Ramsholt moorings

[Capt Popeye]

There's a few landowners on this side of the river. The Quilter realm stops well before Sutton Hoo..

Thank you for the update.

Does the Quilter family still own Methersgate Hall and surrounding lands and farms?

 

[Capt Popeye]

Thank you all for the added knowledge on Ramsholt, tis changed a lot since my days on the Deben.

Re the moorings, restricted landing rights and restricted car parking at Ramsholt, I guess that Ramsholt is very unsuitable for casual sailing /boating from. The comment made to me by a local, well Snape actually, about being prevented from launching their dinghy there, was because of the non public access to the river, so the fella stopping them was well within his rights. We live and learn.

I suppose the Deben does not have many, if any, Public launching sites along its length, and Ramsholt being probably the least suitable.

Re the under used moorings on the river; I suppose one might also add all the under used yachts and boats on the river, or any river, and take an attitude /opinion that they (the boats) should be used more than they are.

Ah well, ownership does have its rights, and using them a definitely certain right.

 

[Debenair]

This really is a most interesting debate.
As a Ramsholt mooring holder for some 22 years who is now in absentia in the South Hams as a result of my wife suddenly getting a job down here, I had to make a decision about my Ramsholt mooring earlier this year.
I had a lengthy and frank discussion with George and decided to keep the mooring this year just in case things did not work out down here, and we returned to the Home Counties on the rebound. Accordingly I had it fully serviced as usual and paid the licence fee, and landowners access fee.

So to all you lucky guys who have had the use of mooring 164 opposite the pub this summer, I hope you have been generous with your donations to the RNLI!
It seems likely that I shall relinquish the mooring this winter so one person at least will move up the waiting list!
I have always struggled with what I called "Suffolk Yacht Harbour" syndrome, namely the noticeable number of historic mooring holders who keep their boats permanently in the marina, and use their mooring at Ramsholt possibly no more than once a year.
The problem is not that the Ramsholt regulations are deficient, as they provide for the eventuality of a mooring remaining unused, but the enforcement of those regs.

Compared to the situation down south and southwest we have it easy and very Informal on the East Coast. On our delivery trip we refuelled in Cowes , and decided to slip up the Medina for lunch. We picked up an unused ( and from its condition not yet used this season) mooring for lunch, to be swooped on within 5 minutes to be told it was a private mooring. We replied that as east coasters we well understood the protocols but the mooring was clearly unused. This was met with a demand for £5 ( rather than the normal £9) for our lunchtime hour.

On Thursday I pottered down from my mooring in Brixham outer harbour to the delights of Salcombe.
Knowing from observation that several resident moorings in the Bag were unused so far this season, when hailed by the harbourmasters mooring dory I requested use of one of these. I was told there were none free which was clearly untrue particularly as a high profile member of SYC is presently in mid-Atlantic and his mooring is like others presently unoccupied.
I decided to anchor up by the Saltstone, practically in view of my new home in Kingsbridge, and was relieved of £9.90 for the privilege.
Almost unbelievably, those on the Salcombe mooring waiting list are allowed to refuse an offer of a mooring and stay on the top of the list, until they have had two strikes. Only then do they go the bottom of the list.

To summarise, regrettably all local allocation systems are imperfect.

 

[Otter]

The whole basis of this attack on the Ramsholt Fairway Committee and George leaves me bemused

I think the OP got rather rude and criticized George, I don't think the thread can be constituted as an attack, that would require a very excitable view of the discussion. Nor is it an attack to question the system whereby retired bankers keep their yachts in a marina and a mooring at Ramsholt for a half dozen nights a year. It's not likely to encourage young families into a sport that requires 30 years on a waiting list to get a local mooring

But we've also pointed out that all those retired bankers have paid to maintain their moorings to give us many free nights at Ramsholt. Criticism of the Ramsholt moorings committee has been fair and reasonable in all except the very first post and thankfully he hasn't been back.

Personally I'm ambivalent about the system, it shuts out locals but gives all us cruising folk a free berth when we want it. Interesting.

 

[LittleSister]

I think the OP got rather rude and criticized George, I don't think the thread can be constituted as an attack, that would require a very excitable view of the discussion. Nor is it an attack to question the system. . . .

Personally I'm ambivalent about the system. . . . Interesting.

+1

 

[PeterWright]

Really the mooring situation at Ramsholt is a disgrace,a jobs worth so called harbour master who seems to think he's God.
a vessel on the mooring,then it should be put to use by those in need.

In my book, that amounts to an attack on the Harbourmaster and those who allocate the right to lay a mooring at Ramsholt. Clearly not a physical assault, but the word attack has more meanings in the English language amongst which a verbal attack is included.

In contrast to the post I have quoted, the OP describes the harbourmaster as friendly, i certainly did not interpret that as an attack on George.

 

[PeterWright]

if you don't keep a boat on (rather than occasionally visit) your mooring for a year, you forfeit it, which seems entirely reasonable. /QUOTE]

To me, forfeiting your property for another to use it is tantamount to confiscation. I deliberately used the analogy of a leasehold cottage as a closer one representing that he river bed is not the mooring holder's property, but rented to him for his use, whereas the mooring gear is, as I understand it, the personal property of the mooring holder.

 

[ianc1200]

I'm a bit confused about all this (& it is about 8 years since I last picked up a mooring at Ramsholt); is the system still you contact George who will allocate you a mooring, and do you then pay for the mooring?

 

[CliveG]

I'm a bit confused about all this (& it is about 8 years since I last picked up a mooring at Ramsholt); is the system still you contact George who will allocate you a mooring, and do you then pay for the mooring?

