Long Island Poole HarbourProtest Landing

robyonfrome

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Jun 2008
Messages
280
Location
Wareham river Frome
Visit site
Long Island Poole Harbour Protest Landing
Bit of a disappointing turn out for the demonstration, only 12 people bothered to come, but never mind it only takes one person to prove a point. The police turned up and spoke to everyone to make sure things stayed amicable, but they didn’’t take sides and we weren’’t asked to leave the Island. Attached is a letter I have written to the Crown Estate. Basically, the Rempstone estate is claiming it owns land that maybe it doesn’’t, if the Crown have got their facts right, we shall have to wait and see.
My only reservation is, that If I succeed in stopping the Rempstone Estate from preventing people from landing, what effect will it have on the island? There is no doubt that a small minority of people do abuse it, such as lighting fires in the woods, that could get out of control; rubbish left on the beach, people letting their dogs run free where birds are nesting, (including me I’’m afraid, with regard to my Golden Retriever - on the occasion I was confronted by the grounds man, whilst he distracted me,) she was just a foot or so off the beach, where oyster catchers where nesting. There is a big wildlife issue here which needs some consideration. However, other nature reserves such as Arne and Brownsea Island manage to combine people and wildlife successfully and there are many miles of shoreline where people never land and wildlife has a free rein. The Rempstone estate are trying to sell the island for allegedly 1m to 5m, and are probably concerned that no one is going to pay that, if people can still walk around on their private beach. Rempstone have paid out thousands for a barge for a grounds man to stay on and a high tech amphibious rib to get to the shore. Would they really pay all that out to look after the wildlife, when people have been enjoying using the island for some 30-40 years and the wildlife is still thriving?
A compromise could be to put in place, a substantial but discreet fence running the length of the beach on the shore line with polite signs saying ““please keep out - birds nesting”” and ““fire risk””. Another idea would be to set up a ““friends of the island”” group that could pick up the occasional rubbish. That way a large number of people could continue to enjoy the shoreline, whilst keeping them away from the centre of the island, rather than the island only being available to a handful of ““chosen”” people.
So, nothing has been finally resolved yet and it may take many more people to voice their objections before any notice is taken and consideration given to the continued use of the island, by caring members of the general public. I will continue to look into our rights and let you know my findings in due course.
Letter to The Crown Estate

Dear Mr Charles Green

Long Island Poole Harbour
Further to your last correspondence to me relating to the above on the 12 June.

The Rempstone Estates representative on the Island showed me the Land Registry Map in which it is coloured in, that their land extends to the very end of the sand bar. This line they indicate is approximately where I consider the low water springs to be, as I have been to the Island many times I feel I am qualified to confirm that. I did take photos last nigh (attached) at 18.00hrs on June 12 which is a half hour off high water of 2m above chart datum, which should be somewhere around the official 1.94m for mean high water. I would ask you to take a look at these photos then compare them with the Land Registry map, you will see from the photos that the high water line is only about six foot or so away from the start of land.
As you stated in your last correspondence to me that the Crown Estate owns the area between the mean high and mean low water marks you will no doubt note the considerable difference in which they say they own.
Please can you confirm who is right here, do The Crown Estate just own what is shown on the Land Registry map which appears to be the low water springs mark or do you own up to the mean high water mark as approximately indicated in my photos.
I would be extremely grateful if you could solve this confusion and please let me know at your earliest convenience.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The Rempstone Estates representative on the Island showed me the Land Registry Map

[/ QUOTE ] Just one quick comment on this. Another recent post (not connected with Long Island) included a contribution from a lawyer (I think) which said that, whilst an entry in the Land Registry has legal force, an attached map doesn't. Nevertheless, I'd be very suprised (a) if Rempstone Estates own the land down to the LW mark and (b) if the person who prepared the LR map has the faintest idea about the law pertaining to ownership of the foreshore /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

Not sure if you'll get a definitive ruling on this issue, mind you. In which case I'd say carry on landing.....
 
PS

If there are 100 people on here who could stump up £10k, maybe we could get ourselves an island in Poole Harbour. It's not going to be worth £5 million with all this palaver about the boundaries and disputed rights of way.

