlin.de>
[and so on]
These tags are designed to tell newsreaders which messages this on is a
follow-up to.
For many, many years this worked. Then, one of the "big" software
companies (and I'm not sure it was Microsoft, it could well have been
someone else entirely, but it feels like MS's "embrace and extend"
embuggerance) gave thousands and thousands of people a newsreader that
didn't generate reference lines.
In desparation, other pople (or maybe it was the same people, but it
caught on) made their newsreaders try to thread based on title and date
(which doesn't work reliably - if it did, there would never have been
references tags).
So if you *really* want to make something appear as a new thread you
must change the title to something that has never been used before (in
case someone has a thread of that title from years ago on their local
machine - your message will get threaded with it), and make sure that
the message doesn't contain "references" to any other messages (how you
do that depends on your software). If you only do one, then it will
work for some and not for others, and instead of people talking about
what you wanted, they'll talk (often rot!) about newsreader
configuration, all assuming everyone uses the same software as they do.
begin another example of what happens when people break standards
I could put some really, really useful information in here, but people
using broken newsreading software will think that there is some sort of
attachement here and won't be able to read it.
end example
--
On-line canal route planner: http://www.canalplan.org.uk
(Waterways World site of the month, April 2001)
Su/Cutworks
"Nick Atty" <nos...@nandj.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ml9h50tt5ovfqnar7...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:59:03 +0000, David Long <Da...@scars.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
> As yet another discussion slides slowly into how to use news software,
> I'll try to help by providing some background.
And make sure you don't include attachments on groups that don't alllow
them?
-Su
Molly Mockford
wrote in <c3adsk$odm$1...@titan.btinternet.com>:
He didn't post any attachment whatsoever. OE is broken, so it assumed
he did. What he actually posted was as follows, and I will enclose it
in quotes so that OE will see it is really text:
"begin another example of what happens when people break standards I
could put some really, really useful information in here, but people
using broken newsreading software will think that there is some sort of
attachement here and won't be able to read it.
end example"
OE thinks that any line which starts with "begin" followed by two spaces
is Javascript, and displays it as an attachment :-(
Su/Cutworks
> OE thinks that any line which starts with "begin" followed by two spaces
> is Javascript, and displays it as an attachment :-(
And if it is displayed as an attachment due to the sender using Javascript
it's still inappropriate in a non-html group.
-Su
Don Aitken
You are still missing the point. The post contained text, and nothing
but text. No HTML involved (and HTML is a different thing from
attachments, anyway). Your newsreader tells you there is an
attachment. Your newsreader is lying to you.
Actually, OE should share the blame with whoever thought up the UUE
specification all those year ago (Javascript is much more recent, and
has nothing to do with it, AFAIK). It is possible to fool other
newsreaders, including Agent, in a similar way, although it is much
less likely to happen by accident.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
Nick Atty
wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:26:29 +0000 (UTC), "Su/Cutworks"
><cutw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>Molly wrote:
>>
>> > OE thinks that any line which starts with "begin" followed by two spaces
>>> is Javascript, and displays it as an attachment :-(
>>
>>And if it is displayed as an attachment due to the sender using Javascript
>>it's still inappropriate in a non-html group.
>>
>You are still missing the point. The post contained text, and nothing
>but text. No HTML involved (and HTML is a different thing from
>attachments, anyway). Your newsreader tells you there is an
>attachment. Your newsreader is lying to you.
>
>Actually, OE should share the blame with whoever thought up the UUE
>specification all those year ago (Javascript is much more recent, and
>has nothing to do with it, AFAIK). It is possible to fool other
>newsreaders, including Agent, in a similar way, although it is much
>less likely to happen by accident.
Much less likely in my experience. After all, it was part way through
the message. If there had been a MIME header it could perhaps (just)
be excused.
I do know people who have "begin reply to xxxx" as their attributions
line. It's tempting!