Narrowboats and wide boats rediscovered at Harefield - the facts

[antarmike]

All due respect but you are not talking about the same pit. The pit with the boats is seperated from the canal BEHIND what is now Harefield marina, it connected with the southern lake known as harefield 2 at one tim but the connection with boyers Pit (Harefiled marina) was a temporary one.

From my memory the pit which connected directly to the GU had boats in it, including at least one motor. There may have been other boats in another pit, but I am sure I remember looking out across water, directly at some boats.

I have not been past there since about 1979, so I have no idea where the Marina is situated, I can only remeber what I saw at the time.

Edited March 11, 2010 by antarmike

[Laurence Hogg]

From my memory the pit which connected directly to the GU had boats in it, including at least one motor. There may have been other boats in another pit, but I am sure I remember looking out across water, directly at some boats.

I have not been past there since about 1979, so I have no idea where the Marina is situated, I can only remeber what I saw at the time.

Hi Mike,

Thats Harefiled Marina now, formely known as "Boyers pit", has been used for boat storage for many years, GU fleet was stored there in WW2, the motor was Barlows "Rodney" (ex FMC Hecla) and was visible, there were other boats too. The owner at that time was not too friendly towards enthusiasts as I remember. Rodney is still there as a landing stage, the rest are cleared apart from a wide beam tug "Panama".

[antarmike]

Hi Mike,

Thats Harefiled Marina now, formely known as "Boyers pit", has been used for boat storage for many years, GU fleet was stored there in WW2, the motor was Barlows "Rodney" (ex FMC Hecla) and was visible, there were other boats too. The owner at that time was not too friendly towards enthusiasts as I remember. Rodney is still there as a landing stage, the rest are cleared apart from a wide beam tug "Panama".

That makes sense., As I say there was a motor visible still with Ramshead in about 1977, and I know the Rams head got pinched. I must appear stoopid, but I hadn't realised that boats were in more than one pit, Makes sense now though, thanks.

[carlt]

Raymond?

No because the original wooden knees were left alongside some oak fence posts and the wrong ones were replicated.

[NB Alnwick]

I know this is slightly but it amazes me that the BTC were able to get away with just sinking so many vessels with the IWA taking such a keen interest. That they subsequently denied knowing about it is even more amazing and this prompted the IWA to state: "Our social organisation is simply not constituted to deal with flat untruths in high places."

 

Perhaps some things do not change - what untruths are being told in high places today?

[Derek R.]

I know this is slightly but it amazes me that the BTC were able to get away with just sinking so many vessels with the IWA taking such a keen interest. That they subsequently denied knowing about it is even more amazing and this prompted the IWA to state: "Our social organisation is simply not constituted to deal with flat untruths in high places."

 

Perhaps some things do not change - what untruths are being told in high places today?

 

Any amount - and you and I end up paying for the consequences!

[fender]

I wonder if in fifty years time these will be a Secret? as today they are treated just the same as those hidden from view were fifty years ago, just a few yards away.

 

How much importance is placed on unwanted items through the course of time. I shouldn't think there is much to 'pick over' now, though many may be visiting for photographs, so the area will inevitably be disturbed beyond what is wanted - despite the pleas. What was 'picked' from them years ago, would have been done as they were no longer of use, and those doing the 'picking' would have had no available finances nor requirements to ressurect and return the greater bulk to service. In the process perhaps, supplying something missing from an extant example - or flogging it for another morsel of grub.

 

More beautiful than the gravel barges granted, but there are many fine examples of such boats on the cut already - usable, and not buried in a land locked flash. Why such attention to so difficult a task as possible recovery - is beyond me, when Progress and others are still mouldering in a still connected arm.

 

You'll have public awareness alright - amongst some. Many will have known of their presence and left sleeping dogs lie. I'll settle for the archive pictures thanks. Sorry if this sounds 'unenthusiastic' and a bit cynical - reality check or just one ignorant opinion? - ignore if you don't like.

 

Derek

 

I feel it will be a waste of time restoring these boats. Recording what remains and identifying the various names of boats would do so much to help fill in gaps in canal historical records, and and possible items that can be retrived may be good for a museum. Thats it, nothing more should be done.

