NIMBYS bully their way over Barrow Blueway

road_high

What a fantastic boon this could have been to St. Mullins, Graig and surrounds. Such a beautiful part of the country with massive potential to draw in visitors. It could have linked in with the planned New Ross and Waterford greenways, bringing a new type of tourism to the south east.
But alas no, a vocal group of NIMBYs who want to keep the area to themselves (ie Olivia O'Leary who lives closeby) got to bully their way and POV on top of everyone else. They'll be the very ones whinging there's nothing in rural Ireland.

https://kclr96fm.com/co-kilkenny-town-reacts-to-barrow-blueway-permission-refusal

Joe Daly

road_high wrote: »

What a fantastic boon this could have been to St. Mullins, Graig and surrounds. Such a beautiful part of the country with massive potential to draw in visitors. It could have linked in with the planned New Ross and Waterford greenways, bringing a new type of tourism to the south east.
But alas no, a vocal group of NIMBYs who want to keep the area to themselves (ie Olivia O'Leary who lives closeby) got to bully their way and POV on top of everyone else. They'll be the very ones whinging there's nothing in rural Ireland.

https://kclr96fm.com/co-kilkenny-town-reacts-to-barrow-blueway-permission-refusal

Its a hidden gem but when the people like you mentioned above seemingly don't wont there peacefull lives disturbed .

Be well and win

I don't live in the area but having seen first hand the butchery done to trees by the river paths up by the Arboretum by Waterways Ireland, I'dhave little faith in them doing something decent on this. Remember the plans called out for part of the path to be concrete. Not very enviromentally friendly and a bit of an eyesore.

Markcheese

It would be a bit ironic if it got "marketed" as a hidden gem, took off in popularity and so got the foot fall, but not blue way... (the paths are still open, the waterway is definitely open, a bit better signage and access, and away you go...

whisky_galore

Good.

You can still walk it, so it's not like it's closed off to you.
I don't see why every single wild area or trail has to be sanitised, plastered with concrete and tarmac to please cyclists and others (as if there arent any existing greenways and 100s if not 1000s of km of quiet roads they can use any day of the week)

road_high

whisky_galore wrote: »

Good.

You can still walk it, so it's not like it's closed off to you.
I don't see why every single wild area or trail has to be sanitised, plastered with concrete and tarmac to please cyclists and others (as if there arent any existing greenways and 100s if not 1000s of km of quiet roads they can use any day of the week)

But they aren't are they? Let's not get all hysterical and exagerate like the anti-blueway mafia. Not every single wild are is getting improved access, this was a very specific project along an already existing towpath. You're essentially saying visitors should eff to other greenways and spend their money and create resultant jobs elsewhere. There's no point people whining there's no jobs or amenities in a rural area when they block all attempts to develop somehting in an area like this.

whisky_galore

road_high wrote: »

But they aren't are they? Let's not get all hysterical and exagerate like the anti-blueway mafia. Not every single wild are is getting improved access, this was a very specific project along an already existing towpath. You're essentially saying visitors should eff to other greenways and spend their money and create resultant jobs elsewhere. There's no point people whining there's no jobs or amenities in a rural area when they block all attempts to develop somehting in an area like this.

They can still walk the bloody towpath, promote that instead in its own right.

ScallionAyter

whisky_galore wrote: »

They can still walk the bloody towpath, promote that instead in its own right.

Who is 'they'?

People in wheelchairs?
People on bikes?
People with buggies?
People in winter?
Elderly people with decreased mobility?


I forgot, those people don't matter, do they? Sure let them walk the N80 if they want a stable surface.

iwillhtfu

whisky_galore wrote: »

Good.

You can still walk it, so it's not like it's closed off to you.
I don't see why every single wild area or trail has to be sanitised, plastered with concrete and tarmac to please cyclists and others (as if there arent any existing greenways and 100s if not 1000s of km of quiet roads they can use any day of the week)

This sort of insane rhetoric is what's annoying about the anti blueway brigade.

A loose unbound pathway does not equal "plastered with concrete and tarmac" Ye honestly haven't a clue and a large percentage opposed don't even use or live on or near the Barrow.

"as if there arent any existing greenways" Nimbyism at it's finest right there.

whisky_galore

ScallionAyter wrote: »

Who is 'they'?

