THE NEW FERRIES - AN ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT
 
Some time ago when the discussion regarding the new Ferries had just started it was felt that people might become unduly concerned. A letter was written to the Lymington Times in an attempt to ameliorate the situation using the phrase, “I feel duty bound to try to dispel the fears expressed by so many of your readers”. The words were chosen carefully and the views expressed have not varied in any respect.
 
Since then the controversy has been developed out of all proportion by a comparatively small group of activists that might best be described as - the “Other Side”. They are not opposition, indeed some are considered friends and, in all other respects, are held in high regard. However, the views they express can only be born of an unreasonable fear of Ferries or a lack of understanding.
 
The following is an attempt, without trying to score points, to still those fears and perhaps explain another point of view.
 
There are only three factors of importance.
1. Safety. 2. Unchanged continuity of leisure sailing and other river users’ facilities.
3. Protection of the Environment.
 
SAFETY
The new ferries will undergo rigorous sea trials. If they cannot be controlled properly in the river at low water (the acid test) - they will be deemed to be unsafe and will not be allowed to operate. Moreover, those employed to command these ships risk severe penalties if they cause damage or injury. No ship’s master would sail a ship that he believed he might be unable to control. If the new ships are not safe they will not operate.
 
Claims in respect to the supposed dangers presented by the existing ferries, upon which fears of the new ferries seem to be based, are clearly groundless in the light of the recently published BMT Group report.
 
CONTINUITY OF UNCHANGED LEISURE SAILING FACILITIES
In conversation with a highly respected sailor some time ago the undersigned was reminded “You must appreciate there are issues other than safety to consider”. As a member of the R Lym YC for more than twenty years, a lifetime small boat sailor and owner of a motor cruiser - his insistence that the leisure sailors should remain unaffected by the new ferries is heartily endorsed.
 
With the exception of “wind shadow” effect, it is believed there is no reason for concern. No other adverse impact that the new ships might have on the leisure sailing community can be envisaged. If something is missed here - doubtless someone will advise. Please don’t cite instances of being thrust into danger or inconvenienced because the ferry has stopped for navigational or operational reasons.  Lymington is a port, not a leisure centre. All proficient sailors know and understand the Regulations for the Prevention of Collision at Sea. All should know that the Lymington Harbour Byelaws state “The master of a small vessel which is not constrained by its draft to navigate only in the fairway shall not make use of the fairway so as to cause obstruction to other vessels which can navigate only within the fairway” All know that the ferries have been operating in the Lymington river for generations before leisure sailors arrived. If a yachtsman or a canoeist does not wish to co-exist with ferries in a commercial waterway, he or she does not bring their craft into the Lymington river.
 
Claims of the fear engendered by the existing ferries are clearly groundless in light of the recently published BMT Group report.
 
The BMT Group survey revealed some startling statistics. In the last ten years “Incidents” recorded by the authorities total 58. These include everything from the most worrying, damage to a moored boat or a river mark (often caused in high winds or dense fog) to less serious instances when a near miss has concerned either a leisure sailor or one of the ferry masters. This is extrapolated into the almost astonishing record of 0.045 incidents per 1,000 river movements. The report notes that this record compares very favourably with any other similar statistic on a worldwide basis.
 
Let us examine the effect of Wind Shadow.
The increased superstructure of the new ships will result in a greater lee or wind shadow.
 
There are two aspects to consider:
1) When the existing ferry is southbound in Long Reach with wind SW 4-5 (a typical situation) and a sail boat is northbound - the boat will enter the ship’s lee, the sails will flap, the crew will duck under the boom and, approximately 6 seconds later - come out the other side to resume its progress. The new, larger ferries will increase the period of wind starvation by 3, possibly 4 seconds. The effect will be no more or less violent, simply slightly more prolonged. It really is difficult to believe that this is a contentious issue.
 
2) The other wind shadow effect is potentially more far-reaching and revolves around the effect ferries might have on Junior Sailing when the ships move slowly in the upper reaches of the river. The issue is complex but it is clear, in light of the BMT Group report that, with goodwill on all sides and some sensible planning, Junior sailing can and will continue wholly unaffected.
 
PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT
This is the really contentious issue. Made more difficult by the fact that even the experts seem to accept that much of what is asserted on both sides of the argument cannot be cast in stone.
 
The following personal assessment has been reached as a result of what has been read, heard and observed over some time.
 
1) The BMT Group survey recently published is only the latest in a number of independent, professional, studies into the operation of the ferries in the river and the possible effect they may have on the environment. In summary, to date all the expert opinion concludes that the Ferries have little, if any adverse impact.
 
2) Independent studies of the south coast areas of marsh have consistently concluded that the process of erosion is natural and inevitable. Observation of adjacent areas, Tanners Lane, Pennington, Keyhaven, and others, show all these areas eroded in the same way as Lymington, some even more so, despite the fact that they do not experience ferry traffic.
 
