BLUEMOMENT

Oban Community Harbour Development Association (OCHDA) have been busy developing the proposal for a Trust Port at Oban. 

They have opened a consultation on where the limits of the Trust Port could be located. You are urged to take part in the consultation by 11th December if you have any interest in Oban Harbour.

They have also established a website where you can find more information.

They’re being generous to themselves with Kerrera Sound....

At least CMAL has been reined in.

If you check out the "potential options", its either 0.75nm or 1.5km. Which is pretty much the same thing. Would be more honest to say "we've decided where the limit is going to be, but would you like it expressed in metric or nautical units?".

I'm in favour of the trust port option since it should be more open and transparent, but either way something needs done about unseamanlike behaviour, whether that's yachts taking down sails in the middle of the channel or calmac travelling at unsafe speeds.

Burst Boiler wrote:If you check out the "potential options", its either 0.75nm or 1.5km. Which is pretty much the same thing.

I think you're looking at an early document. The Consultation only has nautical miles versions of the semicircles. The OCHDA-preferred option for the south entrance is the straight line boundary.

Aye but, that consultation page says "more about these harbour extents can be seen in our third newsletter . . ." and its that newsletter that has the two arcs. I'm not fussed about the limits, more concerned about how the trust balances the potentially conflicting needs of the various users. In particular, whether commercial interests (calmac and the cruise operators using the north pier) ultimately prevail over leisure users. And whether irresponsible (often unknowing) behaviour by visiting yachties leads to draconian restrictions. Goodwill and good intentions at the outset can be hard to maintain. In any case, well done to those giving their own time and effort on an unpaid basis to support the effort.

Burst Boiler wrote:Aye but, that consultation page says "more about these harbour extents can be seen in our third newsletter . . ." and its that newsletter that has the two arcs. I'm not fussed about the limits, more concerned about how the trust balances the potentially conflicting needs of the various users. In particular, whether commercial interests (calmac and the cruise operators using the north pier) ultimately prevail over leisure users. And whether irresponsible (often unknowing) behaviour by visiting yachties leads to draconian restrictions. Goodwill and good intentions at the outset can be hard to maintain. ...

I suggest the trust will develop a bias towards the users that contribute most financially, which is likely to be commercial users and not leisure users. In a way this has to happen as the trust will also have overheads and future development plans that need to be financed. My own opinion is that there is nothing wrong with this approach because it is very unlikely the small needs of the leisure users will be significantly impacted. In fact one could say that leisure users are well catered for with water access points, moorings, permanent marinas and transit marinas.

Leisure users had the imposition of being constrained to a narrow small vessel channel at the north entrance without any consultation as far as I know. How legally binding this is I don't know. So there is a precedent for free passage being removed. This is probably par for the course in other bits of the uk, but seems unique up here. I don't agree that the trust will, or should, become biased to those making the greatest financial contribution. The trustees should find an unbiased approach that balances the needs of all users irrespective of financial contribution. Are you suggesting a range rover driver paying more road tax than a mini driver should have more rights on the roads?

The various documents establishing the trust, especially the trust deed should set out the objectives. Would be interesting to see how they are framed, since the trustees are obliged to discharge their duties in line with this. If they drift over time they may be breaching the deed.