People in wheelchairs?
People on bikes?
People with buggies?
People in winter?
Elderly people with decreased mobility?


I forgot, those people don't matter, do they? Sure let them walk the N80 if they want a stable surface.

Should every long distance trail in the country be surfaced and lifts installed to get to the top of Carrauntwohill regardless?

radharc

ScallionAyter wrote: »

Who is 'they'?

People in wheelchairs?
People on bikes?
People with buggies?
People in winter?
Elderly people with decreased mobility?


I forgot, those people don't matter, do they? Sure let them walk the N80 if they want a stable surface.

I am not familiar with the full track but have to say I have walked most of it with a buggy on several occasions with no trouble.

ScallionAyter

whisky_galore wrote: »

Should every long distance trail in the country be surfaced and lifts installed to get to the top of Carrauntwohill regardless?

Is that your opposition to a year round surface that suits the mobility impaired? Lifts on carrauntwohill?

Nice to know.

road_high

iwillhtfu wrote: »

This sort of insane rhetoric is what's annoying about the anti blueway brigade.

A loose unbound pathway does not equal "plastered with concrete and tarmac" Ye honestly haven't a clue and a large percentage opposed don't even use or live on or near the Barrow.

"as if there arent any existing greenways" Nimbyism at it's finest right there.

The anti campaign has been ferocious in its rhetoric and vilification of anyone with a shred of support for the project. I don't live there either but can certainly see the potential benefits to an area largely bypassed by job creation. The narrative of a concrete/tarmac highway pouring over a green paradise was alllowed take over beyond all reason or logic sadly. All they were talking about here is tarring a grass pathway same you would a country lane. The wildlife don't tend to live directly in the lane funnily enough.

I thought the vilification of the Mullaichan cafe owner particularly distasteful- I don’t know him personally but I’m sure he’s just a small business owner just trying to survive and do something in a rural area- the begrudgery and knocking I saw online took my breath away and illustrated how hard it is to do anything in this country without a cabal of idiots attacking you.

Well and truly had and used by the likes of wealthy individuals like Olivia Oleary who’s sole aim is to keep out visitors and riff raff from anywhere close to their exclusive residences

HenryWoods

The Save The Barrow Track people are not all ''NIMBYS'', quite a lot of us are locals who rightfully didn't want Waterways Ireland tearing up the track to the supposed benefit of anonymous, faceless tourists.
Their plan to lay down gravel on a earthen towpath on a flood plain was disastrous and their employees and plant hire goons destroyed the towpath anyways with their firewood gathering exercise in Leighlin. And have been rightly called out on it by Bord Pleanala.
Don't give me that ''It'll be good for Carlow'' bollocks. Most of the fatties in the Council and Carlow Chamber have never walked the towpath.

(The Muinebheag Sentinel has a great collection of photos of the absolute hackjob done on the towpath.)

road_high

HenryWoods wrote: »

The Save The Barrow Track people are not all ''NIMBYS'', quite a lot of us are locals who rightfully didn't want Waterways Ireland tearing up the track to the supposed benefit of anonymous, faceless tourists.
Their plan to lay down gravel on a earthen towpath on a flood plain was disastrous and their employees and plant hire goons destroyed the towpath anyways with their firewood gathering exercise in Leighlin. And have been rightly called out on it by Bord Pleanala.
Don't give me that ''It'll be good for Carlow'' bollocks. Most of the fatties in the Council and Carlow Chamber have never walked the towpath.

(The Muinebheag Sentinel has a great collection of photos of the absolute hackjob done on the towpath.)

Right so you're not a NIMBY but then proceed to a NIMBY rant about tarmac on an earthen pathway....a little perspective and consideration for the wider benefits isn't even on the radar- the attidude is "I'm fine with the way it is, I don't want any development that may bring jobs and tourism because that's my opinion..."
Who cares if people in the Council never walked it, the aim was to bring in visitors that had never visited and spend money. But who needs that, you're happy to leave things as they are.

HenryWoods

Alas ''I don't want any development that may bring jobs and tourism'' is not what I meant, I'm against it from an environmental standpoint.
Besides, this is Carlow, the only tourists are welfare tourists and there are no jobs to be had along a dirty stretch of river.

wfdrun

HenryWoods wrote: »

Alas ''I don't want any development that may bring jobs and tourism'' is not what I meant, I'm against it from an environmental standpoint.
Besides, this is Carlow, the only tourists are welfare tourists and there are no jobs to be had along a dirty stretch of river.

