data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cf3a9/cf3a90da7555d90ef30091201e9f2082dfe38aff" alt=""
Another beautiful spring day – we do seem to be very lucky with this – perhaps to offset our frustration about the planning situation! On Wednesday April 30th, four volunteers – John, Bob, Toby and James – started with the now-customary “spreading of the hoggin” by our entrance, before decamping to the trackbed, and getting stuck in to stumps, brambles and twiggery
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/41e14/41e144f15602e4235e2f2def45b3c5987cfbd68d" alt=""
John’s pulley system, used with some digging and root cutting, worked very nicely indeed to remove a large number of medium-sized stumps: he quite happily spliced ropes to take the strain of the pulling, although he served in the Irish Guards, not the navy. But as ropage was definitely involved, I instituted the classic (borrowed from the Welsh Highland Railway Civils Team) cry of “two….six”, supposed to be a navy tradition, where the “two” is for preparation, and the “six” is explosive and enhances effort. Or so I am told. Sadly, we managed to split one sheave block after John left, so I will have to apologise to him, grovel, and replace it. I somehow doubt that a block carved from a single piece of hardwood will be that easy to find. Leaving the very largest stumps (for mechanical assistance, or at least younger workers), we have cleared about 6 chains from the east.
Continuing the martial theme, but army this time – the team were somewhat disconcerted when, having spent a great deal of time and effort unearthing an original SR fenced post, I measured it, scribbled notes – and promptly put it back in the same hole! Not satisfied with that, we did it again, only more so – the post was buried 3 to 4 feet in the organic matter and earth which has washed down from the adjacent field. Shades of the classic “digging holes and filling them up again” punishment for out-of-line infantry conscripts. Sensing a tendency to grumble about time-wasting, I hastened to explain.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9858e/9858e276304fbbd0a926cfdf8db627ef98b94913" alt=""
It has long been my theory that the SR used exactly the same timber for fencing and for sleepers. While the sleepers were (even for a lightly-built railway) really much too flimsy at 6 foot by 6 inches by 3 inches – and very widely spaced – the fence posts, at the same cross section, must have been a nightmare to set up, and, being oblong, are not ideal – most railways would have used square posts for strength. So I wanted to see if we had an intact, non-rotted post which would prove it. The second one did (the first was rotted off below ground). I also now have a measurement for the spacing of the horizontal wooden rails on the fence, so we can proceed with design, sourcing and costing of the classic SR-style railside fencing. We also now know that the posts which remain onsite – and there’s, amazingly, quite a few, still – are mostly good enough to re-use. We even have quite a few lengths of the 1 inch by 3.5 inch rails which can be re-used – jointed together into twelve foot lengths.
But, best of all, there’s enough original posts still in situ to
define the original boundary fence line – so, avoiding later-grown trees
– all we have to do is put it all back.
A lot of effort, one might say, for a very little reward. But the SR
4-rail fences were as much part of the unique image of the railway as
the Sharpies, the Cleminsons, and the curved-ended open wagons. So – as
it’s good landowning practice to mark boundaries anyway, and fencing is
the best way to do that, we may as well do the thing properly. I do,
though, I think, draw the line at using (or finding) original-style
square-section handmade blunt nails to hold the whole thing together.