 

I agree with several members in this thread who suggest that we have enough hulks on our canals and rivers (what about that historic narrowboat that has just been left to rot - so it seems - on the Thames west of Ravens Ait?? There are quite a few other examples like this. This week I saw Progress and other boats lying in the Troy Cut and it worries me that these historic boats will just be left to rot even further)

 

Restoring these Harefield boats will only take potential resources away from other projects and spread public contributions and volunteer effort much thinner across the board.

[alan_fincher]

I feel it will be a waste of time restoring these boats. Recording what remains and identifying the various names of boats would do so much to help fill in gaps in canal historical records, and and possible items that can be retrived may be good for a museum. Thats it, nothing more should be done.

 

I agree with several members in this thread who suggest that we have enough hulks on our canals and rivers (what about that historic narrowboat that has just been left to rot - so it seems - on the Thames west of Ravens Ait?? There are quite a few other examples like this. This week I saw Progress and other boats lying in the Troy Cut and it worries me that these historic boats will just be left to rot even further)

 

Restoring these Harefield boats will only take potential resources away from other projects and spread public contributions and volunteer effort much thinner across the board.

An unpopular view with many I feel sure, but I do agree 100% with Fender.

 

Record all you can about those that are unusual, particularly if no other has survived, but I'd say that's where you stop, personally.

[Derek R.]

No because the original wooden knees were left alongside some oak fence posts and the wrong ones were replicated.

 

Does that make Raymond a 'fence'? (Mind the barbs . . )

[Speedwheel]

and possible items that can be retrived may be good for a museum.

 

May as well save the time and expense and scrap them now then!

[Laurence Hogg]

I am suprised at the negative attitude shown in some posts. the site contains at least 11 iron Josher buttys, these would easily fetch around £10k each anyday to enthusiasts who could restore them, that in turn would provide work for specialist yards and so on as well as funding any recovery operation and or restoration of a more rare boat. What also intrigues me is why these have remained overlooked so long when key enthusiasts knew of them. If this site does get investigated and a recovery is mounted it will hardly sap funds from other projects or labour, but actually create work for the boating industry and trades also at the same time improving a run down public amenity.

[Chris Pink]

I am suprised at the negative attitude shown in some posts. the site contains at least 11 iron Josher buttys, these would easily fetch around £10k each anyday to enthusiasts who could restore them, that in turn would provide work for specialist yards and so on as well as funding any recovery operation and or restoration of a more rare boat. What also intrigues me is why these have remained overlooked so long when key enthusiasts knew of them. If this site does get investigated and a recovery is mounted it will hardly sap funds from other projects or labour, but actually create work for the boating industry and trades also at the same time improving a run down public amenity.

 

There's plenty of work available.

 

Maybe it would be more appropriate to leave those boats where they are and restore the collection at Ellesmere and other places, http://www.nationalhistoricships.org.uk/ for a full list, rather than look at these boats as a cash cow.

[Laurence Hogg]

There's plenty of work available.

 

Maybe it would be more appropriate to leave those boats where they are and restore the collection at Ellesmere and other places, http://www.nationalhistoricships.org.uk/ for a full list, rather than look at these boats as a cash cow.

 

The whole Hareield thing started with the discovery of a extant GJ/GU wide boat hull. The prize at Harefiled would be to extract a good example of this now extinct type which was so prevalant and extensivly used in the south. The FMC boats were a side issue but raise the possibility of helping fund the preservation / recovery of a wide boat. We know that there are intact examples on the site. The E Port craft are now being restored under the current plan of TWT which has got off to a good start.

[Speedwheel]

Hi Laurence,

 

I don't think you should let the negativity of some posts (mine included) give you a reflection of people attitudes.

I am very much in favour of the salvage and restoration of these (and indeed would be very willing to assist with operations).

 

However, having seen what happens when museums get involved (which I appreciate you have not actually mentioned) or committees start getting created, people become, rightly cynical. That is not to tar them all with the same brush. The Saturn project for example stands out as a shining example of how it can work.

There are all to many boats though lying in musuems neglected. Birchills, Chiltern, take your pick from E.P.

 

I would be interested to know if there is actually a market for 11 josher butties (other than people cutting the back ends off). I would certainly be interested in one but would not be willing to pay 10k for it as by the time all the necessary work had been undertaken it would not (probably) be worth what had been spent on it - a very cold and calculating way of looking at it but something most people have to consider.