Disinformation calling it a dirty stretch of river. Swimming galas n recent triathlons in Graigue. What's your game?

fits

I walked a lot of it with a buggy recently. Graiguenamanagh to Bagenalstown in stages. Some sections of it have an extremely poor and inaccessible surface.

I don’t know enough about what was proposed but the surface really could do with improving. There is actually almost nowhere to take a buggy off road in the county.

Markcheese

whisky_galore wrote: »

Should every long distance trail in the country be surfaced and lifts installed to get to the top of Carrauntwohill regardless?

Don't be silly lifts would be impractical... I'm sure a local plant hire firm would be only to willing to level and grade the offending mountain, as long as compensation is paid to everyone, (in kerry)

HenryWoods

wfdrun wrote: »

Disinformation calling it a dirty stretch of river. Swimming galas n recent triathlons in Graigue. What's your game?

It is. Go down to Websters Lock or any other body of water in Carlow town.
Did you know that 1 old man cleans this up without any help from anyone?

https://www.facebook.com/Cairde-an-Naduir-338831286872668/

ScallionAyter

HenryWoods wrote: »

It is. Go down to Websters Lock or any other body of water in Carlow town.
Did you know that 1 old man cleans this up without any help from anyone?

https://www.facebook.com/Cairde-an-Naduir-338831286872668/

You're all over the place with your excuses.

1. It's a fragile wildlife sanctuary that needs to be preserved
2. It's a dirty river than nobody cleans

Pick one.

iwillhtfu

HenryWoods wrote: »

It is. Go down to Websters Lock or any other body of water in Carlow town.
Did you know that 1 old man cleans this up without any help from anyone?

https://www.facebook.com/Cairde-an-Naduir-338831286872668/

You'll find it's mainly the burren that Eugene clears from and not to excuse the rubbish but it's nothing more than any large town with a river flowing through would have. He has also had several people help him clean up Hanover park and they did an excellent job. He does this off his own back and despite his lack of support it is his own choice not mandatory.

The barrow itself is far from filthy with 2 triathlons one of which is the biggest in Ireland (Athy Triathlon) taking place in it alongside several swimming events.

I think you need to check your facts to be honest and it's easy to see the bad try and get your hands dirty.

https://www.facebook.com/GoWithTheFlowRiverAdventures/videos/3109618249064109/

Be well and win

I read the report in the Nationalist last night, what is clear that whatever the merits or demerits of a principle of a Blueway, the proposal from Irish Water sucked from the point of view that they had not done a proper Environmental Impact study and that some of the "path" they were proposing would be washed away in a flood.

road_high

HenryWoods wrote: »

Alas ''I don't want any development that may bring jobs and tourism'' is not what I meant, I'm against it from an environmental standpoint.
Besides, this is Carlow, the only tourists are welfare tourists and there are no jobs to be had along a dirty stretch of river.

Wow have you ever been down there? This is one of the best vistas in the whole country. As another poster rightly pointed out you allegedly want to “protest the environment“ but then according to you it’s already a lost cause alongside a dirty river. The arguments against it become even more spurious as we delve deeper

road_high

Be well and win wrote: »

I read the report in the Nationalist last night, what is clear that whatever the merits or demerits of a principle of a Blueway, the proposal from Irish Water sucked from the point of view that they had not done a proper Environmental Impact study and that some of the "path" they were proposing would be washed away in a flood.

Both things which could be addressed and the project allowed proceed with the very minimum of impacts.
Rivers flood onto some public roads with regularity allover the country, doesn’t mean we close them off indefinitely. Ultimately there’s a very vocal bunch of NIMBYs led by the very articulate and well connected Olivia O’Leary who are horrified by the prospect of the general public passing close to their secluded mansions. That’s pretty much all this is about

byhookorbycrook

I’m not sure I’m elderly , but I do have restricted mobility and manage ok on it as it is . The plan as I read it would allow people to speed along on bikes on what is quite a narrow path - not good for those of us unable to jump out of the way fast enough.
The Barrow, like Carlow is badly promoted . It doesn’t need a tarmac / hard surface to succeed , it needs proper pr .
I was in Clonegal earlier this week and can’t understand why the place isn’t alive with tourists . It could be an Adare, which markets itself on a Manor most can’t afford and a few English style thatched cottages . Marketing is the difference .

iwillhtfu

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The plan as I read it would allow people to speed along on bikes on what is quite a narrow path - not good for those of us unable to jump out of the way fast enough.
.

