Peel Marina

[notwell]

Manageable problems. Worth it too.

[gettafa]

The main problem is that the marina was built like this in the first place. A bunch of knowledgable local people pointed out the likely problems at the time but were ignored, and here is the predicted result.

 

Time and time again you see or hear of things being planned and work being carried out and you think 'nah, not going to work' but if you try to point it out to someone they have no interest in listening. Maybe its my attitude...

 

The onlly way you will get through to civil service or anyone in authority, especially politicians, is to chat to them, and suggest stuff in such a way that when the penny finally drops, they believe something is actually their idea.

 

If you ever come straight up with a contrary view you will be castagated, simply because you can't possibly know better than them.

 

It sounds cynical but I have to say, that's the way it goes.

 

I think a not dissimilar case in point (same department) is the monstrosity of the link bridge. It's like a huge greenhouse, hence all the (dozens of?) HSS Hire air conditioners that eventually got put along there after a couple of years of "oh, dear what can we do?"

[notwell]

So according to you experts what should they have done? Re routed the river?

 

What ultimately matters is whether it was for the betterment of Peel and has it worked. The answer is yes and yes.

 

The silt issue is a manageable one. The fact it may not have been managed correctly does not make the marina a poor idea.

[The Bastard]

The Bastard

A staged dredge would be ridiculously expensive, for one thing.

 

Why?

A mini digger on a raft loading a small barge that can be towed out to sea, cost less than a diesel loco ornament.

 

It also doesn't solve the problem of dumping of significant quantities of heavy metals into the environment, rather than gradual leaching by rivers.

 

Waste dispersed over a large area, not dumped all together.

These heavy metals were going into the sea prior to the marina, the only difference now is that there is an opportunity to move them away from land and fisheries into an area where the sea can quickly disperse them over a much wider area far more quickly than they were before.

 

You've not thought this through though, it's "back of a fag packet" thinking. You can't just put a mini-digger on a Heath-Robinson raft and dump it in the bay, or expect a precariously-balanced shallow-draft raft with tonnes of silt to be safely used "away from land."

 

To make it practical you'd need to hire a specialist dumping vessel that's got the capability to receive, move and disperse tonnes of silt a long distance out at sea (£££££) and then hire it at regular intervals annually (£££££££) to do the same job, over and over for decades (££££££££).

 

Then you'd need to "disperse" the silt - where would you easily and cheaply "disperse" it where the silt wouldn't contaminate fishing grounds, shellfish beds or marine ecosystems ? Aren't there already a wealth of regulations and conventions on marine dumping that a responsible country needs to adhere to ? How can we occupy the moral highground on Sellafield if we're dumping heavy metals into the already-contaminated Irish Sea ourselves ?

 

I like the idea of trying to solve the problem, but it's not as simple as you imagine it to be. All these avenues have been looked at already by specialists.

[gettafa]

So according to you experts what should they have done? Re routed the river?

 

What ultimately matters is whether it was for the betterment of Peel and has it worked. The answer is yes and yes.

 

The silt issue is a manageable one. The fact it may not have been managed correctly does not make the marina a poor idea.

 

Not reroute the river but allow it to flow past the Marina by building a wall along the red line. This would be like the Tongue in Douglas. Not ideal (Douglas isn't) and I'm sure this would have been a considered option. I suppose it was down to space and cost. Long term might have been better though.

 

But you did ask. Back of fag packet:

 

 

Edited to add: See Laxey for details. No marina but the river has been given its own water course.

[Speak The Truth]

 

The Bastard

A staged dredge would be ridiculously expensive, for one thing.

 

Why?

A mini digger on a raft loading a small barge that can be towed out to sea, cost less than a diesel loco ornament.

 

It also doesn't solve the problem of dumping of significant quantities of heavy metals into the environment, rather than gradual leaching by rivers.

 

Waste dispersed over a large area, not dumped all together.

These heavy metals were going into the sea prior to the marina, the only difference now is that there is an opportunity to move them away from land and fisheries into an area where the sea can quickly disperse them over a much wider area far more quickly than they were before.

 

You've not thought this through though, it's "back of a fag packet" thinking. You can't just put a mini-digger on a Heath-Robinson raft and dump it in the bay, or expect a precariously-balanced shallow-draft raft with tonnes of silt to be safely used "away from land."

 

To make it practical you'd need to hire a specialist dumping vessel that's got the capability to receive, move and disperse tonnes of silt a long distance out at sea (£££££) and then hire it at regular intervals annually (£££££££) to do the same job, over and over for decades (££££££££).

 

Then you'd need to "disperse" the silt - where would you easily and cheaply "disperse" it where the silt wouldn't contaminate fishing grounds, shellfish beds or marine ecosystems ? Aren't there already a wealth of regulations and conventions on marine dumping that a responsible country needs to adhere to ? How can we occupy the moral highground on Sellafield if we're dumping heavy metals into the already-contaminated Irish Sea ourselves ?