 

How do you decide who gets them? Who decides who is a suitable owner/purchaser?

 

Don't be put off. At the very least these boats need to be properly recorded. If some can be saved, preserved, conserved, restored then so much the better.

 

All the best

 

Mark

[Laurence Hogg]

Hi Laurence,

 

I don't think you should let the negativity of some posts (mine included) give you a reflection of people attitudes.

I am very much in favour of the salvage and restoration of these (and indeed would be very willing to assist with operations).

 

However, having seen what happens when museums get involved (which I appreciate you have not actually mentioned) or committees start getting created, people become, rightly cynical. That is not to tar them all with the same brush. The Saturn project for example stands out as a shining example of how it can work.

There are all to many boats though lying in musuems neglected. Birchills, Chiltern, take your pick from E.P.

 

I would be interested to know if there is actually a market for 11 josher butties (other than people cutting the back ends off). I would certainly be interested in one but would not be willing to pay 10k for it as by the time all the necessary work had been undertaken it would not (probably) be worth what had been spent on it - a very cold and calculating way of looking at it but something most people have to consider.

 

How do you decide who gets them? Who decides who is a suitable owner/purchaser?

 

Don't be put off. At the very least these boats need to be properly recorded. If some can be saved, preserved, conserved, restored then so much the better.

 

All the best

 

Mark

 

Thanks for that Mark, I have noted your interest.

The best preserved boats certainly arent in museums, its individuals that do the better job, ie just look at the Braunston turn out each year. Interestingly the Saturn project didnt go so well to start with, I remember seing "Symbol" rot away on a dock before Saturn was started? There is a contract drawn up and in existence for boats which "protects" the hull from being altered substantially, I havent seen this as yet but it is in existence in a certain well known national large orginisation. The ball park figure was derived from a number of parties and may seem high, however the idea would be to attract serous interested parties not the dreamers. Are there 10 customers out there, I guess so by the amount of calls over this subject. Aslo note the post has had over 1300 viewings in less than a day and a half.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Laurence Hogg

[Speedwheel]

I remember seing "Symbol" rot away on a dock before Saturn was started?

 

This is a very interesting point. As I remember it is was the breaking up of Symbol that spurred the restoration of Saturn on - though I could be wrong.

 

It seems to be a common theme in conservation, it takes the destruction of something to spur people on. The Firestone factory is a good example.

[NB Alnwick]

With regard to restoration it a case of 'Where there's a will, there's a way' - usually a single enthusiast or a small group with an enthusiastic and determined leader, can tackle almost any difficult restoration task - you only have to look at the work that has been carried out in the railway preservation world - not just locomotives but Victorian wooden carriages that having spent as much as half a Century in use as a garden sheds or seaside chalets, were then abandoned and left to rot for many decades before being saved for posterity.

 

Having said that, saving something and restoring it so that it can be used or put on display, is not the end of the story and, again using railway preservation as an example, I know of several items that were once meticulously restored and put back in to service only to subsequently fall into disrepair and be allowed to rot - I even know of such items that were subsequently destroyed! But even where the restored and abandoned item is not destroyed, restoration the second or third time round becomes more difficult in terms of true accuracy because there will be less and less of the original artefact extant.

 

In conclusion, I am all for restoration but once restored, sensible provisions must be made to ensure ongoing maintenance and upkeep. In the meantime every effort should be made to accurately record and preserve details the original so that future generations have a sound historical reference.

[Speedwheel]

According to Roger Fuller's List Upwood has been renamed Kerry and is/was based at Denham, still unconverted. But Jim Shead's Boat List doesn't bring up a likely sounding Kerry (or Upwood for that matter).

 

So is Upwood confirmed as one of the boats at Harefield? And if so which boat is/was Kerry? And where is Kerry now?

 

David Mack

 

Could that be the one now called Kingsdown, now based at Otherton, which may be Kildare that could be Kerry, or not, possibly, maybe?!!!?!?!

[Laurence Hogg]

According to Roger Fuller's List Upwood has been renamed Kerry and is/was based at Denham, still unconverted. But Jim Shead's Boat List doesn't bring up a likely sounding Kerry (or Upwood for that matter).

 

So is Upwood confirmed as one of the boats at Harefield? And if so which boat is/was Kerry? And where is Kerry now?

