Railways and Preservation - Swanage An Environmental Disaster?

[Crisis Rail]

Chaps.

 

Taken from the Purbeck Gazette  - The Isle of Purbeck  - somewhere as a family we have visited for over two decades -  the author of the quoted letter below maybe has some valid points relevant to todays awareness but very much to the extreme and maybe written to provoke a reaction? – Myself and the vast majority on here will of course be biased.

 

I don’t think "Purbeck Sculptor" Mr Beuscher has really thought this one through bringing all that much needed tourist revenue especially after a financially barren and trying year like this one has proven for Dorset and Purbeck –  lack of knowledge or just selfishness maybe?

 

And I very much doubt he has an in depth knowledge of Biodiesel or a lengthy WCML LESSCO2 TESCO or experienced the M6 Southbound on a wet and windy Sunday afternoon.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Editor.

 

Swanage railway. Bearing in mind a huge number of people in the UK (used to!) commute every day from their home to their place of work and back, you could be forgiven for assuming most people are not enthusiastic about the effect of trains on their environment. Generally speaking, the disadvantages of rail travel are legion, including a huge financial outlay, jam packed with people you have never met, it’s eye wateringly expensive and lastly, and most significantly, trains are hugely destructive on the environment. For this reason, you would have thought that to resurrect an outmoded form of railway transport would not be a sensible exercise. Added to the above, in these days of social distancing, rail travel is simply not realistic or possible, and this may continue well into the foreseeable future. Steam railway travel is even more uneconomic, a total disaster environmentally in terms of air pollution and noise. Put simply, steam trains kill people with the amount of nitrogen and carbon dioxide emitted into the air. They expel huge amounts of particulate matter which is a serious threat to people with asthma or other related respiratory problems. Because of their fossil fuel demands, they also support a large network of equally unfriendly industries which further damage the environment. All in the name of entertainment! So, considering all of the above, the question being asked here is why does Purbeck continue to support this outmoded form of transport? Indeed, there are people who would like to see the railway link reinstated right through to Wareham and beyond! Er, why? One can only assume these people never commuted by train. The Isle of Purbeck is arguably one of the most beautiful locations in Dorset, perhaps even in the UK, yet, for some inexplicable reason, a few weird diehards want to extend the life of this decidedly antisocial, if not filthy, mode of transport across a spectacularly scenic valley. I can appreciate that some of the steam engines have become iconic and preservation is to be encouraged. But in a museum, surely? There are also a number of diesel trains being used on this line and we all know the dangers of diesel pollution, or we should do by now. The other point worth noting is that this facility is hardly used during the winter and while it is supposed to be a ‘tourist attraction’, the journey takes less than ten minutes and very little of Purbeck is actually visible from the train itself. So, what is the attraction, you may ask? It does, I suppose, cater for a few steam train diehards and train spotting nerds who have nothing better to do with their lives. What is the solution? Well, I think we should keep Swanage train station and a short length of shunting line to cater for those people who wish to see the engines actually working. Harmans Cross station is an exceptional piece of railway history, maintained by some very enthusiastic volunteers and there is no reason why both it and Corfe Castle stations should not remain as they are. But the ideal solution would be to remove the complete train line and in its place, substitute a tarmac cycle path to run the length from Wareham via Corfe Castle and Harmans Cross to Swanage. The obvious response is why? Well, for starters, it is infinitely healthier to cycle and less environmentally negative. No more noise and no more pollution. It would provide an all year-round facility and encourage people of all ages to use it. It would get cyclists off of the overused main road and onto a purpose-built track where they could cycle safely without fear of traffic. There could be a couple of cafes sited at Harmans Cross and Corfe Castle stations and the history of Swanage Railway could be recorded in purpose built mini museums. Perhaps the primary advantage gained from this is that it would encourage people to use a completely safe cycle lane and thus promote healthy exercise, and lastly, it would be FREE.

 

 

Edited December 7, 2020 by Crisis Rail

[spamcan61]

Executive summary for those unwilling to trawl through the excess verbiage: they want to replace the Swanage Railway with a cycle path.