Why for the love of jaysus is this arguement always brought up. Oh no the dreaded cyclist is going to mow down all the children. I cycle along the Barrow track quite regularly and I can assure you it's extremely far from busy and thronged with would be targets for the menace that is the cyclist.

Most folk that are opposed to it do so simply because they don't want change and they have some image of how the beautiful Barrow track will be destroyed. In reality they probably wouldn't have set foot on it for a long time and have no intention of doing so in the foreseeable future. Nit to mention those that don't even live on or near the barrow.

ScallionAyter

iwillhtfu wrote: »

Why for the love of jaysus is this arguement always brought up. Oh no the dreaded cyclist is going to mow down all the children. I cycle along the Barrow track quite regularly and I can assure you it's extremely far from busy and thronged with would be targets for the menace that is the cyclist.

Most folk that are opposed to it do so simply because they don't want change and they have some image of how the beautiful Barrow track will be destroyed. In reality they probably wouldn't have set foot on it for a long time and have no intention of doing so in the foreseeable future. Nit to mention those that don't even live on or near the barrow.

The type of cyclists who clock up serious km's and speed on their racers wouldn't go anywhere near a greenway or blueway. They stick to the national and regional roads where nobody will slow them down and they can race against the clock. I heard Olivia O'Liary on the radio using the speeding cyclist excuse. It just shows how disingenuous these people are, to come up with fictional scenarios where people are jumping into rivers to avoid cyclists.

wtf are these people on?

Someone should also remind them that the towpaths are man-made, and not a natural feature of the landscape :rolleyes:

Be well and win

road_high wrote: »

Both things which could be addressed and the project allowed proceed with the very minimum of impacts.
Rivers flood onto some public roads with regularity allover the country, doesn’t mean we close them off indefinitely. Ultimately there’s a very vocal bunch of NIMBYs led by the very articulate and well connected Olivia O’Leary who are horrified by the prospect of the general public passing close to their secluded mansions. That’s pretty much all this is about

Agreed it could have been adddressed but the fact is, it wasn't addressed

road_high

Be well and win wrote: »

Agreed it could have been adddressed but the fact is, it wasn't addressed

Well seen as it didn’t get beyond the initial planning stage it would have been difficult to address- the NIMBYs aren’t interested in alterations in any case, just blocking

road_high

ScallionAyter wrote: »

The type of cyclists who clock up serious km's and speed on their racers wouldn't go anywhere near a greenway or blueway. They stick to the national and regional roads where nobody will slow them down and they can race against the clock. I heard Olivia O'Liary on the radio using the speeding cyclist excuse. It just shows how disingenuous these people are, to come up with fictional scenarios where people are jumping into rivers to avoid cyclists.

wtf are these people on?

Someone should also remind them that the towpaths are man-made, and not a natural feature of the landscape :rolleyes:

The Waterford greenway attracts both cyclists and walkers- I don’t recall any major issues so far. As evidenced any excuse is worthy to block from their POV

HenryWoods

I must have passed a dozen cyclists, 10 fishermen and maybe up to 40 people walking the Barrow Track yesterday between Clashganny and Btown.
Walking the lush green grass in the glorious sunshine is heaven as opposed to sitting indoor growling at the internet.

ScallionAyter

HenryWoods wrote: »

I must have passed a dozen cyclists, 10 fishermen and maybe up to 40 people walking the Barrow Track yesterday between Clashganny and Btown.
Walking the lush green grass in the glorious sunshine is heaven as opposed to sitting indoor growling at the internet.

I walked the towpath from Maganey bridge back into Carlow town two weeks ago. I got chatting to a couple over from Wicklow, on their bikes. They set out from Athy but had to turn back just before the Knockbeg section because the going was too difficult on uncut grass. That means they didn't make it to Carlow as planned, they didn't get to rest in the town, or spend some money before cycling back.

