Ports Authority tidal demarkation marks ?

[Capt Popeye]

My Local Ports Authority acting CEO appears to purse the Ports Authority mandate of a few years ago , amounst these recomendations is that Ports Authorities use the MHWS tidal mark as the limits of the Ports demarkation , thois is higher than I understood was or is the existing demarkation mark which I understood as MHW mark .

So am I wrong ? If the Ports are sucessfull in raising their HW demarkation mark of their authority , my guess is that certain activities , by Councils , Property Owners , Wharf owners etc near the HW marks just might have to be curtailed somewhat : Plus as Global Warming might result in HW marks moving upwards along the shore line so the Ports might be gaining not only Waters but Land as well ?

Anyone else experienced this actions ?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I've been trying to find a definition on the Crown Estates site, and it states that the Crown Estate (which leases foreshore and seabed for ports etc. ) regards the landward boundary as MHW. See Around the coast | Around the coast

However, that's very obviously a page prepared for public consumption, and there is no clear definition of the landward limit.

I can't imagine it would make much difference except in a few exceptional cases.

 

[Capt Popeye]

Hi AP well maybe t would effect some Boating activities , if I see it right : Winter laying up , afloat but beached on a Spring Tide upon Mud Flats etc , many East Coast Boats do this , iits been reguarded as above and out of Local Harbour juristiction (so no fees to pay) ? But maybe with the acceptance of a ocal Landowner or Council : Just maybe the proposed extention to the Harbour Board might effect this practice ?

There are other river uses that beach their boats at or above MHW marks whist enjoying 'getting afloat' , that mioght be effected if the Harbour Board are stroppy or similar ?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

Hi AP well maybe t would effect some Boating activities , if I see it right : Winter laying up , afloat but beached on a Spring Tide upon Mud Flats etc , many East Coast Boats do this , iits been reguarded as above and out of Local Harbour juristiction (so no fees to pay) ? But maybe with the acceptance of a ocal Landowner or Council : Just maybe the proposed extention to the Harbour Board might effect this practice ?

There are other river uses that beach their boats at or above MHW marks whist enjoying 'getting afloat' , that mioght be effected if the Harbour Board are stroppy or similar ?

You might be interested in the Crown Estates map of what they own and can therefore lease to Harbour Authorities, It's here: https://thecrownestate.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=0aac22685d2f4d78a2a3b0a5aa1660db

I note that most saltings (which is what I guess you're referring to) don't fall within their remit, and so can't be leased by them to a harbor authority. But of course, local ancient land-owning rights may be a factor in many places. It's also the case that many such areas are nature reserves, which might affect the use of them.

I also note that the Crown Estates also explicitly state that (except in a very few places) Ports are built on seabed and foreshore that is leased to them by the Crown Estates. There are well-known exceptions such as the Beaulieu River, of course.

Actually, I suspect that some office-bound person has simply not realized there's a difference!

Also, while I recognize the issue you raise, I think it's a very infrequent thing these days.

 

[Capt Popeye]

Well down here on the Teign , the Shaldon Council appear to cherish their portion on the Foreshore / beach areas , a while ago an overzealo s Harbour Master or Commision errected some signs stating that the areas around HW mark were Maintenance areas booked and paid for use to the HM office : Well the Shaldon Local Council took some action ,as these areas extended above MHW marks so the HM removed these Notices , and has never replaced them . So up to today the Notices have not been replaced . Good Jobby I say

 

[Capt Popeye]

I've been trying to find a definition on the Crown Estates site, and it states that the Crown Estate (which leases foreshore and seabed for ports etc. ) regards the landward boundary as MHW. See Around the coast | Around the coast

However, that's very obviously a page prepared for public consumption, and there is no clear definition of the landward limit.

I can't imagine it would make much difference except in a few exceptional cases.

You might be interested in the Crown Estates map of what they own and can therefore lease to Harbour Authorities, It's here: https://thecrownestate.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Viewer/index.html?appid=0aac22685d2f4d78a2a3b0a5aa1660db

I note that most saltings (which is what I guess you're referring to) don't fall within their remit, and so can't be leased by them to a harbor authority. But of course, local ancient land-owning rights may be a factor in many places. It's also the case that many such areas are nature reserves, which might affect the use of them.

I also note that the Crown Estates also explicitly state that (except in a very few places) Ports are built on seabed and foreshore that is leased to them by the Crown Estates. There are well-known exceptions such as the Beaulieu River, of course.

Actually, I suspect that some office-bound person has simply not realized there's a difference!

Also, while I recognize the issue you raise, I think it's a very infrequent thing these days.

Hi AP suppose the Harbour Board being in South Devon are only able to claim the Areas licenced to them by the Crown Estates (assuming that the Crown Estates own the River Beds and certain forshore areas)