 

Jog on.

Edited December 6, 2020 by spamcan61

[Rivercider]

4 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

Executive summary for those unwilling to trawl through the excess verbiage: they want to replace the Swanage Railway with a cycle path.

 

Jog on.

A letter from someone who has an axe to grind? Or perhaps lives under a bridge?

 

cheers

[johnd]

NIMBY - go and live somewhere else !

Edited December 6, 2020 by johnd

[Robin Brasher]

Looks like someone has got up out of the wrong side of his bed.  Harmans Cross Station is a wonderful station and has been sympathetically styled to blend in with the Swanage Railway. Despite this it was only built about 30 years ago and cannot be described as an exceptional piece of railway history unless the whole of the resurrection of the railway in preservation is an exceptional piece of railway history.  

 

I wonder if anyone has written in response to this in the January Gazette,

[Crisis Rail]

26 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

Executive summary for those unwilling to trawl through the excess verbiage: they want to replace the Swanage Railway with a cycle path.

 

Jog on.

 

Ah yes - I think that was the general gist of it - I had to check the date.

Edited December 6, 2020 by Crisis Rail

[caradoc]

Some things the writer seems unaware of (or has deliberately ignored):

 

1. Steam is no longer the preferred means of traction for rail, anywhere, therefore the pollution emitted nowadays is a fraction of what it used to be and of that produced from other sources, in particular other forms of transport. 

 

2. Commuting in the rush hour is not the only thing trains are used for. 

 

3. 'trains are hugely destructive on the environment'; Has the writer ever compared railways with the alternative, perhaps he should take a look at the contrast between the WCML and the M6/M74 through Cumbria and Southern Scotland, for example. 

 

 

 

 

[caradoc]

32 minutes ago, spamcan61 said:

Executive summary for those unwilling to trawl through the excess verbiage: they want to replace the Swanage Railway with a cycle path.

 

Jog on.

 

As the writer is so concerned about the environment, I propose that his home be replaced by a green space which will become the much vaunted 'ancient woodland'. He could go and live under a bridge somewhere.......

 

 

[Steven B]

Ah, the lovely Isle of Purbeck. Just right for tarmacing over - perhaps they can use some of the left overs from Europe's biggest on-shore oil field...

 

Steven B.

[Dave John]

Heh, it's not about railways or the environment. 

 

Parts of the cycling lobby are becoming increasingly vocal in demanding that cyclists have dominion over all others. Everywhere must be covered in tarmac for cyclists to ride at high speed without impediment sweeping all pedestrians and vehicular traffic out of the way. Public parks are full of them, they seem to think they have priority on all walkways, footways, footpaths and pedestrian precincts.

 

Long ago society had to introduce traffic calming measures to control the minority of motorists who drove like idiots in urban areas. We are getting to the point where cycling calming measures are needed to control the minority of militant cyclists who ride dangerously. 

 

 

[Crisis Rail]

1 minute ago, Dave John said:

Heh, it's not about railways or the environment. 

 

Parts of the cycling lobby are becoming increasingly vocal in demanding that cyclists have dominion over all others. Everywhere must be covered in tarmac for cyclists to ride at high speed without impediment sweeping all pedestrians and vehicular traffic out of the way. Public parks are full of them, they seem to think they have priority on all walkways, footways, footpaths and pedestrian precincts.

 

Long ago society had to introduce traffic calming measures to control the minority of motorists who drove like idiots in urban areas. We are getting to the point where cycling calming measures are needed to control the minority of militant cyclists who ride dangerously. 

 

 

 

Yes - I'm partial to the odd bike ride or two when I get the chance - good for the mental well being in these stressful times.

But it's all about the persecution complex again that seems so prevalent in a lot of society  today. Extremism even within cycling.

[PaulRhB]

Ah yes let’s start by insulting those with different interests and ignore all other leisure pursuits that contribute to the same ‘environmental disaster’ he postulates. So motor sports, boating and production of sailboats, canoes etc, going for a drive, going out to places in the car and pretty much every other hobby going have an impact somewhere on the scale. 
It’s those that jump on the bandwagon without thinking and asking more questions that are equally worrying. 