 

I like the idea of trying to solve the problem, but it's not as simple as you imagine it to be. All these avenues have been looked at already by specialists.

 

As silt removal from both Peel and Douglas is going to be an ongoing issue for as long as there are marinas the hiring of any form of removal is nothing more than a waste of funds in the long term.

A means of removal should be bought by the government and run by them.

I never said anything about a Heath-Robinson raft,I was thinking more along the lines of those used to dredge for gold in the coastal areas of Alaska.

As for a barge, it need be nothing more than pontoons surrounding a loadable centre with sea cocks that can be opened, once opened a pump could be operated to direct a stream of seawater into the silt to wash it out of the sea cocks.

This could be done whilst the barge is being towed thereby dispersing the silt over a large area.

Obviously the barge would have to be small enough to be able to work in the marinas and would therefore only be able to dump a dispersible amount each time.

The dredging should always have been, and will always need to be a fairly continuous process.

The concerns raised regarding pollution is a moot point - these pollutants were already being dispersed into the sea prior to the marina and would continue to be if the marina had not been built.

[GreyWolf]

Never should have sold the old mannin dredger which the incompetent harbour head honchos at the time sold of cheap, I believe the new owner got his money back in a couple of months and she's still working today mostly out of Padstow.

Yes the marina has undoubtedly regenerated that area of Peel and yes they were told it would silt up very quickly but didn't listen.

Lessons will never be learned when local free advice (aside of the old Manx crab party) is ignored time and time again when you can just line the pockets expensive consultants as seems to be iomgov preferred option.

From memory didn't they put a debris grid trap in that nearly flooded the local area.

[TheTeapot]

The government owned a dredging barge, maybe called the mannin, which they sold at around the same time the marinas were being built. At least, I think that's right.

[The Bastard]

As silt removal from both Peel and Douglas is going to be an ongoing issue for as long as there are marinas the hiring of any form of removal is nothing more than a waste of funds in the long term.

 

A means of removal should be bought by the government and run by them.

I never said anything about a Heath-Robinson raft,I was thinking more along the lines of those used to dredge for gold in the coastal areas of Alaska.

As for a barge, it need be nothing more than pontoons surrounding a loadable centre with sea cocks that can be opened, once opened a pump could be operated to direct a stream of seawater into the silt to wash it out of the sea cocks.

This could be done whilst the barge is being towed thereby dispersing the silt over a large area.

Obviously the barge would have to be small enough to be able to work in the marinas and would therefore only be able to dump a dispersible amount each time.

The dredging should always have been, and will always need to be a fairly continuous process.

The concerns raised regarding pollution is a moot point - these pollutants were already being dispersed into the sea prior to the marina and would continue to be if the marina had not been built.

 

 

Pollution is not a moot point, the concern is the mechanism. When the silt is washed out to sea by a gradual natural process that's occurred for billions of years, it is quite different to concentrating that silt and simultaneously dumping thousands of tonnes of it in a single location.

 

The Heath-Robinson approach you've identified here still generates the problem of dumping tonnes of heavy-metal-contaminated silt into a vulnerable ecosystem. Whether you just dump it over the side in one batch, or play with your cocks, the long-term problem is still the same. The only difference between your cock-squirting approach and single-dump disposal is the initial concentration of the silt before it's affected by hydrology of ocean currents and dispersed locally. To minimise the effects of dispersion would involve huge-scale dispersion, not just your "cocks and hose" over a small area.

 

Again, you've suggested a barge that's small enough to be operated in a small marina, but which has to contain tonnes of silt and take it safely a significant distance out in a notoriously rough sea. Presumably they could get the same designer who created the TARDIS to come up with some designs ?

 

Spain has learned lessons from its many marinas which sprung up at river mouths everywhere, mainly when the adjacent beaches began to disappear as the marinas silted up.

[Speak The Truth]

 

As silt removal from both Peel and Douglas is going to be an ongoing issue for as long as there are marinas the hiring of any form of removal is nothing more than a waste of funds in the long term.

 

A means of removal should be bought by the government and run by them.

I never said anything about a Heath-Robinson raft,I was thinking more along the lines of those used to dredge for gold in the coastal areas of Alaska.

As for a barge, it need be nothing more than pontoons surrounding a loadable centre with sea cocks that can be opened, once opened a pump could be operated to direct a stream of seawater into the silt to wash it out of the sea cocks.

This could be done whilst the barge is being towed thereby dispersing the silt over a large area.

Obviously the barge would have to be small enough to be able to work in the marinas and would therefore only be able to dump a dispersible amount each time.

The dredging should always have been, and will always need to be a fairly continuous process.

The concerns raised regarding pollution is a moot point - these pollutants were already being dispersed into the sea prior to the marina and would continue to be if the marina had not been built.

 

 

Pollution is not a moot point, the concern is the mechanism. When the silt is washed out to sea by a gradual natural process that's occurred for billions of years, it is quite different to concentrating that silt and simultaneously dumping thousands of tonnes of it in a single location.

