On 7/25/07, Andrew Dyke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>LT is almost back on Avon normal level, about 12 inches to go.
> Officially the height has now been put at 5.51meters, almost 18 feet above
> normal levels.

On 7/25/07, Andrew Dyke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LT is almost back on Avon normal level, about 12 inches to go.

Well, we finally left Pershore today. The water level was actually an
inch lower than normal above the lock, but there was still a good flow
on the river (about 1.5 mph).
At it's highest just above the lock it reached 9 foot from normal
summer levels, but since the lock was completely level at it's highest
you can add the height of the lock on to that (not sure what it is
normally, as it was already rising when we reached the lock). I'd like
to know where they measure river "height" as it varies along the
length of the river especially in flood when the water slopes between
6-12 foot between locks.

We passed Gribbitt still hanging on to grim life, even though the
stern on the ground was about 4 feet higher than the bow in the water.
Oasis Too, and another boat, Zenobia has also both slipped their ropes
on the LANT moorings, so I'm not impressed. I'm also not impressed
with the owners who didn't use the many strong trees to tie both front
and stern ropes to, and didn't bother with riding posts.

We pushed up the river and while the flow across the wiers was strong,
I could cope with it OK.

We reached Chadbury lock, and found the gates covered in debris. There
was still most of a caravan blocking the left side top gate, but by
the time we had lunch some one had arrived by dingy. I thought it was
LANT, but no - it was some boaters from the boat club just up the
river wanted to get the lock ready to bring back some of there boats
that had been swept away.

We stayed a couple of hours clearing the debris out, putting it all
neatly to the side of the lock, and then we continued up the river.

Passed Lord Toulouse, which now looked OK, and the sunken trip boat
the fire brigade were trying refloat.

We had some prior knowledge of the problems at Evesham lock, about
several narrowboats blocking the gates. We thought we would go up to
the lock, and have a look.

When we arrived, it was a scene of devastation with one boat below the
lock on the island on it's side, another above it resting of one of
the lock balance beams above the first. Another boat sits alongside
the lock on the wall, and a sunken workboat in the lock cut, and a
small fibreglass cruiser on it's side on the lock moorings.

The lock keepers boat was on the side of the lock after a rope snapped
holding it from a oak tree on the lock island, two of the other boats
(one of the gate, the other on it's side) belonged to the same person
who apparently moored them using one rope off the bow, and then
stringing the other behind. I'm not happy about this useless person.

Most boats that had been damaged could have been saved through better
mooring, especially if they have a permanant mooring on the river.

The lock keeper was unwilling to let us through, saying the river was
3 foot in the red above the lock. We are not convinced, and he was
also unwilling to let us through once they repaired the lock some
several weeks in the future. We worked out it was possible to make the
lock operational for narrowboats, and so he said he would let us
through was the level had dropped. The levels seen on the way up
peaked at 6 inches, and at Evesham was less than 4 inches in the red.

We returned back to the LANT moorings in town, and just as I write
this Julie and Dad have gone to find a chippie. Now to do the
important thing, and set up the satellite - the only thing that has
been keeping us sane!

If the levels rise much again, I think we will insist going through
the lock to use the UANT moorings up river which have proper riding
posts, and rings to tie to. Are you listening LANT? - many boats have
suffered because of your poor moorings!!

Mike

-- 
Michael Askin
http://shoestring_DOT_zapto_DOT_org/

Reply via email to