Dredging and Mooring

boatone

boatone

Well-Known Member
Joined
29 Jul 2001
Messages
12,845
Location
Just a few cables from Boulters Lock
www.tmba.org.uk
Apollo and I are sparring with each other on the Mud Weight thread with regard to dredging and moorings.

Apollo thinks the EA should take responsibility for dredging areas like the Brocas even though they are not the riparian owners of the river bed in question.

The EA, as I understand it, is only responsible for maintaining certain navigable depths in the fairway and carries no responsibility for dredging bankside unless the area in question is actually an EA mooring stretch.

I get the feeling this is one of those issues which has no easy solution but I certainly accept that, unless something is done, the situation can only get worse.

Anyone care to suggest how we might mount a campaign to try and change attitudes?
 
Last edited:
You may get some sympathy from EA, but I suspect not a lot of action.

Having got stuck trying to join the main stream at the head of Monkey Island earlier in the season, sources close to EA said that the dredging rules have tightened up, so much so that if the dredgings are to be placed more than a digger's bucket away, then EA have to pay landfill tax, a whole load of paperwork, H&S procedures and on, and on.

Consequently EA will only do the minimum, and as there is nothing concrete (pun not intended) in whatever standards they are obliged to follow- or indeed any statutory obligation at all.

It seems to me that they make up the rules as they go along...

If you're having a go at them - and you'll get my support. It might be as well taking up the issue of dead and overhanging trees. Both items restrict the channel and are a danger to navigation.

Does any senior member of this forum have any knowledge of what statutory obligation EA has??
 
boatone said:
The EA, as I understand it, is only responsible for maintaining certain navigable depths in the fairway and carries no responsibility for dredging bankside unless the area in question is actually an EA mooring stretch.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember the EA saying they aren't required to make sure that EA Moorings are of sufficient depth to match the channel. Hence we paying customers can't even guarantee being able to moor on an EA maintained site.

I've lost all hope of understanding how the EA maintain levels and depths when I go to bed at night and wake up with a foot of water gone from beneath by the morning.
 
TrueBlue said:
Does any senior member of this forum have any knowledge of what statutory obligation EA has??
Click to expand...

I am fairly certain that their only statutory obligation, at least as far as navigation is concerned, is to maintain certain depths in the main navigation channel:

Teddington - Staines Bridge 2.0m
Staines Bridge - Windsor Bridge 1.7m
Windsor Bridge - Reading Bridge 1.3m
Reading Bridge - Folly Bridge 1.2m
Folly Bridge - Lechlade 0.9m

Beyond that I am not aware of any stipulations with regard to minimum depths at mooring spaces etc. They are also clearly responsible for the maintenance and safety of locks and lay-byes and I am sure there are much wider issues relating to flood control etc.
 
Not commercial

The EA are trying to increase licence registrations.
Whether or not it is entirely their responsibility, if they want more punters, they need to offer facilities and a pretty basic facility is somewhere to park without going aground!
 
Riparian owners own the river bed to the middle of the stream, although they have little or no say in what can be done, and, somewhat ironically, would have to get EA permission to dredge any moorings, and, as previously stated, would have to find somewhere to dump the "contaminated" waste (dumped dredgings in Penton Lake came up as a bad thing on the LA search when I bought my house).

I think the shallow water at places like the Brocas helps take some of the energy out of the wakes set up by the multitude of hirelings and trip boats in that area, and will help prevent further erosion (it's largely erosion of the banks that has caused the shallow ledge there)

Personally I think that finding a suitable mooring spot, and occasionally going aground, is part of the fun of navigating a natural water course (c:
 
Government Intervention Needed

miket said:
The EA are trying to increase licence registrations.
Whether or not it is entirely their responsibility, if they want more punters, they need to offer facilities and a pretty basic facility is somewhere to park without going aground!
Click to expand...

I think the only way these issues will be addressed is by government intevention.

The EA has statutory authority regarding issue of licences for peeps to actually use their boats on the non tidal Thames. However, that is all you get as a declared right in return for your licence fee. They have declared their objective with respect to the navigable waterway but there appears to be no specific requirement on the EA with regard to moorings availability or maintaining specific depths other than in the main navigation channel.