 

David Mack

 

We have a photo of Upwood part buried at Harefield. There are quite a few errors on Rogers page which have been noted in the past. Kerry was sold to E Thomas and used for the basis of the tug "Birchills" which is at E Port. It was formely named Kingston.

[Paul H]

I am afraid I too have some misgivings about this scheme involving boats which have laid undisturbed for the last 50 years. There used to be quite a few historic wrecks around the system which were fascinating to enthusiasts and historians but they have now almost all gone, swept away in BW tidy-up operations or as a result of waterway restorations. Harefield is a pretty unique survivor.

 

however on this site are at least 11 very saleable Josher hulls which as far as we can see should be salvagable these could assist in the financial equation. .

 

It would be nice to think that but I doubt in reality that this is really is the case. "Grimsby" a Saltley Josher butty, ready to go, was for sale for over a year at IIRC £24K with no takers - there is simply not much demand for butties.

 

A derelict butty could cost something upward of £40K to properly restore at one of the specialist yards - possibly rather more - so it is not really an economic proposition.

 

What there would be a demand for today are the bows of the boats which could be made into tugs. Which would be a travesty – is that really what we want? Better to leave them where they are in the hope that people will one day recognise their real value.

 

I agree that it would be fantastic to see a Grand Junction wideboat restored but there's already a number of other wooden wide boats (albeit from different parts of the waterways) which the Waterways Trust are failing to restore at Ellesmere Port. I was told on good authority that the cost would be something like £250K per boat.

 

Sorry to sound such a note of pessimism but I do hope that things can be left as they are with an archaelogical investigation and perhaps some interpretation boards. I don't think these boats are particularly vulnerable to vandals - they have been known locally for decades and all the worthwhile boat fittings would probably have been pinched in the 1960s anyway.

 

I do look forward to the articles in Waterways World and Narrow Boat though!

 

Paul

Edited March 12, 2010 by Paul H

[fender]

I note the replies from Alan Fincher, Speedwheel, Chris Pink (and Paul H.) I am too in agreement. I am NOT against restoration of boats, but the way these kind of things happen. The restoration of the Harefield boats are clearly a very long term project and possibly may take far more resources and finances than anyone can imagine.

 

One of my concerns about preserving boats has been the dubious state of some historic boats in private and museum collections and the lack of willingness and funds to further complete these projects. It seems even independent organisations have problems too. Less than a year ago the ICI Weaver Packet 'Wincham' was scrapped by the Wincham Preservation Society because costs were too great - this destructive act occurred much to the anger of many maritime organisations.

 

To Laurence Hogg: May I suggest that instead of restoring the GJ/GU wide boat hull, why not build a new one? It will be a much more manageable long-term project and just the same as spending years and years rebuilding it to what would be to all purposes a completely new vessel. Look at the railways, the lack of certain iconic steam engines in preservation hasnt stopped rail enthusiasts from building new ones, examples are those splendid Garratts on the WHR. One of the most inspiring projects ever was the Tornado project which oversaw the building of a brand new LNER Peppercorn A1 locomotive. What do you think?

Edited March 12, 2010 by fender

[Steve King]

It's as interesting to read about these sunken boats now as when I went to Harefield for a brief exploration of the site in the mid 1970s. Back then the cabin side of Barlows 'Rodney' was just about discernable as such (the boat was in use as a landing stage) and I was told that the original 'Jason' was there too, this being the Chas Nelson of Stockton one.

 

Thirty five years later I am minded to relate here the story of the recovery of a Fen Lighter, a task undertaken by enthusiasts in the early 1970s. Prompted by John Wilson, author of the Robert Wilson series booklet 'Fenland Barge Traffic' they spent many hours and much effort raising one of the last wooden Fen lighters from Roswell Pits near Ely. Having achieved their goal they needed somewhere to preserve the boat so it went to the Cambridge Museum of Science and Industry by the River Cam. At some point this organisation decided they did not want the boat any more and, although the exact details of what happened are not known to me, most of the boat has disappeared leaving just the fore end to be seen at Collector's World in Downham Market ('Open Every Day' a few years ago but closed on the day I visited so I cannot verify this).