Your anecdote about how easy it is to cycle the towpath is absolute bollocks.

road_high

ScallionAyter wrote: »

I walked the towpath from Maganey bridge back into Carlow town two weeks ago. I got chatting to a couple over from Wicklow, on their bikes. They set out from Athy but had to turn back just before the Knockbeg section because the going was too difficult on uncut grass. That means they didn't make it to Carlow as planned, they didn't get to rest in the town, or spend some money before cycling back.

Your anecdote about how easy it is to cycle the towpath is absolute bollocks.

There's little point arguing with these people- their minds are closed to development and how this could be such a boon to the area- they don't want to hear it. Which is why the relevant authorities need to push on with this project taking on board (valid) concerns and work for the greater good, not just a pack of vocal NIMBYs stuck in the past.

HenryWoods

>Your anecdote about how easy it is to cycle the towpath is absolute bollocks.

The grass has been cut South of Carlow. 20 mile or so of towpath is easy to navigate. It took me just 2 hours to get to St Mullins.

Go whinge to the 'North Barrow IWAI' on Fbook, they're part of Waterways Ireland. They're out planting apple trees on that stretch of the river as part of the pathetic response for the mass tree cutting at Leighlin.

ScallionAyter

HenryWoods wrote: »

>Your anecdote about how easy it is to cycle the towpath is absolute bollocks.

The grass has been cut South of Carlow. 20 mile or so of towpath is easy to navigate. It took me just 2 hours to get to St Mullins.

Go whinge to the 'North Barrow IWAI' on Fbook, they're part of Waterways Ireland. They're out planting apple trees on that stretch of the river as part of the pathetic response for the mass tree cutting at Leighlin.

Guess what? If a hard surface was laid, there's be no need to cut grass! and you'd be able to walk or cycle your little legs off all four seasons of the year.

What good is complaining to someone about the length of the grass after you've had to turn back due to the length of it? A hard surface gives certainty for someone planning to cycle the entire towpath on a cycling holiday; even if it rains; even if the council forget to cut grass. It's also safer. There are sections of the towpath where you can't see where your foot is going, never mind a bike tyre.

But you haven't thought of any of that, because you're like the Brexiters - you haven't listened to experts, or facts, or experiences elsewhere. You just know you're aginn' it, and that's good enough for you.

I've shown you where you're wrong. You've response is to complain to someone on Facebook. Pathetic.

Mocadonna

road_high wrote: »

There's little point arguing with these people- their minds are closed to development and how this could be such a boon to the area- they don't want to hear it. Which is why the relevant authorities need to push on with this project taking on board (valid) concerns and work for the greater good, not just a pack of vocal NIMBYs stuck in the past.

By "the authorities?" I assume you mean Waterways Ireland as Carlow Co Co rejected it last year as did ABP.

Have you read An Bord Pleanala's decision? What is it within that that you disagree with or do you want to just keep calling people who dont agree with you names? People were against it for a variety of reasons. Personally I think they should market it as a long distance walking route, can leave the surface and landscape as is and still attract visitors. It just doesn't seem wide enough to have cyclists 2 abreast coming at each other along with fishermen and walkers to me, particularly alongside a river (and an engineers report commissioned by Kildare Co co backs this up). If that makes me a NIMBY in your eyes so be it.

road_high

Mocadonna wrote: »

By "the authorities?" I assume you mean Waterways Ireland as Carlow Co Co rejected it last year as did ABP.

Have you read An Bord Pleanala's decision? What is it within that that you disagree with or do you want to just keep calling people who dont agree with you names? People were against it for a variety of reasons. Personally I think they should market it as a long distance walking route, can leave the surface and landscape as is and still attract visitors. It just doesn't seem wide enough to have cyclists 2 abreast coming at each other along with fishermen and walkers to me, particularly alongside a river (and an engineers report commissioned by Kildare Co co backs this up). If that makes me a NIMBY in your eyes so be it.

People didn’t really know why there’re against it in the end- they were led up the garden path by a vocal group of protagonists in the form of Olivia Oleary who don’t want the risk of the great unwashed anywhere near their private properties- the “concerns” about trees and grass paths were smoke and mirrors to deflect and give them a legitimate vehicle to object.
In essence you seem to agree with the project but stuck on the notion of leaving a grass muddy track surface- bizzare.

