The Douglas Bay Horse Tramway

This, to me, is the nub of it. Successful projects really need people with a variety of skills.

Most railway enthusiasts are not accountants by trade; hence, they are unlikely to have a detailed knowledge of whether or not it is possible to make a scheme financially viable, and if so, how. Naturally, any scheme to rescue the Douglas horse trams really needs to get an accountant on board as a matter of priority.

Nevertheless, just because somebody doesn't have financial knowledge doesn't mean they don't have other skills that they might be able to offer, at some stage, to help the horse tramway. And just because they might need a little help to make their ideas work, doesn't necessarily mean that their ideas are bad ones. Hence, I have to say that it grates with me slightly to see idealistic enthusiasts dismissed as "gricers who need a reality check".

I see this in my own line of work (historic houses); lots of our volunteers offer well-meaning ideas to try to generate extra revenue. Unfortunately, I usually have to explain that such ideas are not workable, simply because there is some factor which the volunteer is not aware of. But just occasionally, somebody comes up with a really good idea which we can actually carry out. So it is always worth listening.

 

As you appear to know zilch about how finance works pointless debating. You mention loss leaders, that's fine when total income covers total outgoings and in the present climate that's not the case in retail (look it up). In public finance there is never enough coming in to do everything the public wants/expects that is why love them or hate them we elect people to chose the priority.

Something has to go as their isn't enough £ to go round; if you don't like the choices either find qualified/experienced and enthusiastic friends to raise funds and start a preservation group or shut up bleating. When people have acted things have been saved in any sphere of activity you can think of.

You never know but perhaps if a credible preservation group starts, emphasis credible, some of us may donate some funds.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Which are these countries which are "dead boring" to live in?

 

The idea that preservation would never have got anywhere without unrealistic dreams is rather counterfactual.
The TRPS guys had a great dream, certainly, but no lack of realism. They donated their own money, time, sweat and tears, and lobbied hard for others to help - from companies like Hunslet to the Army. They did what they could as they could, bit by bit, and it was really hard work and dicey at times. It cost lots of money (and time) to build it up and they brought in knowledgeable people, including clear thinking professionals with relevant experience (Curwen, Whitehouse, etc.). And they appealed hard for money throughout.
Some here don't understand the point about money - no one is saying heritage railways must be profitable in the sense of fare income covering all operating and capital costs - but you have to have an idea of where the money is coming from and what the costs are. The money could include grants, public subsidy, fare income, retail, lots of donations, gifts in kind, donations of time, but it needs to be there.

 

Lets not assume that all railway enthusiasts aren't successful businessmen. A lot of us are thanks very much. If you run your own business you do need a handle on the bottom line but also the wider picture in general. I wouldn't mind betting that really at the heart of this somebody has got their eye on the development possibilities of the land that the stables are on.

 

Erm, I wasn't, quite the opposite.

Quite possibly part of the story - drop a loss-making concern and raise some cash from an asset sale. I'm afraid that kind of thinking is ruling supreme in Whitehall, Town Halls, and possibly Douglas too. So a counter-argument needs to take into account the financial as well as the heritage angle.

 

What could be tried is the green angle. There's a lot of myth and cash peddled towards all things deemed 'green' So having a high street transport not powered by coal and petrol could be a good angle.

 

Careful now. Arguments have been advanced that cattle and horses produce more greenhouse gases than motor vehicles! I don't know if this is so. By the way, have you any experience of operating draught horses?

PH

 

Probably best not saying "myth" and "peddled" if you're after the funding...
I think you'll find things have changed in recent years and money for green projects substantially reduced, in the UK anyway.

 

This morning Manx Radio reported that the group working to find a permanent solution are hopeful that a "reduced service" can be operated this year. An official announcement will be made in the next 7-10 days.
Ray.

 

If I cross my fingers any tighter, they'll drop off!

 

There doesn't seem too much point arguing about the costs of running the tramway and its profitability or otherwise. Figures can always say what you want them to say. Above are cogent reasons for closure, what more does any local authority need? As to the toxic effect of the mix of local authority landowner, developer and heritage railway, I refer readers to the recent history of the West Somerset Railway Association.

 

I have received this through the LUPTS mailing list.
"Allegedly:

• The Douglas Horse Tram will run again this summer.
• The street horse tram will finish at the end of the season and there will be an official event to mark the closure.
• A new 3ft-0in electrified line will be built along the promenade from Derby Castle to the Villa Marina. This will be used by the MER and, on certain dates of the year, by a horse tram token service."

 

First I've heard of it! An announcement of whether the horsetrams will run at all this summer is still awaited. The local media did mention, some time ago, that one idea was to extend the MER along the prom possibly sharing the re-laid horsetram tracks but I don't think it was any more than a 'suggestion'. I think someone in LUPTS is adding 2 and 2 to make 5 and adding a good helping of wishful thinking.
Ray.

 

This could be a sensible solution, and starting the Laxey and Ramsey trams from near the pier would be a big plus, but the horses would still have to be looked after all year round - you can't just collect up a suitable number of suitable horses from local farms on the occasional Friday to then work the trams for the occasional weekend then back to the farm on Monday.

John

 

The idea of extending the MER sounds encouraging, but maybe the suggestion of token horse operations on it are a way of calming the arguments, and in reality it will be quietly allowed to die a death? The track in the road is now in very run-down condition, incidentally - or at least the road dressing around it is. I'm assuming that the MER would run along reserved tracks on the prom? I rode my 1941 Ariel motorcycle - no rear suspension and "girder" front forks there last year and it was an interesting experience mixing traffic, trams, track and potholes. Not good.

 

It was the poor condition of the road surface (rather than the track itself) and the need for total rebuilding that caused the Dept. of Infrastructure to suggest moving the tracks to either the seaward side of the road or onto the promenade walkway - at their expense. Douglas Corporation's decision has only been made recently, on cost cutting grounds.
Ray.

 

Well I think it can be safely be said that the announcement today that the decision to refuse the plans to design Douglas prom and move the horse trams to the walkway has seen the end of the horse trams running the length of the prom.

The relevant department have announced they are going to proceed with an alternative a plan in two parts. From the Sea Terminal to the War Memorial (basically about 1.2km from the Sea Terminal & opposite the Sefton Hotel/Gaiety Theatre) will be part one and that will not include tracks. Stage 2 is from Strathallan Crescent (Current Terminus) to War Memorial and will include tram tracks. It is not clear if the intention is they will be on the roadway or the prom. My Guess is that they will widen the prom/dig up the gardens and run in that space but it is a pure guess. Whatever it is clear that unless a minimal service runs this year we probably won't see trams running the length of the prom again.

I have to admit I am struggling to see the merits of the new proposal. I would have thought that to have any real chance of attracting people to use then the really need to run the whole length of the prom Or if they are going to run only part way then starting at the Sea Terminal would have been more likely to attract users although I suppose the sheds and stables are at the far end although Douglas Corporation wish to sell. It is rather like the Fairbourne Railway stopping at the current passing point and starting from Penrhyn Point.

 

That sounds like the old "propose something unworkable and, when it doesn't work, use it as an excuse to close the whole thing" tactic beloved of BR in the 70s and 80s.