[jonhall]

Overlooking

 

The odd hundred thousand cars taken off the A351 through Corfe Castle every year? Which then try and find a parking space in Swanage!

 

The many millions of pounds of visitor spend in the Isle of Purbeck that the Railway helps to draw in?

 

The training, education and employment benefits?

 

The reduction in air miles saved by those who choose a staycation instead of an overseas holiday?

 

I'm sure there are lots more examples...

 

Jon

 

 

 

 

[sir douglas]

remember that person from several years ago that moved to their new house next to the Bluebell and then complained at the smoke and tried setting up a  petition to get it banned

[caradoc]

4 hours ago, Crisis Rail said:

the ideal solution would be to remove the complete train line and in its place, substitute a tarmac cycle path to run the length from Wareham via Corfe Castle and Harmans Cross to Swanage. The obvious response is why? Well, for starters, it is infinitely healthier to cycle and less environmentally negative. No more noise and no more pollution. It would provide an all year-round facility and encourage people of all ages to use it. It would get cyclists off of the overused main road

 

If he really wants no more pollution, turn the 'overused main road' into a cycle path instead of the railway. Has he not noticed the year-round emissions from road vehicles, or does that not count ?

 

 

[Chris116]

Sadly people move next door to motor sport stadia, steam railways and even dairies. Then they decide they don't like what is going on nearby and try to close it down. 

 

For me, if the Swanage Railway was not there I would have never gone to the Isle of Purbeck and would never plan to in the future. I had a cycle until I was about 17 and was very happy to let someone else have it. I have also had motor bikes and cars but nowadays travel by train (and bus when forced to). If I can't get there by train then I won't go most of the time. 

 

The writer of the letter wants to be told how green each form of transport is and then if he is serious he can give up going anywhere by car. Only if someone saying what is in the letter actually gets rid of their car will I take them seriously. 

[Enterprisingwestern]

1 hour ago, jonhall said:

Overlooking

 

The odd hundred thousand cars taken off the A351 through Corfe Castle every year? Which then try and find a parking space in Swanage!

 

The many millions of pounds of visitor spend in the Isle of Purbeck that the Railway helps to draw in?

 

The training, education and employment benefits?

 

The reduction in air miles saved by those who choose a staycation instead of an overseas holiday?

 

I'm sure there are lots more examples...

 

Jon

 

 

 

 

 

Why let facts and common sense get in the way of your bandwagon?

 

12 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

If he really wants no more pollution, turn the 'overused main road' into a cycle path instead of the railway. Has he not noticed the year-round emissions from road vehicles, or does that not count ?

 

 

 

How would the vast majority of the cyclists arrive in the Isle of Purbeck and surrounding areas, not by car presumably, doesn't everyone cycle down from London and other points North?

 

Mike.

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, sir douglas said:

remember that person from several years ago that moved to their new house next to the Bluebell and then complained at the smoke and tried setting up a  petition to get it banned

Or the one that moved next to the Great Central fully knowing it was a working preserved line then complaining about the trains

IIRC the comment was something like "I didn't think they would be that big" or such.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Isn't it a joke? I really cannot think that anyone who claims to be environmentally aware would complain that steam engines emit nitrogen. They do emit nitrogen, of course, the same amount of nitrogen as they absorb. Perhaps the writer will complain that 79% nitrogen in the air is far too high, and we should be reducing it.

 

The writer might have confused nitrogen with nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide (collectively often called NOx), but even these aren't something commonly associated with steam locomotives.

[Steamport Southport]

I expect it's real.

 

Seems to be a local nutjob and crap "artist".

 

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/15667190.sculpture-made-of-plastic-collected-from-rubbish-at-dorset-beauty-spots/

 

 

[Crisis Rail]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

I expect it's real.

 

Seems to be a local nutjob and crap "artist".

 

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/15667190.sculpture-made-of-plastic-collected-from-rubbish-at-dorset-beauty-spots/

 

 

 

Seems a bit of a loon.

