Hi all,
Chuck asked / noted
> 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
I venture to suggest that some of the reason might be due to the same
cause that trams etc in cities disappeared from the USA as well as in New
Zealand.
The companies were bought out by those who wanted to use roads and
diesel-powered buses and trucks (or trains in the USA); and the old
competitor was destroyed to keep it from ever coming back again.
Brian
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