Mocadonna

road_high wrote: »

People didn’t really know why there’re against it in the end- they were led up the garden path by a vocal group of protagonists in the form of Olivia Oleary who don’t want the risk of the great unwashed anywhere near their private properties- the “concerns” about trees and grass paths were smoke and mirrors to deflect and give them a legitimate vehicle to object.
In essence you seem to agree with the project but stuck on the notion of leaving a grass muddy track surface- bizzare.

I know exactly why I was against it and I outlined a reason to you which you ignored, and instead put words in my mouth which you then called bizarre.

Many others knew exactly why they were against it also, and to dismiss everyone as getting sucked in by smoke and mirrors while you alone can see the light is condescending in the extreme. I doubt ABP were swayed by Olivia O Leary and instead actually looked for evidence it would not damage wildlife habitats, which Waterways Ireland were unable to adequately supply, therefore plan rejected. Again have you read the report and what in it do you disagree with?

coathanger

whisky_galore wrote: »

Good.

You can still walk it, so it's not like it's closed off to you.
I don't see why every single wild area or trail has to be sanitised, plastered with concrete and tarmac to please cyclists and others (as if there arent any existing greenways and 100s if not 1000s of km of quiet roads they can use any day of the week)

Well said, totally agree with your point of view. Why must everything be geared towards cyclists , who pass by the flora & fauna at speed , with little or no regard to their beautiful surroundings.

ScallionAyter

Mocadonna wrote: »

I know exactly why I was against it and I outlined a reason to you which you ignored, and instead put words in my mouth which you then called bizarre.

Many others knew exactly why they were against it also, and to dismiss everyone as getting sucked in by smoke and mirrors while you alone can see the light is condescending in the extreme. I doubt ABP were swayed by Olivia O Leary and instead actually looked for evidence it would not damage wildlife habitats, which Waterways Ireland were unable to adequately supply, therefore plan rejected. Again have you read the report and what in it do you disagree with?

Seeing as you seem to have read all 250-odd pages of the ABP report, could you tell me what wildlife habitats are at risk from a compacted surface?

ScallionAyter

coathanger wrote: »

Well said, totally agree with your point of view. Why must everything be geared towards cyclists , who pass by the flora & fauna at speed , with little or no regard to their beautiful surroundings.

What's the recommended velocity of travel, to ensure surroundings are enjoyed? Is there a speed at which the surroundings cease to be enjoyed?

Do share...

Mocadonna

ScallionAyter wrote: »

Seeing as you seem to have read all 250-odd pages of the ABP report, could you tell me what wildlife habitats are at risk from a compacted surface?

Not necessary to read the full report, the 4 page decision mentions otters specifically, but the ecology assessment which deals with this starts on page 182 of the report if you would like to have a look.

But as I've been saying it's ABP who looked at all the evidence and made this decision. If it was really down to people not "wanting the great unwashed passing their mansions" you'd imagine the reasons in the decision would be flimsy enough. Yet I haven't heard anyone make any solid arguments against them. Olivia O Leary may be well connected but to suggest she could manipulate this process is fairly silly lads.

I'll bow out here and leave you at it as I'm not going to change anyone's mind and vice versa. The plan has been rejected, time to focus on actually marketing the river as it is.

ScallionAyter

Mocadonna wrote: »

Not necessary to read the full report, the 4 page decision mentions otters specifically, but the ecology assessment which deals with this starts on page 182 of the report if you would like to have a look.

But as I've been saying it's ABP who looked at all the evidence and made this decision. If it was really down to people not "wanting the great unwashed passing their mansions" you'd imagine the reasons in the decision would be flimsy enough. Yet I haven't heard anyone make any solid arguments against them. Olivia O Leary may be well connected but to suggest she could manipulate this process is fairly silly lads.

I'll bow out here and leave you at it as I'm not going to change anyone's mind and vice versa. The plan has been rejected, time to focus on actually marketing the river as it is.

Otters eh? Something out Otters. Gotcha. I'll have to be careful not to step on any Otters when i'm walking the towpath next time. Otters, as we all know, get confused by compacted gravel and are unable to find their way back to the river.

I remember the usual eco-hippies emerging from their McMansions to object to the M7 over some snails. Thankfully that project was of such economic significance that the objectors were ignored and the snails survived anyway.

Unfortunately, the blueway doesn't have the same strategic importance and therefore the likes of O'Leary and the farmers can feign concern about wildlife, while burning gorse, poisoning birds of prey, culling deer and cutting hedgerows, among other things.