Just a thought..... /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
While the prob with Rempstone Estates is ongoing, does anyone know the legality regarding the ownership of the"cess" (I think thats how you spell it)where its involved with non-tidal rivers.My boat club is now having to pay a considerable amount to the Environment Agency for a lease to use the "cess" for our moorings.If you own the freehold of the land I would have thought it would go down to the waters edge.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Long Island Poole Harbour Protest Landing
Bit of a disappointing turn out for the demonstration, only 12 people bothered to come, but never mind it only takes one person to prove a point. The police turned up and spoke to everyone to make sure things stayed amicable, but they didn’’t take sides and we weren’’t asked to leave the Island. Attached is a letter I have written to the Crown Estate. Basically, the Rempstone estate is claiming it owns land that maybe it doesn’’t, if the Crown have got their facts right, we shall have to wait and see.
My only reservation is, that If I succeed in stopping the Rempstone Estate from preventing people from landing, what effect will it have on the island? There is no doubt that a small minority of people do abuse it, such as lighting fires in the woods, that could get out of control; rubbish left on the beach, people letting their dogs run free where birds are nesting, (including me I’’m afraid, with regard to my Golden Retriever - on the occasion I was confronted by the grounds man, whilst he distracted me,) she was just a foot or so off the beach, where oyster catchers where nesting. There is a big wildlife issue here which needs some consideration. However, other nature reserves such as Arne and Brownsea Island manage to combine people and wildlife successfully and there are many miles of shoreline where people never land and wildlife has a free rein. The Rempstone estate are trying to sell the island for allegedly 1m to 5m, and are probably concerned that no one is going to pay that, if people can still walk around on their private beach. Rempstone have paid out thousands for a barge for a grounds man to stay on and a high tech amphibious rib to get to the shore. Would they really pay all that out to look after the wildlife, when people have been enjoying using the island for some 30-40 years and the wildlife is still thriving?
A compromise could be to put in place, a substantial but discreet fence running the length of the beach on the shore line with polite signs saying ““please keep out - birds nesting”” and ““fire risk””. Another idea would be to set up a ““friends of the island”” group that could pick up the occasional rubbish. That way a large number of people could continue to enjoy the shoreline, whilst keeping them away from the centre of the island, rather than the island only being available to a handful of ““chosen”” people.
So, nothing has been finally resolved yet and it may take many more people to voice their objections before any notice is taken and consideration given to the continued use of the island, by caring members of the general public. I will continue to look into our rights and let you know my findings in due course.
Letter to The Crown Estate

Dear Mr Charles Green

Long Island Poole Harbour
Further to your last correspondence to me relating to the above on the 12 June.

The Rempstone Estates representative on the Island showed me the Land Registry Map in which it is coloured in, that their land extends to the very end of the sand bar. This line they indicate is approximately where I consider the low water springs to be, as I have been to the Island many times I feel I am qualified to confirm that. I did take photos last nigh (attached) at 18.00hrs on June 12 which is a half hour off high water of 2m above chart datum, which should be somewhere around the official 1.94m for mean high water. I would ask you to take a look at these photos then compare them with the Land Registry map, you will see from the photos that the high water line is only about six foot or so away from the start of land.
As you stated in your last correspondence to me that the Crown Estate owns the area between the mean high and mean low water marks you will no doubt note the considerable difference in which they say they own.
Please can you confirm who is right here, do The Crown Estate just own what is shown on the Land Registry map which appears to be the low water springs mark or do you own up to the mean high water mark as approximately indicated in my photos.
I would be extremely grateful if you could solve this confusion and please let me know at your earliest convenience.

[/ QUOTE ]
I will probably never visit this island, but I'm going to jump in because I was with you until this latest post.

As I understand it, everything above HW is privately owned, and everything between HW and LW is owned by the Crown. I understood you wanted to land and use the inertidal area. No problem.

But in this post you talk about other things:
[ QUOTE ]
There is no doubt that a small minority of people do abuse it, such as lighting fires in the woods, that could get out of control; rubbish left on the beach, people letting their dogs run free where birds are nesting, (including me I’’m afraid, with regard to my Golden Retriever - on the occasion I was confronted by the grounds man, whilst he distracted me,) she was just a foot or so off the beach, where oyster catchers where nesting.

[/ QUOTE ]
Lighting fires in the woods? If it is private land they shouldn't be in the woods at all.
Rubbish left on the beach? They shouldn't be on the beach above the HW mark at all.
You say your dog was a foot off the beach, as if he were only a foot "out of bounds". But all of the beach above the HW mark should be out of bounds. As far as dogs go, very few if any dogs will be well trained enough to stay below the HW mark, so the only responsible thing to do (to ensure they don't trespass) would be to ensure they stay on a lead at ALL times.
You refer to people walking around "on the private beach". If you mean below the HW mark I am with you. If you mean above the HW mark, that's private land so (IMO) out of bounds.
 
Access has been an issue in Scotland for many years, with the "Right to Roam" a hotly debated question.