 

John Wilson told me the story and notes that although no Fen Lighters exist now in preservation, there are one or two in quite good condition sunk in backwaters off the River Great Ouse. However, he notes that the most important thing in contemplating such a recovery and restoration is to have funds and a place to keep the craft arranged before you raise it. This, he says, is the main problem, not getting the boat raised.

 

So yes, it would be nice to think that some of the Harefield boats could be raised and restored, but how likely is this to happen? Canal boat preservation is not like railway preservation where there is a large and thriving restoration movement with plently of volunteers and outside funding. We only have to look at The Boat Musem in Ellesmere Port to see how difficult it has been to preserve our inland waterways heritage. One could observe that in many cases private individuals have done a much better job or preserving heritage boats than museums have done. The 'museum way' seems to be years of hard use coupled with neglected maintenance, followed by a major restoration where much of the original fabric has to be replaced. Contrast this with individuals or groups who tend to 'conserve' rather than replace, perhaps because funding comes from their own pocket, and consequently possess a more original craft which will pass on through history.

 

Personally, I would not expect that the Harefield boats would actually be in a condition that would get many practical people excited - they have been abandoned and neglected for over fifty years now! And weren't many of these boats engaged in the carriage of London's refuse? They would hardly be the best available, even at that time. I think the idea of hauling out iron composite buttys in decent condition is rather fanciful I'm afraid.

 

Having said all this, if an attempt is made to rescue some of these boats and it is properly organised with an assured future for the craft in place, then I would wish it every success.

 

In the meantime though, it remains a tantalising thought that out there are the remains of some historic boats which might just be left untouched and lost forever in the mists of time and memory, and I find this quite an attractive outcome.

 

 

Steve

[fender]

It's as interesting to read about these sunken boats now as when I went to Harefield for a brief exploration of the site in the mid 1970s. Back then the cabin side of Barlows 'Rodney' was just about discernable as such (the boat was in use as a landing stage) and I was told that the original 'Jason' was there too, this being the Chas Nelson of Stockton one.

 

Thirty five years later I am minded to relate here the story of the recovery of a Fen Lighter, a task undertaken by enthusiasts in the early 1970s. Prompted by John Wilson, author of the Robert Wilson series booklet 'Fenland Barge Traffic' they spent many hours and much effort raising one of the last wooden Fen lighters from Roswell Pits near Ely. Having achieved their goal they needed somewhere to preserve the boat so it went to the Cambridge Museum of Science and Industry by the River Cam. At some point this organisation decided they did not want the boat any more and, although the exact details of what happened are not known to me, most of the boat has disappeared leaving just the fore end to be seen at Collector's World in Downham Market ('Open Every Day' a few years ago but closed on the day I visited so I cannot verify this).

 

John Wilson told me the story and notes that although no Fen Lighters exist now in preservation, there are one or two in quite good condition sunk in backwaters off the River Great Ouse. However, he notes that the most important thing in contemplating such a recovery and restoration is to have funds and a place to keep the craft arranged before you raise it. This, he says, is the main problem, not getting the boat raised.

 

So yes, it would be nice to think that some of the Harefield boats could be raised and restored, but how likely is this to happen? Canal boat preservation is not like railway preservation where there is a large and thriving restoration movement with plently of volunteers and outside funding. We only have to look at The Boat Musem in Ellesmere Port to see how difficult it has been to preserve our inland waterways heritage. One could observe that in many cases private individuals have done a much better job or preserving heritage boats than museums have done. The 'museum way' seems to be years of hard use coupled with neglected maintenance, followed by a major restoration where much of the original fabric has to be replaced. Contrast this with individuals or groups who tend to 'conserve' rather than replace, perhaps because funding comes from their own pocket, and consequently possess a more original craft which will pass on through history.

 

Personally, I would not expect that the Harefield boats would actually be in a condition that would get many practical people excited - they have been abandoned and neglected for over fifty years now! And weren't many of these boats engaged in the carriage of London's refuse? They would hardly be the best available, even at that time. I think the idea of hauling out iron composite buttys in decent condition is rather fanciful I'm afraid.

 

Having said all this, if an attempt is made to rescue some of these boats and it is properly organised with an assured future for the craft in place, then I would wish it every success.

 

In the meantime though, it remains a tantalising thought that out there are the remains of some historic boats which might just be left untouched and lost forever in the mists of time and memory, and I find this quite an attractive outcome.

