Possible good newsfor the ecology of the Deben.

[Capt Popeye]

Recall that the whole are now known as the 'Deben Estuary', or 'Woodbridge Haven', was known as 'Gooseford which i recall from maps of old, was even bigger that the old maps already refered to ; Giving Bawdsey an nearly Island nature geographically

Recall that Gooseford is refered in some detail , in that DVD Prog on the River Deben , scource to the sea !

 

[Tomahawk]

Surely all those 'funded by the EU' projects , are in reality Funded through the EU ? as twas our UK /GB money surely ?

Wash your mouth out with malt whiskey for mentioning Brexit here in the gentle East Coast

 

[Kukri]

Wash your mouth out with malt whiskey for mentioning Brexit here in the gentle East Coast

You can buy Adnams’ malt whisky, made in Southwold, if you like.

 

[Capt Popeye]

Wash your mouth out with malt whiskey for mentioning Brexit here in the gentle East Coast

Well I only did it with a heavy heart, because two Wags from Norfolk (where else ?) claimed funding from that old EU ; it really shook me, as I am only used to such garbage in Lounge and Current affairs ( no not Tidal Streams charts!)

I will hang my head in shame; can I please have a Tolly Cobbold instead ? yours is ?

 

[AntarcticPilot]

You can buy Adnams’ malt whisky, made in Southwold, if you like.

I've heard of that. I've had Adnams wine - it's not bad, but they don't make it - they're importers. Is the whisky any good? I like the peaty, smoky styles!

 

[Easticks28]

You can buy Adnams’ malt whisky, made in Southwold, if you like.

'Near' whisky - AKA paint stripper !

 

[Kukri]

I have not tried their whisky.

They do make a good gin.

why they should want to make whisky in Suffolk is beyond me

 

[pvb]

why they should want to make whisky in Suffolk is beyond me

They're probably not SNP supporters...

 

[Aquaboy]

of cause 'fleet' means shallow so its the Kings Shallow or shallows maybe..?

 

[tillergirl]

It all depends on what one regards as shallow. A chap called Pett built built ships at Woolwich, Deptford and Woodbridge. Typically at Woodlbridge they were 550 tons. There is a record in 1634 of a ship built by Pett at Deptford that was 95ft overall and drew 13.6ft. I think that is in ballast. The Deben was obviously a lot deeper in the 17th Century. One wonders how deep Kingsfleet was in the 14th century as an anchorage. On a bit of a drift in 1634 the King ordered dredging the Thames as there was a risk of ships not being able to reach to London - on account of the 'soil'

 

[Tradewinds]

On a bit of a drift in 1634 the King ordered dredging the Thames as there was a risk of ships not being able to reach to London - on account of the 'soil'

As a matter of interest, how did they dredge these quite large expanses of water back in those days? Must have taken (nearly) forever?

 

[Capt Popeye]

As a matter of interest, how did they dredge these quite large expanses of water back in those days? Must have taken (nearly) forever?

No idea, but I understand that in the Chart shoing the larger Kingsfleet it was not dredged but actually mostly saltings; although I read that it was the practice of vessels making down river on the Ebb to drag a baulk of timber so dislodging some soft muddy substances behind them, for the Ebb current to move substance down river

 

[Greemble]

When you consider the cost of the flood defences to reclaim that land** the set it against the value of agricultural product that is produced.. subsidised from the tax payer in general.. I suggest it doesn't seem to be a good use of public funds.

** a 3m high bank needs 18 CuM per linear meter at a cost of over £50 possibly much higher per meter placed and engineered or best part of £100 a linear meter.. then there is maintenance.

As pointed already, the land reclamation was likely a private enterprise.
However, complaining about the amount spent against the production values of agriculture strikes me as very short-term thinking.
Consider the value of the produce over course of one year, then multiply that by around three hundred years since the reclaimed land has been in production
- so far. Maintenance costs are unlikely to be that high, especially when set against the likely cost of the flooding over the area and all the properties further inland that are also protected by those same sea defences. Consider what happened to Dunwich.

 

[tillergirl]

As a matter of interest, how did they dredge these quite large expanses of water back in those days? Must have taken (nearly) forever?

'engines'? in 1629? Interesting.

68. [f.40v. ? 18 Nov. 1629 × 29 Jan. 1630] (fn. 1) Trinity House to the king

The office of lastage* and ballastage in the Thames has been under the great seal of England time out of mind. Trinity House have held the office without molestation, paying £50 a year to Capt. Thomas Porter by order of the king. They have been at great charge perfecting the supply of ballast and the daily cleansing of the river which with engines, lighters and wharves is not less than £3,000 or £4,000. Lately John Gilbert and Abraham Johnson have each obtained a patent on pretence of having new engines for cleansing the river, but their aim is to deprive the petitioners of their right of ballast. If the grants pass the great seal, much trouble will be caused, and Porter's £50 would be 'decayed'. The king is asked to direct the lord keeper to stay the grants and to examine the case.