Our Parliament has largely resolved the matter with The "Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003" which basically states

"Everyone has the right to be on most land and inland water providing they act responsibly. Your access rights and responsibilities are explained fully in the Scottish Outdoor Access Code.

Whether you're in the outdoors or managing the outdoors, the key things are to:

take responsibility for your own actions
respect the interests of other people
care for the environment"

On the whole the new access code has worked well with only a very small number of landowners challenging it in court. Equally I'm not aware that the great estates have lost value because of the access code.

From what I see of Long Island on Google Earth were it in Scotland it would not have access problems.
 
bbg. You haven’t taken into consideration that people and their dogs have been roaming the island unchallenged to my knowledge for decades. I originally thought due to my conversation with a member of the harbour control that I could land as far as the high water springs mark, which is right up to the land itself, I have since been informed by the Crown Estate that I only have the right to land up to the mean high water mark which is 6 foot away from the land, as my post read I was distracted by the confrontation of the groundsman that is why my retriever strayed onto the land, but this was at the start of the campaign, I believe we are all a little clearer now of the boundaries and yes when I go on the island again I will have my dog on a lead, as my post indicated I am very respectful of the wildlife and ownership aspect as I hope others will be. Thank you for your input.
 
What a problem.......these places are becoming rarer & over run by the human population.The alternative seems to be to manage them artificially for use by the chosen few.
That said Global warming is predicted to raise sea levels by several feet in a very short time so what loony is going to pay 1m/5m for them?Enjoy them while you can.
 
There are two different but related issues here, Firstly there is access to the island for which a right of way application as been made to Dorset County Council. Secondly is that Rempstone Estates appear to be attempting to prevent landing below the mean HW mark which is not in their power do to.

The use of the island for barbecues, etc., whilst not actively encouraged by Rempstone estates in the past (although you could apply and get permission from them to hold a barbecue) there was never any action to prevent such activity. In fact those who did get permission and pay a small fee gave up due to being overun by others who had not bothered.

Again speaking as one who always took pains to clear any rubbish I abhor those who didn't bother. However using this as a reason to ban access seems suspicious giving the projected sale, likewise the effect on wildlife, as part of proper management plan OK but not just to facilitate the sale, or prevent right of way access.
 
Well done - I think getting even 12 people is impressive.

We will all of course be interested to see there response to your last letter.

IF they do claim to any land below MHW then it will very interesting to hear what the Crown estate have to say.

Who called the police ? More importantly who PAID for them.

When I have been assaulted in the street outside my house the police wouldn't turn up. There wasn't even a crime committed.

Did someone honestly expect violence ? That seems a ridiculous over reaction.

Next time I do want to land (below MHW) I might ring and see if they want to attend !!!

I assume they didn't take DNA swabs from all the invaders - as is their customary practice these days !
 
[ QUOTE ]
Who called the police ? More importantly who PAID for them.

[/ QUOTE ] My experience of a similar situation is that, if you ring up and ask the Police to attend something like this they will charge you. On the other hand, if you ring them up to say that there's a barney already going on they will, presumably, attend for free. If they attend at all...... /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

(Edit: when I say "They will charge you", I mean that they will expect you to foot the bill, not charge you with an offence /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif. I wonder if Rempstone Estates may have rung them up and paid, in an attempt to criminalise an entirely civil matter? Pure speculation on my part, allegedly and without prejudice etc etc.....)
 
Interesting - I have never done it but suspect to get someone to turn up for free you need to say, after resonably calmly giving all your address details, something like

"Oh my God ! I think he has got a gun.." And put the phone down.

Later you say I did *think* he had but obviously I was mistaken. Thankyou for attending Mr plod...

I was good of you to send so many officers and patrol vehicles all at once !

Also,

"I wonder if Rempstone Estates may have rung them up and paid, in an attempt to criminalise an entirely civil matter?"

You speculation is outrageous sir - surely no-one would abuse and manipulate the system like that...Surely not...

;-)
 
Regarding the Police presence, many of us are pleased that Dorset Police does still have a Marine section, the Accountants would have axed it long ago, so maybe you shouldn't be too surprised that a sunny Sunday Afternoon in Poole Harbour with a possible confrontation was an occasion they felt worthy of a putting in a appearance.
 
BTW Dick Durham (new editor for YBM) did get in touch. I gave him a few general quotes and sent a piccy of SWMBO and doggie on said beach. I encouraged him to get in touch directly with you (Roby) to get the story from the horse's mouth. Or you could just email him direct.

He also wanted to know my age and occupation - clearly pertinent to the story but that's journalism for you ;-)
 
Top