 

The Heath-Robinson approach you've identified here still generates the problem of dumping tonnes of heavy-metal-contaminated silt into a vulnerable ecosystem. Whether you just dump it over the side in one batch, or play with your cocks, the long-term problem is still the same. The only difference between your cock-squirting approach and single-dump disposal is the initial concentration of the silt before it's affected by hydrology of ocean currents and dispersed locally. To minimise the effects of dispersion would involve huge-scale dispersion, not just your "cocks and hose" over a small area.

 

Again, you've suggested a barge that's small enough to be operated in a small marina, but which has to contain tonnes of silt and take it safely a significant distance out in a notoriously rough sea. Presumably they could get the same designer who created the TARDIS to come up with some designs ?

 

Spain has learned lessons from its many marinas which sprung up at river mouths everywhere, mainly when the adjacent beaches began to disappear as the marinas silted up.

 

I think the tree you are hugging is stopping you seeing clearly.

It is also quite apparent that your knowledge of the sea has been learnt from the beach looking out.

Anyone who has even a basic understanding of ships understands the use of water as ballast in order to stabilise vessels in rougher weather. I an not suggesting setting sail in a gale.

Also, as someone with experience of being on the Irish sea in all different type of vessels, I have to point out that you are talking shite.

Yes there will be an initial need for more intensive dredging but once required levels are reached it is only maintenance levels needed.

 

I know I have said this before but I will repeat it again -

 

Before the marina pollutants washed into Peel bay.

After the marina pollutants can now be removed to an area where tidal and wave action will disperse them making them less of a hazard than they were when they settled in the bay.

 

Unfortunately rather than coming up with realistic, workable solutions to the problem, assuming the problem is as big as you make out (I am yet to hear of a single person dying or becoming ill as the result of these heavy metals), there is a culture with some people of clinging to the eco bandwagon and blowing things out of proportion.

[quilp]

If the silt is dumped out at sea it'd better be a long way out as some of that contamination might find its way back to shore on the incoming tide. Nice beach, Peel.

[finlo]

If the silt is dumped out at sea it'd better be a long way out as some of that contamination might find its way back to shore on the incoming tide. Nice beach, Peel.

 

 

You sure about that?

[The Bastard]

I think the tree you are hugging is stopping you seeing clearly.

It is also quite apparent that your knowledge of the sea has been learnt from the beach looking out.

Anyone who has even a basic understanding of ships understands the use of water as ballast in order to stabilise vessels in rougher weather. I an not suggesting setting sail in a gale.

Also, as someone with experience of being on the Irish sea in all different type of vessels, I have to point out that you are talking shite.

Yes there will be an initial need for more intensive dredging but once required levels are reached it is only maintenance levels needed.

 

I know I have said this before but I will repeat it again -

 

Before the marina pollutants washed into Peel bay.

After the marina pollutants can now be removed to an area where tidal and wave action will disperse them making them less of a hazard than they were when they settled in the bay.

 

Unfortunately rather than coming up with realistic, workable solutions to the problem, assuming the problem is as big as you make out (I am yet to hear of a single person dying or becoming ill as the result of these heavy metals), there is a culture with some people of clinging to the eco bandwagon and blowing things out of proportion.

 

 

It seems things like the risks from lead and cadmium exposure are too complex for you to understand, but then you didn't understand where the heavy metals were coming from in the first place, so it's not too surprising that arguing with you has devolved into insults about "talking shite" when we're looking at your intellectual limits distantly in the rear view mirror.

 

I love the way you're trumpeting about the success of using water to ballast a vessel that doesn't actually exist, and a plan for dumping sediment into Davy Jones' locker where tonnes of contaminant will just disappear and not enter the food chain by that well-known process of just dumping it and hoping it will go away - why on earth didn't the experts talk to you first, with all your years of expertise in marine dumping, hydrology, mini-diggers and water-ballasted rafts ? Oh, it's because you thought it was all coming from the Raggatt.

 

One last thing. it's not "clinging to the eco bandwagon" not to want to harvest/sell/eat shellfish full of lead and cadmium - it's a shame you don't understand why not..

[Speak The Truth]

So the waste from the Raggat is clear from all contaminants is it?

Ignoring the materials that were dumped there, the Raggat is below areas of the mining that you blame for the contaminants existence in the first place.

Therefore, by your own reasoning, it must contain contaminants.

 

Show one example of illness or death due to the contaminants on the Island.

 

Explain how these naturally occurring contaminants flowing into Peel bay and causing such massive problems that you have previously stated is better than them being more widely dispersed over a larger are that would allow for further natural dispersal by the sea?

 

Exactly what experience to you have of the sea and maritime vessels?

 

What is your answer to the 'problem'?

Dumping on land to further contaminate water courses in different areas?

[Non-Believer]

I wonder how the harbour silt that they dumped out the Poortown Rd is getting on....? 😁