Threat to our way of life.

[adamlang]

I think this is about Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategies, part of the local planning process. Probably in relation to planning decisions for new developments rather than restricting anyones enjoyment.

https://www.ipswich.gov.uk/sites/default/files/rams_spd_call_for_ideas_14_june_2017.pdf

 

[LONG_KEELER]

I think this is about Recreational Avoidance and Mitigation Strategies, part of the local planning process. Probably in relation to planning decisions for new developments rather than restricting anyones enjoyment.

https://www.ipswich.gov.uk/sites/default/files/rams_spd_call_for_ideas_14_june_2017.pdf

I'm afraid that real facts have little relevance here.

The intention is to spread misinformation, division among people , taking sides etc etc
to make us as miserable with life as they obviously are.

The freedom of the seas is largely a myth that may well apply to ocean crossing and the likes
but the closer you get to the coasts compromises between leisure, commerce and nature are always necessary for the benefit of all .

To anyone reading this who has interests other than sailing , this forum is a poor reflection of the larger sailing community who are willing listen to others . Many have left this forum recently for good . This thread is an example.

I too have no wish to be part of this forum .

 

[NUTMEG]

What a shame that there is still the attitude from a minority of people of 'them and us'. We all use the water so any plans could affect us all. So as water users we should all stick together.

I am sorry but you can not compare the environmental impact of a big high speed flybridge Romford Navy frigate and a 20’ gaffer, or a jet ski and a kayak. All water users are not created equal, if you can not see that, well, nothing else to say.

 

[NUTMEG]

When will people learn that all boaters need to stick together

Didn't see much evidence of "sticking together" last season when we got rolled by the wake of a gin palace doing at least 25kts up the Blackwater.

Being totally honest, I would welcome a total ban on jet skis and water skiers on most of the river, a ban on all hi speed motor pleasure vessels, which should be registered and licensed and a strictly enforced speed limit, under power of 8kts. Jet skiers and water skiers should, ideally, be confined to designated gravel pits. Anti fouling coatings don't work and should be totally banned, lift your boat mid season and scrub it rather than add to the toxic mix that already floats downstream.

Sorry if that offends.

 

[Kukri]

If the wildlife were not there, I would not enjoy sailing on the East Coast. Or anywhere else, probably,

It’s the fact that we have our very own wilderness, on our doorsteps, that makes it so special.

 

[CalicoJack]

I always get a bit twitchy about this kind of proposal. When I was a lad back in the 1970’s we used a local series of gravel pit lakes at Rye Harbour. I sailed on it and water skied on it; there was even a seaplane, not that I ever got to go on that! Then it was taken over by the RSPR. Within a very short space of time power vessels, seaplanes include disappeared. Soon however all forms of boating were forbidden and now unless you are a Twitcher you are most certainly not welcome.

Just one example I suppose, but it does make me worry.

 

[oldgit]

Er... no not really....

having looked at the document it appears the aim is to want to try and prevent further harm to the natural enviroment from increased use by folks who enjoy any hobby or pastime that involves being out on the water. ?
The waters of the East Coast especially the rivers are far far less polluted now than ever they were when A/F consisted of a decent coat of bitumen.
The problem was not the bitumen but the gasworks producing it.
Even today the site of the Gasworks at Rochester and the one in Maidstone Town centre still will give out the odd visible slick and lord knows what still remains underneath where the gasometer once stood.

 

[Bru]

Re: Er... no not really....

Key point: The request for ideas document linked above applies only to the existing Stour and Orwell Special Protection Area (basically all of the rivers Stour and Orwell excluding Felixstowe, Harwich and Ipswich docks). However, RAMS are in preparation for other SPAs nationwide.Elsewhere, they do not appear to be aimed at restrictions on existing users, more at providing guidance to planners on new developments.

