I'm on the mailing-list for Lee Valley Park - the pro-metric authority that reported ARM to the Police last year but this year finally admitted their metric-only footpath signs were illegal.

Their latest newsletter informs me excitedly that they have just got an enormous grant (part of a £4 million grant for the country as a whole) to try to increase the number of breeding bittern sites in Britain from four to thirteen. As a result, former sand quarries near Ware, Hertfordshire, now mostly lakes, will be devoted to 'reedbed creation and enhancement'.

The part of their letter that particularly caught my eye was:

"...reedbed creation and enhancement is planned to take place at Seventy Acres Lake in the River Lee Country Park. It is expected to establish over 18 hectares of reed cover..."

The jangling juxtaposition of acres and hectares got me thinking about many geographical sites there may be across Britain referring to British units of measurement. I immediately thought of Six Mile Bottom, Ten Foot Drain, farms called 'Five Acres' (or similar) and local stretches of road called the 'straight mile' (on the A 414) and the 'crooked mile' (Harlow to Waltham Abbey road).

I'd be grateful if others could add locations or names they know of, or local names, which include British units of measurement.

It also seems to be more than probable that in many now-metric countries, the old units of measurement must survive in place-names and could be found on local maps. Do they?

Tony Bennett

Ninety Mile Beach in New Zealand comes to mind.

http://www.90milebeach.co.nz/

Of course, there are plenty of references to acres on that site, so perhaps NZ is a bit less metric than is presumed.

In the US, there are countless place names that include English measures in their name, ranging from cities to subdivisions. Plus the standard land allotment in most rural areas is one square mile, so there are intersections every mile along many rural highways.

Veinte Miglia, I think

I checked. had the spelling wrong
anyway you probably know it, on riviera
very near monaco border

This is a good idea Tony. However, may I suggest a small addition - each of these names be checked to see what the real measurement is that they cover. I will start the ball rolling - Nine-mile ride in Berkshire (Wokingham/Bracknell area) is about 12km (7 miles) long.

Why measure a distance named in miles, firstly in kilos?

"Nine-mile ride in Berkshire" - I was going to say that!

Answer to Bryan - "coz 'ees an idiot"

<<
Why measure a distance named in miles, firstly in kilos?
>>

I was counting kilometre squares on an OS map

Martin, most people don't do that and hopefully never will - I'll rub it in your face that Tim Collins, who signed the EDM, is the Shadow Secretary of State for Transport and I wrote him a letter recently asking his views on road metrication and trying to disuade him (I did not happen to get a proper answer).

As for place names in General, just near where I'm studying, Keele University (near Newcastle-under-Lyme, Staffs), there's a road called 'Three Mile Lane'. I think it's three miles long since a sign post pointing down it gives the distance of another village three miles away.

I've lived in the UK since 1983, with the exception of five and a half years spent in France in Germany. I could call myself "British", I guess, and would qualify for a passport after having lived here for more than five years.

I have some idea of the imperial system. I know I'm roughly 6ft 3inches and weigh about 16 stone, for one thing.

However, when using maps (the topic of this thread), I still look for the metric scale on them, i.e. how many metres or kms to one centimetre. It's just what I feel more at home with and for me personally it's easier to visualise. I've also seen lots of examples of metric only signs in this country, such as at an open-air swimming pool I often went to over the summer.

I don't mind seeing signs in metric myself (I couldn't really care less, to be honest, as I have more pressing things on my mind at the moment) but I do sometimes wonder why the imperial equivalent can't be given as well.

All the outdoor pools I've been to have been in imperial only (I haven't been to many)

The indoor ones tend to be metric or, on recently opened swimmingpools, metric and imperial.

Perhaps the resurgence of imperial measures for pool depths goes hand in hand with Prince Charles fears of the UK being a compensation culture. Think about it, most people only know their height in ft/in. Perhaps if you ingure yourself in a "metric only" pool you could claim injury compensation for the fact that they used signs that hardly anyone knows the understanding of?

Hmmm, might go off and dive in the bit of the pool that says 0.6m!!!!


(Interesting how a common metric depth is 1.2m - can you guess why? - think!!!!)

Because it's for foot...?

On the issue of Charlie boy McKing: I really *do* respect his views. I was reading the Telegraph and... Why are there so many people who do not appreciate the role the Royal fmaily plays in ensuring equality and the fair running of this country? I believe it is because the media rams the Monarchy down all of our throats to such a degree that many people become either disinterested or resentful of the Monarchy and Royal family.

I really *do* know how to spell 'four'... :)

Bryan: I wouldn't have realised it was a mistake if you hadn't drawn attention to it. I thought you meant "for". As in 1.2m is for(eign) for four foot!

By the way, what's this Royal fmaily? The latest name for the GPO?