By - Friday, December 18, 2009
Search iwcp.co.uk:
LettersFrom Dr Donald
Mackenzie, Lymington, Hants:
I write concerning the Wightlink
Lymington to Yarmouth ferry route.
I, for one, and many
other people I know, are categorically not against there being a
ferry on the Lymington to Yarmouth route.
We have lived with the
ferry service operating for many years. We all fully appreciate the
route’s importance to the people and traders living and
working in the western part of the IW and also the importance to
Lymington’s retailers of IW residents shopping here.
However,
this cannot be at any cost to the safe recreational and business use
of the river and to the environment of the protected habitats
nearby.
Bearing in mind that the frequency of the ferry service
has now increased to more than 22,000 trips a year (or 72 every day)
it is vitally important that all the impacts of the ferry service
are properly assessed — which so far they definitely have not
been.
If, as many suspect, the impact of these new ferries on the
internationally important EU-protected habitats nearby is not
sustainable, Wightlink must be asked to design and build new ferries
which can be safely accommodated in the river rather than the
monsters that have imposed on the river and on river users.
In
the opinion of many people in Lymington, the new W Class ferries are
simply too large to be safely accommodated in the river, despite the
assertions of the Lymington Harbour Commiss-ioners.
Evidence is
already suggesting a rapid acceleration of the loss of the
supposedly protected habitats since they arrived.
On the
practical side they are so large that they cannot even keep to the
normal timetable due to the need to go so slowly at low tide and
have been actually providing a much worse service to Island
residents.
Hopefully Wightlink will eventually see that it is
everyone’s interest if they are brave enough to bite the
bullet and start the process of replacing these ferries with ones
that can be sustainably used for the future while maintaining a
viable service to the IW.
By - Thursday, December 24, 2009
Search iwcp.co.uk:
LETTERS
From John Burrows, general manager operations,
Wightlink, Gunwharf Road, Portsmouth:
I WRITE following
the letter (CP, 18-12-09) from Dr Donald Mackenzie regarding our
new ferries operating on the Lymington to Yarmouth route.
Sadly,
his letter seems to ignore all the studies carried out by a
significant number of extremely reputable and independent
experts.
Before the new ferries arrived there were two main
concerns being expressed:
1. The new vessels were too large to
operate safely in the Lymington River and would cause a reduction
in the number of visitors to the river.
2. The new vessels would
cause loss of the protected habitats that border the navigation
channel.
With regard to the first point, Lymington Harbour
Commissioners appointed BMT Seatech to carry out reviews of the
safety of the operation of the ferries. They observed our operation
from on the vessels, from small boats in the river and from the
shore.
Some visits were pre-announced and some were carried out
without our knowledge to ensure our actions were consistent. During
the review, BMT consulted with all river users, including the
Lymington River Association (LRA), and fully considered their
comments.
It is perhaps interesting to note that BMT felt
compelled in one of their reports to note some of the comments made
by the LRA could be read as threats.
BMT made a number of
recommendations and, following a review of the full summer’s
operation, their final conclusion was "that the low level of
marine risk on the Lymington River had not been compromised by the
introduction of the W Class ferries".
In terms of visitor
numbers, the chairman of the harbour commissioners confirmed in his
Update to Stakeholders, issued on August 6, that visitor numbers
were actually up by 15 per cent on the same period last year.
With
regard to the second point, Natural England, which is the statutory
nature conservation adviser, takes the view that "an adverse
effect on the natural sites’ ecological integrity due to the
ferries is not likely in the period between February 25, 2009, and
the spring of 2011".
This view has been supported by
monitoring that has taken place since the introduction of the new
ferries.
Wightlink have been working with a number of bodies and
in conjunction with them have drawn up a proposed mitigation scheme
whereby we will recharge the block of salt marsh directly to the
east of the mouth of the river. Natural England’s
current view is "once delivered the risk of adverse effect
will have been avoided".
As a layman it seems to me that a
significant body of independent experts have concluded that both of
the understandable concerns initially expressed, have proven to be
unfounded.
I should also point out the statement made by Dr
Mackenzie that sailings have increased to more than 22,000 trips a
year is incorrect. In 2009 we will complete fewer than 15,500
trips.
From James Wilson, Newport:
Go upstream: I
read with interest Dr Mackenzie’s letter and as a regular
commuter on the Yarmouth to Lymington route, I am usually the first
person to criticise Wightlink. However, on this occasion, I am of a
different opinion.
I, for one, am a complete
champion of a fixed link but while this debate remains on the back
burner, we should make the best of what we have and I like the new
boats.
The wash from these vessels is considerably less than
most of the fishing boats and leisure craft which use Lymington
river on just as frequent a basis, so it is these people who should
be the subject of a judicial ruling, not the ferries.
Apart from
a handful of people, who really cares about the mud flats
surrounding the river? For a large percentage of the time they are
submerged under water at high tide anyway.
All the LRA has
succeeded in doing is infuriating me and the other commuters
traipsing back and forth to the mainland each day by having to go
at a snail’s pace in the river while fishing boats, RIBS and
pleasure boats speed past with their wash.
There are far more
pressing things to worry about in this life. If preserving a
riverbank is all you have to worry yourselves about, go upstream,
north of the bridge and you have unspoilt reed beds and wildlife to
look at with no danger of the ferries.
From Robert Hall, East Cowes:
No change:
While I accept that the EU-protected habitat of the Lymington River
is important, I also see Dr Mackenzie admits the ferry is vital to
the Island, as well as Lymington retailers.
He accepts the boats
go very slowly down the river, this, I believe, is to protect the
habitat as well as for safety reasons.
I accept the ferries
cannot keep to a former timetable, as he says, but a lot of this is
caused by the fact Wightlink is unable to unload and load people
and vehicles at the same time, due to the opposition at Lymington,
making it impossible, at the moment, for a new ramp at
Lymington.
Yes, these ferries are a lot taller, but are not much
larger or wider than the older ones, and I seem to remember an
'outcry’ when the old ferries were introduced about 30 years
ago. Do things ever change?