The UK canal system is more extensive than I thought. I have always
been struck by the difference in the treatment of the canals between the
US and other countries. The US had many canals before the advent of
railroads but these died off and lands were sold and filled in not long
after the iron horse made its debut. It's ironic that, at least in the
case of the Middlesex Canal that ran from Boston to the Merrimack River
at Lowell, Mass. <http://www.winchestermass.org/images/canal9.gif> the
canal boats carried the rails and ties to build the railroads that would
eventually do them in.
So, why do UK canals still operate while in the US there are nothing but
small vestiges left? And, if anything is still operational, it's likely
part of the park system or, in a few cases, part of the government
supported inland waterway system. Did the government in the UK build
and operate these canals either from the beginning or take over
operations from private parties once railroads made canal operation
unprofitable? In the US most canals were built with private money and
the system collapsed with the advent of the railroads.
Chuck Norcutt
Simon Worby wrote:
> Found this for those really interested.
>
> http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/jim.shead/Inland-Waterways-of-England.html
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