393. [f.51. 9 March × 1 June 1631. Needham, Ramsey and others to the privy council. See 394]

According to the privy council order made after reading their petition [391], they set out their plans for cleansing the Thames, based on their experience overseas. With lighters made fit, labourers, shovels and grapnels, they will scour the channels of all banks of sand and gravel which forces the tide to make new channels. Next they will trench and roll both sides of the river beginning at low water and carry their rolling to the foundations of the houses on both sides of the river and from there carry it [i.e. the soil] away to places convenient for sale so that both sides of the river will be made more sloping and deeper than the main channel, and the channel will then shoot all soil to the sides, and not from the sides to the channel. Thus the river will be always navigable. The old main channel may be kept clear with 2 dragging lighters (fitted with 2 iron rakes of 20 cwt. apiece and 2 fathoms broad, fastened at the stern with a great cable) falling down with the tide and taking hold of banks or anything remaining in the channel. When at a stay, they will bring the cable to the capstan bar and wind up the lighter till the buoy, fastened to the rake, comes home and so clears the lighter, to fall down with the tide again. All shipowners, bargemen, fishermen and watermen who trade in the river will prove that the patents granted by James I for scouring the Thames were used for private gain and stop the river, to the prejudice of city and commonwealth, so that the king may lawfully call in those patents. Reports that Needham and Ramsey were partners [f.51v] in these patents or sought to renew them are untrue. They seek to maintain the city's charter and make the river navigable. What money the lord mayor, aldermen and citizens of London, the suburbs and Middlesex can lend for this famous work will be repaid from the sale, at ordinary prices, of sand for building, gravel for ballasting ships, stones and small gravel for paving, clay for brick making, tiles, paving of houses, and earthen vessels. Money borrowed shall remain in the hands of the lord mayor, being treasurer for this business. In view of their endeavours, the petitioners request a favourable reply to the king's reference of 23 Jan. [392] so that the king may declare by letter his pleasure to the lord mayor for effecting the work and no more time be lost and money spent in soliciting this business, the petitioners having other employment overseas. If anyone be grieved by these proceedings, let him complain to the privy council and there be satisfied. They will perform what was stated in their petition to the king, the privy council, and the city of London

 

[tillergirl]

As pointed already, the land reclamation was likely a private enterprise.
However, complaining about the amount spent against the production values of agriculture strikes me as very short-term thinking.
Consider the value of the produce over course of one year, then multiply that by around three hundred years since the reclaimed land has been in production
- so far. Maintenance costs are unlikely to be that high, especially when set against the likely cost of the flooding over the area and all the properties further inland that are also protected by those same sea defences. Consider what happened to Dunwich.

Quite. And in the Middle Ages, land seaward was extended at least a mile and a half on the north bank of the Crouch. A look at the Interweb map of the Dengie Peninsula shows the intensive system of drainage to 'claim' (my term) the land. Asheldham received Roman ships.

 

[Yorkshire Exile]

I was trying to imagine how much a million tonnes of water is. The nearest I can get it a square kilometre one metre deep. This could be useful, especially in terms of what is dissolved or suspended in the water, but doesn't sound much over a year. However, I wish them well, and while they are about it, maybe they could enforce the speed limits.

I'm finding this difficult to viualise. Could you convert it to Oympic sized swimming pools, bath tubs, London double decker buses, elephants or countries the size of Wales please?

 

[tillergirl]

Using Mum's measure (she was a Yorkshire Exile), I reckon it about 6400,000,000 Yorkshire Puddings. I hope that helps you.

 

[Hydrozoan]

By my reckoning, and using WaterUK's figure of ca. 500 litres per day of water use by the average family household of four people (Vast majority of Brits have no idea how much water they use each day | Water UK) it represents a 10% water saving by about 55,000 such households. But do check my arithmetic!

 

[Dan Tribe]

I'm finding this difficult to viualise. Could you convert it to Oympic sized swimming pools, bath tubs, London double decker buses, elephants or countries the size of Wales please?

A TV reporter was describing a new Ferris wheel in Great Yarmouth and gave the height in metres, then quickly corrected it to double decker buses. He presumably thought that the viewers would not be able to cope with real measurements.

 

[Lucky Duck]

A TV reporter was describing a new Ferris wheel in Great Yarmouth and gave the height in metres, then quickly corrected it to double decker buses. He presumably thought that the viewers would not be able to cope with real measurements.

I was under the impression that all those measurements in Yorkshire Exile's posts were SI units

Although I believe he has missed off the distance to the moon and back.