 

 

Steve

 

 

Yes - my post regarding examples such as ICI Weaver Packet 'Wincham' make this point too.

 

http://j-eyres.fotopic.net/p57602558.html

 

And there's the example of a maritime museum in Melbourne scrapping a preserved Steam Tug.

 

http://daldy.com/category/general-news/ste...ton-2-scrapped/

Edited March 12, 2010 by fender

[Speedwheel]

We have a photo of Upwood part buried at Harefield. There are quite a few errors on Rogers page which have been noted in the past. Kerry was sold to E Thomas and used for the basis of the tug "Birchills" which is at E Port. It was formely named Kingston.

 

So which one is Kingsdown? That was at Denham and then out on the bank at Cassio for a while. It was subject to a dispute and sold. Now at Hatherton.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Speedwheel

[Derek R.]

I am suprised at the negative attitude shown in some posts. the site contains at least 11 iron Josher buttys, these would easily fetch around £10k each anyday to enthusiasts who could restore them, that in turn would provide work for specialist yards and so on as well as funding any recovery operation and or restoration of a more rare boat. What also intrigues me is why these have remained overlooked so long when key enthusiasts knew of them. If this site does get investigated and a recovery is mounted it will hardly sap funds from other projects or labour, but actually create work for the boating industry and trades also at the same time improving a run down public amenity.

 

This is of course only a handful of people speaking their personal thoughts on a forum, but Mark, Chris, and others have made some good points with regard to the fifty plus years these vessels have been submerged - some with tree root growth through them, and others under spoil - that whilst it may be nice to see some examples of extinct vessels to the region back afloat, the idea that others such as those Joshers would provide a financial stimulus to the odd few, has some research needed in gaining a realistic idea of the costs involved in getting any of them out from where they are. There is fifty years of arboreal growth to get through; stabilising of the ground for heavy lifting tackle; and quite likely specialised wider than standard HGV cradles to be made; transported to site; deployed; and loaded onto transport to a yard or yards under specialised escort with all the Local Authority co-ordination needed. Yes, it's possible - but from what bottomless financial pit? Besides which, who currently owns them? And who may lay claim to owning them once the financial ball is set rolling?

 

The heartfelt enthusiasm following such a discovery is understandable. It is also the very same enthusiasm that can bankrupt even a consortium of investors - and what is the investment? How and when will it be realised? Probably never, not without massive public funding or a huge charitable trust that could more economically target other vessels - in less terribly isolated positions and in less bad condition with subsequently less cost overall. I see it as a project beyond the pail. An enthusiast who restores a boat - any enthusiast restoring anything - will never see a return on his project when finished, as the ongoing costs multiply as time goes by. The steam loco Flying Scotsman has cost how much since it was brought back from the States all those years ago? It has been at the NRM York for a rebuild which was reckoned would cost £750,000. The figure spent now stands at £1.3m - and problems with the wheel sets are now about to set them back even further - THAT locomotive is a piece of history that virtually everyone knows about, even if they were born after 1968. In St Albans a derelict Cinema has received £1m in donations for its restoration over a period of six weeks. It will be a place for hundreds to gather and enjoy films and meals - but will cost a lot more than £1m for its completion. How many will be as enthusiastic about bits of old boat buried in a pit for fifty years, in a near impossible to recover location, and maybe never see, travel, or steer such a vessel - when they can already do that now on many others? The difference to many will be negligible or lost completely on them. Wooden boats also burn well. Imagine a recovered and restored Harefield wide boat ending up like the Cutty Sark - or Usk.

 

Yes, they are important 'discoveries', but they are not another version of the USAF P-58 fighter recovered from under 250 feet of ice in Greenland - Glacier Girl. Not quite. It is warming to know they are confirmed to be there, and that some names can be attributed to them, but I would like to see some figures on sheets of paper before my enthusiasm for extraction got the better of me. This latter problem should be seen as the reason why no-one to date has taken any firm action to commence resurrection, for the whereabouts has not been unknown.

 

Is this negativity? There are the 'ah but's' of this world, and there are the 'can do's'. The first 'must do' (I'm sure it is in progress) is research costs and practicalities - then review the situation. When a figure is reached for completion - multiply it by 2.5 - that's more like what it will actually cost.

 

Derek