Gaff schooner sunk in Brixham

[Mark-1]

The harbourmaster told me all this - he was off work at the time and no-one asked him his view. The council knew who owned it so it was not 'fly berthing'. It cost the rate payer £36k. Show me the statutory requirement to take over fishing boats and spend council's money on it. I think they have better things to do with their money, frankly.

You started the argument, so you should believe that you got into it.

From the article you quoted:

"The harbour authority for this facility is Ards and North Down Borough Council and so the reported £36,000 cost of the dismantling fell to them."

The boat was moved there in darkness. They never found the guy who moved it there.

So there was an untracable abandoned wreck. The responsibility fell on the council. They can't trace the owner.

 

[dgadee]

From the article you quoted:

"The harbour authority for this facility is Ards and North Down Borough Council and so the reported £36,000 cost of the dismantling fell to them."

The boat was moved there in darkness. They never found the guy who moved it there.

So there was an untracable abandoned wreck. The responsibility fell on the council. They can't trace the owner.

Never believe a journalist. They rarely get their facts right. That part of the Ards peninsula is a small area where everyone knows everyone else (and their business). Of course they knew who it was. Even if they didn't they would be able to trace the last known owner.

 

[Chae_73]

I don't really want to get into this argument either. But I will make a couple of observations.

"Knowing" is one thing, "proving " from a legal point of view is another.

Even if you can prove ownership, being able to take enforcement or recover costs is by no means a given.

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and say "they should have done this or that".

 

[dgadee]

I don't really want to get into this argument either. But I will make a couple of observations.

"Knowing" is one thing, "proving " from a legal point of view is another.

Even if you can prove ownership, being able to take enforcement or recover costs is by no means a given.

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and say "they should have done this or that".

Maybe they should have just left it alone. Ballyharbert is hardly a major international port.

 

[dgadee]

Ards council is the most in debt council in NI. Cutbacks all over the place. Yet some think that paying to remove a fishing boat (which would probably otherwise end up an attractive wreck on the beach for tourists to instsgram) is ok.

 

[penfold]

I observe that Portavogie is no more a shipbreakers than Ballyhalbert, the vessel was about 50' and a digger could smash it up and put it in 2-3 skips in a day or two, a task that could be achieved as well where it was as on the slip at Portavogie. The local taxpayers got taken for a ride.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Why does it take so long to go from Helensbourgh to Glasgow centre by train? It's only 30 miles. Over here - NI - everyone is moving out to the coast. Even Ballyhalbert (don't ask - just look at Google streetview) has seen loads of houses sold over the past few months I was told today by a local. Maybe when the yuppies (is that still a word?) move out to Helensburgh everything will improve. All change seems to be the keyword.

Because there are nine stops. It’s only about 45 minutes to Queen St, Glasgow.

 

[Mark-1]

I observe that Portavogie is no more a shipbreakers than Ballyhalbert, the vessel was about 50' and a digger could smash it up and put it in 2-3 skips in a day or two, a task that could be achieved as well where it was as on the slip at Portavogie. The local taxpayers got taken for a ride.

We're being told the Council needlessly paid for disposal when there was somebody body else who could have done it instead.

Now we've seamlessly moved onto a completely different claim, that the boat could have been disposed of for less money or that there was no need to dispose of it all.

As much as I'd love to do detailed research into a project undertaken by an obscure council I've never heard of, I think I'll just have to continue my life without ever knowing if they significantly overspent on this job. It will be a burden, but I'll cope.

 

[dgadee]

As much as I'd love to do detailed research into a project undertaken by an obscure council I've never heard of, I think I'll just have to continue my life without ever knowing if they significantly overspent on this job. It will be a burden, but I'll cope.

Well perhaps you've learned your lesson now. Do your research first before you start an argument!

Ballyhalbert on a very busy day:



Ballyhalbert's claim to fame is that George Best moved to a house there when he was drying out. Didn't work, I believe. And I can understand why.

 

[dgadee]

I observe that Portavogie is no more a shipbreakers than Ballyhalbert, the vessel was about 50' and a digger could smash it up and put it in 2-3 skips in a day or two, a task that could be achieved as well where it was as on the slip at Portavogie. The local taxpayers got taken for a ride.

