Marine Group and Watchet on Facebook

[Birdseye]

In fairness as I recall the jet washing seemed to be doing a fantastic job. Though it seems that this has stopped or slowed considerably.

Unfortunately it looks what would in an ideal scenario be a huge clean up every few years has to be radically scaled up radically with yearly major clean ups and month maintenance. If it can't be sustained on a profit enterprise, then perhaps it needs to be taken into local charitable ownership.

Charities have to pay the bills too! Watchet issues are that it is almost designed as a mud and silt catcher. The incoming silt bearing tide comes over the gate and the silt begins to drop down the water column in the free flow period. Come the ebb, the gate raises and only cleaner water on the surface flows out leaving the dirtier water held back . The local Uni did a research project and estimated that each tide deposited on average 30 tonnes of silt into the marina.

Cardiff Bay is slowly going the same way

 

[Praxinoscope]

There are ways of keeping Watchet and possibly even Burry Port free of silt, but all are very costly and unlikely to be financially viable for a marina company to adopt as both ’marinas’ are potentially too small to provide the income that would be needed to maintain silt free operation.

 

[Allan]

There are ways of keeping Watchet and possibly even Burry Port free of silt, but all are very costly and unlikely to be financially viable for a marina company to adopt as both ’marinas’ are potentially too small to provide the income that would be needed to maintain silt free operation.

I think there's a major difference between Burry Port and Watchet. Watchet is a town around the harbour at which tourism is a significant factor. Burry port relies far less on tourism and the harbour is detached from the town. The harbour at Burry Port is also much larger which would affect the viability.
Allan

 

[Praxinoscope]

#23. Agreed there are differences between Watchet and Burry Port, but I think the dredging costs are basically similar, yes Watchet is a ‘town centred’ harbour and a tourist centre, so there is an argument that the Chamber of Trade and Local Council should be heavily involved in financing the continuous dredging that this harbour needs.
Burry Port is as you say different in that it is out of town and not generally a tourist centre, but I would maintain that it was only viable as a port over 50 years ago when it was still operating as a commercial port, and dredging was part of the port operations, now as a hoped for marina, it is unlikely that a commercial marina can achieve the density of marina moorings that can fund the constant dredging required, so there is a need for some form of subsidy (either by financial assistance or reductions in business rates etc.) if the local business community and local authorities want to maintain its use.
I would think that the opportunities for Watchet are considerably more rosy than Burry Port, but neither harbour have simple, cheap or easy answers for their maintenance.

 

[PCUK]

Maybe it needs an organisation like the Onion Collective to run the marina. The development on the East Quay may not be to everyone's taste, but they got it done and it's far better than the carbuncle housing that was first proposed.

 

[38mess]

If watchet was dredged regularly would the extra boats that could then moor up and use it cover the cost of the extra dredging? That's the million dollar question in my mind. It's a commercial decision being taken not to dredge perhaps. I have used bury port and laurghne in the past and both were challenging.

 

[PCUK]

Only two thirds of the available berthing has ever been used as there are piles in place for extra pontoons that have not been installed, so if full there should be a decent income.

 

[Praxinoscope]

Only two thirds of the available berthing has ever been used as there are piles in place for extra pontoons that have not been installed, so if full there should be a decent income.

But its ‘ chicken and egg’ , first you have to dredge fully to attract customers for your moorings, but until you can prove that you have fully dredged and can keep the berths clear (a constant dredging process is the only realistic method) who is going to be willing to pay marina fees for a partially dredged harbour with just a promise (not a guarantee) that it will remain silt free.
Also would the income even if occupied to 100% be sufficient to maintain a silt free harbour, dredging is expensive and the regular dredging that would be needed to keep the marina free of silt is a constant expense, business rates will take another slice of income, maintenance. of berths, facilities etc. all eats into profits, maybe a 100% occupancy would be sufficient but, the first need is the heavy investment to clear the harbour in the first place.

 

[PCUK]

If Watchet had a dedicated dredger and used the berthing staff to operate it, that would drastically reduce the dredging costs.

 

[Praxinoscope]

If Watchet had a dedicated dredger and used the berthing staff to operate it, that would drastically reduce the dredging costs.

Possibly, but not initially as the first thing to do is a proper dredge of the whole harbour, (not water injection but bucket) then a water injection dredging system might keep it clear if permanently based in Watchet, but this would not be cheap, for a relatively small harbour/marina, berthing staff would need additional training and probably some form of qualification, so naturally would expect to have an increase in salary, plus of course maintenance of the dredger.
As I said in my earlier post, as Watchet is a tourist centre this is partly a Chamber of Trade and Local Council issue as much as that of-whoever runs the harbour/ marina and therefore needs a combined effort and financing.

 

[Luminescent]

Charities have to pay the bills too! Watchet issues are that it is almost designed as a mud and silt catcher. The incoming silt bearing tide comes over the gate and the silt begins to drop down the water column in the free flow period. Come the ebb, the gate raises and only cleaner water on the surface flows out leaving the dirtier water held back . The local Uni did a research project and estimated that each tide deposited on average 30 tonnes of silt into the marina.

Cardiff Bay is slowly going the same way

They do but charities have the luxury of legalized slave labour and far far more tax breaks.

Unfortunately to get the silt to go back out with the flow you have to re-suspend it. That said if the gate is up and the silt is coming over it.... Watchet needs a bigger gate.

Possibly, but not initially as the first thing to do is a proper dredge of the whole harbour, (not water injection but bucket) then a water injection dredging system might keep it clear if permanently based in Watchet, but this would not be cheap, for a relatively small harbour/marina, berthing staff would need additional training and probably some form of qualification, so naturally would expect to have an increase in salary, plus of course maintenance of the dredger.
As I said in my earlier post, as Watchet is a tourist centre this is partly a Chamber of Trade and Local Council issue as much as that of-whoever runs the harbour/ marina and therefore needs a combined effort and financing.