3) It is said that the new ferries have the power to cause much more erosion than the existing C class. That could be considered a possibility only if the power available is actually used. The ability to couple up four engines is a design feature of the new ships to ensure disruption to the service can be avoided if or when a breakdown occurs or when maintenance is undertaken. It is only necessary to use half the engine capacity to operate the ship in the river. A Ferrari owner is not compelled to drive at full speed past the Primary School at the end of his road! Only the thrust required to safely navigate in the river will be used.
 
4) The wash created by the ferries is often cited as a major scourge of the marsh. Sadly, this observation is usually made without any factual basis. For the most part no discernable wash is visible in the wake of a ferry. Occasionally, notably at low water, wavelets can be seen spreading from the ship. Some weeks ago the undersigned commanded a Wightlink Ferry that sailed at 1330, finishing the watch at 2150. During all this time the wind was gale force 8 to 9. The weather station at Hurst recorded gusts of 49 knots. At the commencement of the watch it was high tide. The waves, a metre or more in height, were breaking right across the marsh to the tree line, tearing at the spartina grass, attempting to rip it out by the roots. As the tide ebbed the waves broke directly on to the top of the marsh edge and gradually worked their way down continuing to smash into the slope at 5 to 7 second intervals.
 
With some knowledge of what happens in real life it becomes obvious that more damage is done to the marsh in one SWly gale on an ebb tide than could be accomplished by the whole of a Wightlink fleet, twice as large as the existing one, in ten years of operation.
 
5) It is generally agreed that the Ferries keep the river open in that they prevent it silting up. However, the contention that the new ferries could increase erosion of the marshes is vigorously denied. As pointed out above, all the evidence is that impact is minimal. There is no reason why the new ferries should have any more deleterious effect.
Let us try to assess the effect of the ferries on the river. There is a strange belief that the ferry thrusters squirt high powered jets of water at the river banks over a considerable distance, thereby progressively wearing them away. We all know this is not possible - yet the superstition persists.
 
The following is what actually happens. Close to the thrusters an area of turbulence is created. This stirs up, into suspension for a period, the soft, loose silt of the river bed. The quantity of silt involved depends largely upon the height of the tide. At high tide very little disturbance occurs. At low water, particularly in shallow areas of the river, occasionally some discolouration of the water astern of the ferry shows that silt has been dislodged. Much of this silt falls back from where it was disturbed. Some will fall back upstream or downstream from its original position dependant on tidal movement. Inevitably, some will be borne out into the Solent and lost. We can only guess at the amount. Could it amount to five hundred tons of solids in a year? It’s doubtful - otherwise shallow patches developing in the mouth of the river would become a problem. Whatever view is taken, any supposed erosion thought to be caused by the Ferries can hardly be compared with the sixty three thousand tons of river bed carved out and dumped outside the Needles between 1 November 2007 and 31 March 2008. (See Local Notice to Mariners No.6 of 2007)
 
6) A chart of the Lymington river dated 1891 in our possession is instructive. It shows only (what is now) Oxey Lake - as marsh. All the other areas are marked as mud. Large mud flats existed where the Berthon and Haven marinas are now situated. A little Boat House marks the site of the R Lym Y C. No moorings existed. Ironically, the only really recognisable features are the public baths, the railway and the ferry terminal.
 
When the marinas were established, many thousands of tons of mud were removed to provide the areas of water in which the boats now float. It is an inescapable fact that with every tidal movement (four each day), hundreds of thousands of tons of water continuously flow, round, over and through the river and marshes to fill, empty and refill again these man made lakes.
 
SUMMARY
Nothing above is said in an attempt to assign blame. It is not suggested that essential dredging should stop or that reasonable development should not continue. There is no dredging at Tanners Lane and the marsh there has been hugely eroded in the last twenty years. One has to conclude that dredging may not be as damaging as is sometimes suggested.
We are where we are and from all the above it is impossible to see any case to suggest that the existing ferry fleet is or has been dangerous or intrusive upon the other users of the river, nor has it had any adverse impact upon the environment. If the new ferries successfully complete their trials, they will be safe, they will not interfere with either leisure sailors or other commercial traffic any more than the existing fleet. Finally, it is not believed they will represent any greater environmental hazard than that which has existed for over thirty years. On the contrary, we have every reason to believe they will be more environmentally friendly. (Hopefully the awful soot that our friends justifiably complain about so bitterly will become just an unpleasant memory).
 
Of course the Other Side may well say - “It’s all very well saying the new ships will be no worse than what we’ve got - but the existing ferries are a nuisance to us and this is a great opportunity to get rid of them once and for all”. In answer, it is suggested that the discipline of commercial operations imposes standards. It also demands the acquisition of proper seamanship skills. Do we really want to be seen as a group of people so rich, powerful and self satisfied that we are above having to abide by regulations formulated to keep all seafarers safe. The soft option is rarely the right one. Despite the apparent attraction of becoming a floating leisure centre, it is suspected that we would not breed Olympic sailors in the atmosphere of the Serpentine.
 
Peter Cutmore.
Master Mariner

25/5/08