I think the larger point is that the council took on responsibility for removal when - according to the harbourmaster - they should not have. What is to stop me thinking my old boat that no-one wants to buy is too expensive in Donghadee marina, moving it down the coast to Ballyhalbert and saying I sold it to a man in a pub for £1, and you'll have to look for him to get it moved? A recipe for encouraging abandoned boats.

 

[penfold]

Is this just a 5 minute argument or the full half-hour?

Councils are overprovided with risk-averse bottom-coverers; rather than make a decision it's too easy for to hire in a consultant or commission a report and before you know it they're on £500 a day or there's a stream of reports inbound telling you the blindingly obvious for about £1 a word.

In this instance it's a bit baffling, particularly when the council actually have a harbourmaster who might be reasonably expected to have a grasp of his responsibilities and obligations, what with that being his job.

 

[dgadee]

Is this just a 5 minute argument or the full half-hour?

In this instance it's a bit baffling, particularly when the council actually have a harbourmaster who might be reasonably expected to have a grasp of his responsibilities and obligations, what with that being his job.

I can go on as long as you want.

As I said above, the harbourmaster was not at work at that point and his views were not requested.

 

[burgundyben]

or the full half-hour?

At least.

Anyway, what is the latest from Brixham?

 

[JumbleDuck]

I think the larger point is that the council took on responsibility for removal when - according to the harbourmaster - they should not have. What is to stop me thinking my old boat that no-one wants to buy is too expensive in Donghadee marina, moving it down the coast to Ballyhalbert and saying I sold it to a man in a pub for £1, and you'll have to look for him to get it moved? A recipe for encouraging abandoned boats.

I've posted this before, so apologies ... Someone abandoned a fishing boat at the old pier in Port Bannatyne. At that point the pier was on the way to dereliction, but shortly afterwards a Community Interest Company was set up to restore it. It's an odd situation, because nobody owns the pier and therefore nobody had responsibility for it. Hence the single purpose CIC.

The abandoned boat was blocking most of the most useful bit of the pier, but the owner, whose name was known, refused to move it, restore it or even sell it. Since nobody owns the pier, nobody could do anything about it. After a while the boat sank, which made things worse. Eventually, so 'tis said (aaargh), the sound of a JCB was heard one evening and in the morning the boat had gone. Nobody saw anything.

Short version: Abandoned boats can be a real pain, and it's quite possible that the cost to your council was less than the potential legal costs of any other route.

 

[dgadee]

Short version: Abandoned boats can be a real pain, and it's quite possible that the cost to your council was less than the potential legal costs of any other route.

Maybe. Maybe it could have been a tourist attraction:

Abandoned Fishing Boat Photos and Premium High Res Pictures - Getty Images

Edit: particularly when there's bu**er all else to see in Ballyhalbert.

Edit 2: the civil justice system in the UK is buck awful. Best just to untie these boats in the night.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Maybe. Maybe it could have been a tourist attraction:

Abandoned Fishing Boat Photos and Premium High Res Pictures - Getty Images

Edit: particularly when there's bu**er all else to see in Ballyhalbert.

Edit 2: the civil justice system in the UK is buck awful. Best just to untie these boats in the night.

I saw the sights in Ballyhalbert on my last drive from Dublin to Belfast. A very rewarding minute and three quarters.

 

[dgadee]

I saw the sights in Ballyhalbert on my last drive from Dublin to Belfast. A very rewarding minute and three quarters.

You must have been travelling very, very slowly.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You must have been travelling very, very slowly.

We did the really good bits twice.

 

[dgadee]

We did the really good bits twice.

If the council had let the fishing boat go ashore and beach, they could have got funding rom the EU (remember we are half in) and added a coffee shop and museum to it. You could then have spent 15 minutes there.

 

[AntarcticPilot]

It does seem to me that a concrete boat is made of much the same stuff as a coral reef, plus a bit of steel and

Sorry, but concrete is nothing like coral. Coral is basically either Calcite or Aragonite (different crystal forms of Calcium Carbonate) and is a biological product that is stable at seawater temperatures. Concrete is a mix of all sorts of hydrated silicate minerals and is actually pretty unstable at seawater temperatures. Concrete leaches various unhelpful things in a wet environment; so much so that in highly sensitive environments like Antarctica its use is discouraged unless unavoidable.