Mocadonna

ScallionAyter wrote: »

Otters eh? Something out Otters. Gotcha. I'll have to be careful not to step on any Otters when i'm walking the towpath next time. Otters, as we all know, get confused by compacted gravel and are unable to find their way back to the river.

😆 Classic!

From the actual decision:
The Board is also not satisfied that the proposed development would
not impact negatively on otter, an Annex I species under the Habitats Directive
and a qualifying interest of the River Barrow and River Nore SAC by virtue of the
uncertainty regarding the location of otter holts, the potential loss of holts and the
proposed removal of any holts encountered during the development.

But look, you have your mind made up that ABP are in on the conspiracy. Yet you complain about people not listening to "experts" while disregarding the findings of this report. Enjoy the ranting and raving, I'm off for a nice walk down the barrow.

ScallionAyter

Mocadonna wrote: »

�� Classic!

From the actual decision:
The Board is also not satisfied that the proposed development would
not impact negatively on otter, an Annex I species under the Habitats Directive
and a qualifying interest of the River Barrow and River Nore SAC by virtue of the
uncertainty regarding the location of otter holts, the potential loss of holts and the
proposed removal of any holts encountered during the development.

But look, you have your mind made up that ABP are in on the conspiracy. Yet you complain about people not listening to "experts" while disregarding the findings of this report. Enjoy the ranting and raving, I'm off for a nice walk down the barrow.

Are ABP experts on Waterways? That's funny, i thought Waterways Ireland are the experts on Waterways? I guess there must be much more Otter experts in ABP on Marlborough Street...

Either way, construction projects in Ireland have very careful guidelines for dealing with Otters to minimise any impact on them. Do you have some sort of image in your head that builders just turn up one day and tear up the riverbank, while the Otters flee for the hills or get churned up in machinery? That's not what happens in the real world. In the real world, Otters would be evacuated from their nests as they're found, and those Otters go and build new nests elsewhere.

https://www.tii.ie/tii-library/environment/construction-guidelines/Guidelines-for-the-Treatment-of-Otters-prior-to-the-Construction-of-National-Road-Schemes.pdf

You know what also destroys otter nests? river drainage and dredging. The residents of Graigenamanagh can tell you a thing about flooding, caused by lack of river dredging. How lucky they are to have Olivia looking out for the Otters, over their own town.

Enjoy your walk, and watch out for those dangerous two-a-breast Peletons.

alias no.9

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

I was in Clonegal earlier this week and can’t understand why the place isn’t alive with tourists . It could be an Adare, which markets itself on a Manor most can’t afford and a few English style thatched cottages . Marketing is the difference .

Adare is both very fortunate and horribly cursed with its location. It's situation on the main route to Kerry sees it snarled up with traffic but it has a captive audience of commuters and tourists. It doesn't need much marketing. Imagine if there was a way to selectively increase passing tourists moving at the kind of pace that would see them stopping regularly without adding the burden of traffic congestion.

coathanger

ScallionAyter wrote: »

What's the recommended velocity of travel, to ensure surroundings are enjoyed? Is there a speed at which the surroundings cease to be enjoyed?

Do share...

U must be a cyclist or one of the minority that stood to benefit financially if it went ahead ....

road_high

coathanger wrote: »

U must be a cyclist or one of the minority that stood to benefit financially if it went ahead ....

Bigger picture- the wider community and local economy ALL benefit from a project like this...that’s if people embrace the potential and open their minds just a teeny tiny little bit to the possibility. The Olivia Oleary’s of this world may suffer slightly as they may have to share space with wider society but that’s a price well worth paying. Shame she and some others managed to hoodwink the locals to back maintaining the status quo after whipping up a storm in a tea cup

HenryWoods

This week on 'It's all about Olivia'... road_high get chased by otters on bicycles.

Markcheese

I'm at a bit of a loss over this one,
The current project has been shot down, by ABP.
But the idea of the project was to up the number of people making use of the canal, as an amenity, (and I assume allow more trade for businesses along the route)
Well, largely because of the publicity that's happening...
A lot of the infrastructure part of the project, was going to be improved access and parking, and signage, that can still be done, (and cheaply)
Its just the bikes that won't be accomadated, might be an opertunity for someone with a barge to transport bikes and luggage one way along a new version of the blue way...