Unless anybody can find any further documentation, all we have at this stage is a call for ideas. All sorts of ideas will doubtless be submitted from "do nothing" to "ban everything"

Public consultation has already started taking place (apparently) and certainly the topic appears to have been discussed at more than one meeting / seminar (as reported by Chris and going by hits on Google search) but I can't find any detail whatsoever regarding what may be being proposed

More info is needed and I can't find it online

 

[Bru]

Re: Er... no not really....

having looked at the document it appears the aim is to want to try and prevent further harm to the natural enviroment from increased use by folks who enjoy any hobby or pastime that involves being out on the water. ?

Which document? Help!

 

[reginaldon]

This is a serious subject. When you say local councils are you talking County, District or Town/Parish? I am a councillor on Aldeburgh Town Council and this has not been brought to my attention. Will keep a good look out.
Personally I just don't get the so called bug huggers etc. I have sailed locally for over 30 years and its the increase of twitchers and gawpers that has had an adverse effect on wildlife not boats. Maybe I have got this wrong and will investigate further but I suggest people keep alert to such people.

Who are these dreaded 'gawpers' and what do they do?

 

[Tomahawk]

This is a serious subject. When you say local councils are you talking County, District or Town/Parish? I am a councillor on Aldeburgh Town Council and this has not been brought to my attention. Will keep a good look out.
Personally I just don't get the so called bug huggers etc. I have sailed locally for over 30 years and its the increase of twitchers and gawpers that has had an adverse effect on wildlife not boats. Maybe I have got this wrong and will investigate further but I suggest people keep alert to such people.

Please remember the meeting was looking at general issues around the Tendring, Colchester, Braintree Local Plan. The subject of RAMS was bought up in general discussion about sustainability and in response to a letter from a former Natural England conservationist. He of course has an axe to grind in favour of his hobby. It appears that all the coastal districts are preparing these RAMS studies as a joint exercise. Unfortunately at the moment I don't know any more than I have already said. I do know from previous meetings in my former life that Natural England types want to see all rivers returned to a pristine condition they would be in without human influence. From my meetings with them they have a one track mind and seem to disregard anything except their nature conservation.

 

[Keith 66]

Natural England has been restructured several times, I was secretary of our local wildfowling club some years ago & built up a good working relationship with our site officer. He was a pragmatic bloke & covered a sizable area in South Essex. Since the restructure his area has expanded to cover Essex, Hertfordshire, Suffolk & Norfolk, The organisation does not really have the manpower to do anything more than keep a status quo. The old NE office in Colchester was shut & all documentation is held in a central document repository in Loughborough, Accessing documents takes literally months. Changing management plans takes forever & has to be science based.
Personally without hard evidence of these RAMS I remain sceptical of what they can achieve. Even if they are ever implemented who will enforce it? Natural England wont because they dont have anybody!

 

[Concerto]

Please remember the meeting was looking at general issues around the Tendring, Colchester, Braintree Local Plan. The subject of RAMS was bought up in general discussion about sustainability and in response to a letter from a former Natural England conservationist. He of course has an axe to grind in favour of his hobby. It appears that all the coastal districts are preparing these RAMS studies as a joint exercise. Unfortunately at the moment I don't know any more than I have already said. I do know from previous meetings in my former life that Natural England types want to see all rivers returned to a pristine condition they would be in without human influence. From my meetings with them they have a one track mind and seem to disregard anything except their nature conservation.

Harold Wilson said the greatest threat to democracy was Single Issue Pressure Groups. The Natural England conservationists fall into this group. Their high ideals are unrealistic compared to those of existing users of coastal waters and rivers. Ultimately they will isolate themselves from the general population, loosing any support they might have already created, especially from yachtsmen.

 

[Tomahawk]

I would agree with you ... except..
They asked for changes to the text of the Local Plan to promote vermin and disease. And the Inspector seems happy to oblige simply because Natural England are a govenment outfit.

So from now on everything must promote bio diversity as a main objective otherwise you will not be allowed to develop. .