cherish your harbour master - a rant!

l'escargot said:
As usual you are just putting out second hand opinions of places you know nothing about. Another one of your "years ago" exaggerated stories - now it's multiple bins of increased size to go with the drug and drink crazed, caulkhead zombies recreating scenes from the "walking dead" in a place you haven't been to and have no first hand experience of. :D I do find it hard to take you seriously sometimes...
Click to expand...

That's a bit OTT
 
Capt Popeye said:
:(

Tis money money money all the way with the new brand of Harbour Masters and the committees these days, and from experience, if they can double or even treble charge for anything they will certainly do it. :(
Click to expand...

They should have a word with Salcombe Harbour to see if that works .
 
It's the complete problem with the low-tax conundrum. Services are cut or disappear totally and people whinge about paying for it.You can't have everything and pay no fecking income tax!
 
BlueSkyNick said:
How much income tax money goes towards managing public harbours? Not a lot I suggest, nothing probably.
Click to expand...
None goes towards harbours run by commissions does it? I don't think they are allowed to take government money and have to be self funding. Local authority ones like Newport are paid for out of council tax because they generally can't generate enough income.
 
l'escargot said:
None goes towards harbours run by commissions does it? I don't think they are allowed to take government money and have to be self funding. Local authority ones like Newport are paid for out of council tax because they generally can't generate enough income.
Click to expand...

Two observations:

1. Newport and Ventnor are losing c.£5,000 and c.£100,000 p.a. respectively and AFAIK there is an ongoing inquiry into expenses at Ventnor. The bigger question has to be why on earth Newport, next to one of the world's yachting meccas, cannot be made to work? Blaming the Government (which funds itself from UK taxpayers) is simply a cop out.

2. One of the reasons Newport is shunned by yachtsmen is exactly as Seajet described, at least that's pretty much how two IoW politicians put it at some nobby drinks function in the Yacht Squadron in 2013, albeit absent his colourful action-movie screenplay! The right approach must be for the local council to come up with a coherent plan (apparently they are/were considering a cilled marina), LISTEN TO THEIR POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS, and then sort something out which adds to the economy rather than detracts from it.
 
dom said:
The bigger question has to be why on earth Newport, next to one of the world's yachting meccas, cannot be made to work?
Click to expand...

Because it has no water in it for much of the day?

(I've never visited; I vaguely intended to when I had Kindred Spirit, but now that I have 6' draught and a narrow fin, I doubt I ever will)

Pete
 
The charge I really hate at Falmouth, bearing in mind I have a harbour mooring, is the £5 to tie my tender up (limited for 2 hours from memory) at the yacht haven if I want to go into town.

Just blatant money grabbing.
 
dom said:
Two observations:

1. Newport and Ventnor are losing c.£5,000 and c.£100,000 p.a. respectively and AFAIK there is an ongoing inquiry into expenses at Ventnor. The bigger question has to be why on earth Newport, next to one of the world's yachting meccas, cannot be made to work? Blaming the Government (which funds itself from UK taxpayers) is simply a cop out.

2. One of the reasons Newport is shunned by yachtsmen is exactly as Seajet described, at least that's pretty much how two IoW politicians put it at some nobby drinks function in the Yacht Squadron in 2013, albeit absent his colourful action-movie screenplay! The right approach must be for the local council to come up with a coherent plan (apparently they are/were considering a cilled marina), LISTEN TO THEIR POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS, and then sort something out which adds to the economy rather than detracts from it.
Click to expand...

The cilled marina was floated as an idea 10 to 15 years ago - partly to provide a crossing nearer to Cowes so that the council could get rid of the floating bridge - even then it could only be seriously considered with private investment. There was never any prospect of it being built with public funds and no private investor was ever interested.

Likewise, the only prospect of development at Newport would be with private funding - unfortunately, local "river users" are very effectively preventing any attempts by the council to seek improvements. They want free/cheap use just for themselves and this is what is causing the harbour to die - it doesn't even have it's own harbour master anymore.

IW Council wanted to hand Newport over to Cowes Harbour Commission in it's entirety a few years ago but Cowes wanted the crumbling harbour walls rebuilt and the harbour made good first. The near bankrupt council don't have the money to do it. The very real prospect now is that the harbour will be de registered and just left to deteriorate permanently.
 
prv said:
Because it has no water in it for much of the day?
Click to expand...

True, quick look at iPad suggests it dries to about 1.6m all the way up from the Folly, which with a HW/LW range of say 4.0/1.8m is pretty restrictive. But why not do a cost benefit of some dredging and/or a cilled marine and some decent visible security because that's what many punters want if they are to bring their pride and joy to new spot?

If something works bingo; if it doesn't then maybe Newport's Statutory Harbourship is destined to slowly dissolve into the mud, as did Newtown Creek's (more important port than Newport in the mid-fourteenth century) after the French damaged it in 1377.
 
dom said:
True, quick look at iPad suggests it dries to about 1.6m all the way up from the Folly, which with a HW/LW range of say 4.0/1.8m is pretty restrictive. But why not do a cost benefit of some dredging and/or a cilled marine and some decent visible security because that's what many punters want if they are to bring their pride and joy to new spot?

If something works bingo; if it doesn't then maybe Newport's Statutory Harbourship is destined to slowly dissolve into the mud, as did Newtown Creek's (more important port than Newport in the mid-fourteenth century) after the French damaged it in 1377.
Click to expand...

With the council already announcing they have to reduce expenditure by 28 million over the next 3 years there is no prospect of any money being spent on the harbour for the benefit of "rich visiting yachties". Anyway what makes you think marina, security etc is what people want - look at the outcry on here alone over the improvements at Yarmouth and Cowes. Most boatowners in my experience complain bitterly about paying for most things and are more likely to want more for less...
 
l'escargot said:
Likewise, the only prospect of development at Newport would be with private funding - unfortunately, local "river users" are very effectively preventing any attempts by the council to seek improvements. They want free/cheap use just for themselves and this is what is causing the harbour to die - it doesn't even have it's own harbour master anymore.
Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't see this post. It's always sad when a few self-interested locals are allowed to take control of a resource which could benefit the entire community. I am sure you are right in saying that private money would be required, and that private investors wouldn't want to start pouring money into a plan which stood an odds-on chance of getting gummed up in local politics.

Your second post makes the point that "rich visiting yachties" want "more for less". That in a sense is the essence of free markets; the flip-side is that the taxpayer has no obligation to fund our desires! My instinct however is that Newport is a wasted resource; but I could be wrong and certainly have no facts to back up a coherent argument.
 
l'escargot said:
unfortunately, local "river users" are very effectively preventing any attempts by the council to seek improvements. They want free/cheap use just for themselves and this is what is causing the harbour to die
Click to expand...

Bearing in mind I don't really know the place, and this is a genuine question, what exactly is the problem with leaving it as-is? The river will presumably still be there, and if local folks are happy to keep their boats on it on a self-help basis rather than through an organised harbour authority, what's wrong with that?

I guess I'm asking what does "the harbour dying" actually mean?

Pete
 
dom said:
Sorry I didn't see this post. It's always sad when a few self-interested locals are allowed to take control of a resource which could benefit the entire community.
Click to expand...

That pretty accurately describes people who want ever-posher facilities for visiting yachtsmen even if it means pricing out, or otherwise displacing, traditional local users. Not all of us want every harbour or creek turned into an expensive marina.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top