I am less convinced about the water injection system. Dealing with 30t on silt is no joke and I'm not sure how one would design a water injection system to cope with that.

What about a sea worthy turbidity barrier with a gate? It's not going to be perfect but I think you could basically stop a lot of silt using something like that. Couple with some gate limitations... timing to reduce the amount of silt coming in... I think could greatly reduce the amount of dredging required. Clearly something has to be arranged to change otherwise it's a losing battle.

 

[Birdseye]

Watchet might be a tourist town but its a down at heel one with tatty shops, no beach and on visits there not many people about. Various past owners have dredged with greater or lesser success but none of them have found it financially viable.

Burry port has a marginally greater chance of some success since its sand that washes in and at much lower rates. Its problem is that the port is in the back of beyons and the town is even less attractive than Watchet. So who would want to go there as a visitor?

The obvious harbour for profitable marina - isation is Combe

 

[Praxinoscope]

Luminescent, I tend to agree with you that water injection is not all its cracked up to be, but if a severely silted are is ckeared first using traditional dredging then keeping it clear with regular water injection dredging may work.
But to do this the pontoons have to be removed to give full access for a a working dredger. There is also the environmental problem of where to dump the silt.
As you have stated, something needs to be done if Watchet is to remain useable, but it needs a concerted effort and a considerable investment.

 

[PCUK]

I've seen the injection dredger make big improvements at Watchet but it needs to be constant. It could clear the marina with continuous working but then it needs to continue all the time. It is possible, but it needs input from all interested parties including the Council, Chamber of Commerce, Tourist board, Onion Collective as well as The Marine Group. It's just a matter of money. Simples!

 

[TSB240]

I've seen the injection dredger make big improvements at Watchet but it needs to be constant. It could clear the marina with continuous working but then it needs to continue all the time. It is possible, but it needs input from all interested parties including the Council, Chamber of Commerce, Tourist board, Onion Collective as well as The Marine Group. It's just a matter of money. Simples!

It does seem that the Doomhammer has made some impact at Watchet of late. It seems to go ìn line with the marina group actually releasing some funds, paying out for the new crew and diesel operating costs.

The local free press has an investigative reporter on the case.

Watchet super Mud

Marinas without diesel all year, staff not being paid, ccjs being awarded. There is more to this than just running down marinas. It is easy to follow the trail in companies house and on line of the main money men.

Perhaps the lack of funds could be explained by this?
Cladding on £23m Cardiff Bay development withdrawn from sale.

Sadly in Wales there is no government support to provide developers with a fund for replacing non conforming cladding.

 

[Luminescent]

Sadly in Wales there is no government support to provide developers with a fund for replacing non conforming cladding.

Why should tax payers fund negligent companies? I'm of half a mind to say the entire development should be confiscated and turned into social housing. The lot of it.

"With a fund for replacing non conforming cladding"... you make it sound like they weren't happy with what colour it happened to be. On the contrary this is cladding a la Grenfell. It's very much a fire hazard used by companies who are cutting corners and flouting engineering and safety principals to turn an extra few quid. Support? They should be hammered for their privateering.

Back on topic then.

TMPG have only had the contract over Watchet for two months. I don't think (three CCJs...) that TMPG can throw a lot of Money at Watchet, but I do think they can throw more at it than the previous operators did. I can understand the frustration of the currently incarcerated, but some patience is definitely going to be required. Some additional communication from TMPG wouldn't go amiss either... how many people knew the gate parts needed to be shipped from America with a minimum three month lead time?

Also putting the wrong coolant in the dredger... that's smooth.... . At least we know why it's not working now.

 

[Allan]

Why should tax payers fund negligent companies? I'm of half a mind to say the entire development should be confiscated and turned into social housing. The lot of it.

"With a fund for replacing non conforming cladding"... you make it sound like they weren't happy with what colour it happened to be. On the contrary this is cladding a la Grenfell. It's very much a fire hazard used by companies who are cutting corners and flouting engineering and safety principals to turn an extra few quid. Support? They should be hammered for their privateering.

Back on topic then.

TMPG have only had the contract over Watchet for two months. I don't think (three CCJs...) that TMPG can throw a lot of Money at Watchet, but I do think they can throw more at it than the previous operators did. I can understand the frustration of the currently incarcerated, but some patience is definitely going to be required. Some additional communication from TMPG wouldn't go amiss either... how many people knew the gate parts needed to be shipped from America with a minimum three month lead time?

Also putting the wrong coolant in the dredger... that's smooth.... . At least we know why it's not working now.

I'm a little confused, are TMPG The Marine Group?
Allan

 

[Luminescent]

Looks like the full name is "The Marine and Property Group", but trading as The Marine Group.

The Marine & Property Group Ltd completes major new financing deal with TAB - The Marine Group

Company Information

Company Information The Marine & Property Group Ltd (company no. 05799333) is privately owned and is the parent company to; Cardiff Marine Services Ltd (company no. 01408506).
Burry Port Marina Ltd (company no. 10225502). Aberystwyth Marina Ltd (company no. 09426470).
Port Dinorwic Ltd (company no. 10547576). Watchet Marina (company no. 03986667.
Cardiff Diesel Services Ltd (company no. 03631857).
Our HQ is in Cardiff and we have additional facilities in Burry Port, Aberystwyth, Port Dinorwic and Watchet.

 

[MisterBaxter]

I wonder whether the only long term solution for a silt free harbour on the Bristol Channel might be a basin that you lock into, so that the tide isn't flowing freely in and out.

 

[SaltIre]

Watchet Marina might update their website by removing last year's Tide Table and replacing it with one for 2023...

Watchet Marina