I have ventured to suggest many times on this forum that the key to all these issues is funding and that the EA is massively underfunded with regard to issues such as dredging and provision of increased moorings.

The EA are certainly in no position to enforce landowners to carry out dredging to provide moorings and they have ownership/managemet rights over very little of the river bank that they can actually address themselves, They are clearly improving and maintaing the lock cuts and laybyes but they seem to attract some criticism for doing that !

Even with greater funding I am doubtful that there is much they can do with regard to areas such as the Brocas without the cooperation and involvement of the landowners.

This is not British Waterways where the canal carries with it mooring availability alongside the towpath side and BW have even been able to raise revenue by providing facilities to cable and communications companies,

The Thames doesn't 'belong' to any one owner or authority.

And before Apollo starts telling me I'm an EA supporter I'm not, I'm just telling it like it is.
 
I would have spent the funds they DID/DO have differently, have always said that.

Fix the most urgent Capital projects by all means, but keep the basics running (e.g. like having some water to float in.)

Too much has been wasted on Health & Safety projects with no gain e.g. Widening the Cookham lock moorings to one metre so that they are Wheelchair accessible...

And dare I mention the Glossy "River Views" Mag and the Yellow or Blue Spots, all a kingsize waste of money.

I think they badly need the services of the Mayor of Doncaster!!
 
apollo said:
And dare I mention the Glossy "River Views" Mag and the Yellow or Blue Spots, all a kingsize waste of money.
Click to expand...

And I guess the total annual expenditure on those items might just about cover 3 or 4 hours of dredger deployment, always assuming it was in the right place at the time?? !!!!

As for wheelchair access.....don't suppose it matters at all really.....unless you or yours are wheelchair users.......
 
Tone, sorry mate I am losing the will to live here....

I will, i am sure end up like many already, just voting with my feet or Oars.

And guess what, the budget will be stretched even further then...
 
apollo said:
Tone, sorry mate I am losing the will to live here....

I will, i am sure end up like many already, just voting with my feet or Oars.

And guess what, the budget will be stretched even further then...
Click to expand...

One of my colleagues has a Birchwood 33 like mine.

He keeps his on the Canal Du Midi.

Annual cost £700 - £800. He reckons a Mediterranean Marina costs about £1700.

He could not stop laughing when I told him I paid £500.12 for an EA licence, and I thought he was going to choke when I told him how much the marina costs......
 
Either customers get the service they expect for the amount of money it costs or you lose the customer base which is exactly what is happening.

If they take my money for a stated Length/Beam/Draft of boat, I expect them to make the environment suitable for a boat of these dimensions or give me my money back.
 
err...

"He reckons a Mediterranean Marina costs about £1700."

He might get something in St Juan for 4000 euros or how about a 12 metre berth in P.Banus for 8K but anywhere like Nice will probably cost loads more..
If you can get in that is.
 
apollo said:
If they take my money for a stated Length/Beam/Draft of boat, I expect them to make the environment suitable for a boat of these dimensions or give me my money back.
Click to expand...

Now you really are 'aving a larf !

But, as you rightly say, it is your choice whether you pay and play or take your business elsewhere.

I am more interested in trying to find a way of improving matters for those of us that actually like being on the non-tidal Thames.

If I am just plain down to earth realistic, I actually think little will change as the political, local and communal wills are not up to dealing with the problems. And in the current changed financial climate the best we can probably hope for is routine maintenance, limited improvements like OOP and , hopefully, minimal year on year increases in the licence fees.

Nevertheless, last weekend was very pleasant !
 
My moorings are reasonably deep however if I were forced to maintain a depth I would just cease to offer moorings. Consider this, I get not a penny income from the Clubs who come here although many do donate respectable sums to our pet charity.

The cost of dredging and disposal of perfectly good soil to a landfill site would be horrendous.

I still don't understand how river bed suddenly becomes "contaminated waste" when removed from the river.
 
Used to go fishing at Laleham with my Dad in the early 50's - don't think we could afford to go boating then :-(

Anyways, what's that got to do with anything?

I really don't understand why you are giving me such a hard time over this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top