 

I'm all for him cleaning up the beaches though - good effort.

[Nearholmer]

6 hours ago, Dave John said:

Parts of the cycling lobby are becoming increasingly vocal in demanding that cyclists have dominion over all others. Everywhere must be covered in tarmac for cyclists to ride at high speed without impediment sweeping all pedestrians and vehicular traffic out of the way. Public parks are full of them, they seem to think they have priority on all walkways, footways, footpaths and pedestrian precincts.

I’m a fairly keen cyclist, and have never considered myself militant, mostly a bloke who wants to ride a bike without imminent danger of death from badly-designed infrastructure and impatient car drivers, but having just read that intemperate and intolerant rant, I will probably become militant forthwith.

 

As to the Swanage Ranter: clearly a bit odd.
 

Some of the best solutions have come where old rail infrastructure has been used to create a shared rail and walking/cycling route, but I’m not sure whether there is room for that on the Swanage RoW.

[phil_sutters]

There are probably more people physically incapable of riding a bike than there are who currently do - for basic transport or leisure. Although for over twenty years I used to cycle to work in London, I had to give up when my nether regions started to make it uncomfortable. So to exchange a very inclusive form of transport, for one that can only be used by a minority seems ridiculous.

Who says it would be FREE? Someone would have to pay for his tarmac highway, laid by polluting contractors' vehicles, and maintained by whom? Are he and his fellow cycling enthusiasts going to put their hands in their pockets to pay for it, or are they going to put their backs into doing the work, like the thousands of hard-working preservation enthusiasts have done over the past decades. If they did, would they want to share their freewheeling super-bikeway with pedestrians and mobility scooters, assuming those groups would want to risk being mown done by high speed cyclists? 

Edited December 6, 2020 by phil_sutters
Inappropriate language

[pete_mcfarlane]

3 hours ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

How would the vast majority of the cyclists arrive in the Isle of Purbeck and surrounding areas, not by car presumably, doesn't everyone cycle down from London and other points North?

 

Mike.

 

The normal form for leisure cyclists on disused railways is to turn up in a 4x4 with the cycles on the back/roof, cycle a couple of miles to the next car park with a coffee shop, sit there for an hour, and then cycle the couple of miles back to the car. And then act like they've been on an adventure worthy of Roald Amundsen. 

 

The chap's website is a hoot by the way: http://www.robinsart.co.uk/. 

 

[Nearholmer]

38 minutes ago, phil_sutters said:

re they going to put their backs into doing the work, like the thousands of hard-working preservation enthusiasts have done over the past decades.

 

A very significant proportion of the work put into creating and maintaining the National Cycling Network is done by volunteers, under the aegis of Sustrans, which is a charity.

 

And, yes, every route created or maintained by Sustrans is open to everyone, walking, cycling, pogo-sticking etc. Many routes or sections are wheelchair accessible, but a lot aren't, simply because the surface is too rough to be usable in a wheelchair.

 

And, if you can show me a person over 18yo riding a bike on the public highway who isn't also a car tax payer, you will be showing me a rare beast - there are a few, but not many. So, cyclists, by and large, do contribute to highway upkeep.

 

By all means remain really angry that people have the temerity to ride bikes, if that's how you feel, but try to get a bit closer to the facts. 

 

More broadly, I think there is a dialogue to be had about the relative merits of creating more heritage railways on old track-beds, as compared with using those track-beds for walking and cycling routes. As a person who is "into" both, my three-penn'orth is that I think we have more miles of heritage railway in England than is sustainable in the long term, given the available volunteer resource, and too few miles of traffic-free cycling routes. Swanage is an established and viable railway, but there are other heritage railways that seem to me to be on distinctly shaky footings financially and volunteer-wise.

 

The best, of course, is good partnership between rail and bike, so that trips can be made using the two together, as is normal in Holland, and as used to be common in the UK until the 1970s (after which it became increasingly difficult to take a bike on a train in many parts of the country).  Some of the bigger preserved railways are good for this, but many aren't because they have so few days operation each year.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 6, 2020 by Nearholmer