You don't "Pay" anyone.
We mooring holders don't ask for any payment.
Our Harbour Master asks if you would like to make a donation to the RNLI for the use of our mooring.
He will suggest £5.00 for a night.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

Cruising currently in South Brittany I have come across a subtle way around this sort of mooring problem. There are waiting lists for many of the moorings, but you can get a 6 month contract on a mooring when the owner has not launched for one reason or another. Then you are offered another6months, but probably on a different mooring and so on. Could not the Fairways Committee look into this sort of possibility? The lessee would have to pay a fee that would cover a contribution to the owner of the mooring; towards George's honorarium; and a service fee to the person administering the scheme. It would need someone who could liaise happily with George, is computer literate to keep track of what the intentions are of the owners of the moorings and those who would wish to tame a "short term lease". Lateral thinking is what is needed,

 

[Otter]

I suspect there's no appetite for change. Let's face it, if you waited 25 years to get a mooring there you're not going to change the rules so that the next guy only has to wait 2 years.

30 or 40 nights at Ramsholt in the last few years and we've only been asked for a fiver twice, so basically free mooring when you want it, sometimes for three or four nights when the weather and the children are settled there. It is odd though as you meander up the Deben, every other collection of moorings has almost full occupancy but as soon as you get to Ramsholt it's only half full. I'm not complaining, I get free mooring when I want it, but it doesn't seem fair to the inhabitants of those local villages.

 

[ianc1200]

CliveG, thanks for the reply, seems a very good & reasonable way of contributing. Hope to be up there next week.

 

[Santana379]

if you don't keep a boat on (rather than occasionally visit) your mooring for a year, you forfeit it, which seems entirely reasonable. /QUOTE]

To me, forfeiting your property for another to use it is tantamount to confiscation. I deliberately used the analogy of a leasehold cottage as a closer one representing that he river bed is not the mooring holder's property, but rented to him for his use, whereas the mooring gear is, as I understand it, the personal property of the mooring holder.

I'm certainly not advocating that personal property be forfeit - I'm sure the owner could have the right to collect their mooring tackle when they gave up (or were made to give up) their mooring, or there could be a set transfer price.

I still cannot understand why it can be right for a fairway committee, when there is a very long waiting list, to allow an individual to have a mooring when they know that individual has absolutely no intention of keeping a boat on it.

Obviously I can see there are medium term justifiable exceptions - e.g. a boat kept out of the water for a summer or two's renovation, or one on a lengthy cruise.

I don't think either of us stands even a faint chance of changing the other's viewpoint, so it's probably best left there!

 

[Santana379]

Let's face it, if you waited 25 years to get a mooring there you're not going to change the rules so that the next guy only has to wait 2 years.

That's a very cynical view of human nature! I'm sure we must be talking about a more sophisticated and altruistic mentality here.

 

[Otter]

My mistake, I see now that after waiting 25 years and growing both spiritually and psychologically through that process, they are reluctant to deny that growth opportunity to the next chap who wants a mooring.

 

[Athene V30]

I still cannot understand why it can be right for a fairway committee, when there is a very long waiting list, to allow an individual to have a mooring when they know that individual has absolutely no intention of keeping a boat on it.

Surely this is the same as happens everywhere else? There are empty moorings at Kings Boatyard, there are boats laid up ashore and there is a waiting list. When I wanted to move to Brightlingsea I had to go on the waiting list and a couple of years later a vacancy came up. I can recall then there were empty spaces despite the moorings being 'full'.

If someone is paying for the space on the Deben (or where ever) how is it to the benefit of the owner / committee / whoever to want to change that and get rid of someone who is paying for someone else who might not? I dont see where 'right' comes into it - surely it is a commercial decision rather than a moral debate?

 

[Santana379]

I dont see where 'right' comes into it - surely it is a commercial decision rather than a moral debate?

Ah, it didn't realise it was a commercial decision.

I thought the committee ran the moorings for the benefit of the mooring holders, (current and waiting?). I am choosing to pass comment on the situation from a moral standpoint (and debating something here that is of course really none of my business at all). Excessive investment banker bonuses are justified on commercial grounds, but they are, to most eyes, morally abhorrent, and simply not "right". Just another case of one group of people benefitting themselves to the significant detriment of others by using a controlling position to their advantage.

If it's to be commercial then there's only one thing to be done - increase prices to reduce demand. Get everyone who wants to retain a mooring to pay more, and raise prices until the excess demand is reduced to a manageable say one year waiting list.

 

[FullCircle]

If it's to be commercial then there's only one thing to be done - increase prices to reduce demand. Get everyone who wants to retain a mooring to pay more, and raise prices until the excess demand is reduced to a manageable say one year waiting list.

If it's commercial. However, price is not a Unique Selling Point, as any Bank Manager knows when looking at the business plan. However, looking holistically, free moorings for visitors, makes a very good selling point if other businesses in the area are able to respond in like kind.
For instance: I no longer go to West Mersea since they started charging a usurious rate, but go to Paglesham, and if you park up one end, no charge, and a fiver if you park up the other end.
Maybe, you could establish a long term use test, taking into account illness, family issues, unemployment, financial hardship, temporary no boat. A bit like the welfare benefits system points.

Sounds like a plan. Sort of.

 

[Otter]

Not going to change, too many vested interests. It's not a commercial decision otherwise they'd be charging visitors instead of very occasionally waving an RNLI tin about. Hopefully it's reputation as a free destination brings business to the Ramsholt Arms.

 

[Cantata]

Not going to change, too many vested interests. It's not a commercial decision otherwise they'd be charging visitors instead of very occasionally waving an RNLI tin about. Hopefully it's reputation as a free destination brings business to the Ramsholt Arms.

And as an occasional visitor I am very happy with the status quo.