Updated: Surf reef closed after inspection raises safety fears

Bournemouth Echo: Surf reef closed after inspection raises safety fears Surf reef closed after inspection raises safety fears

SURFERS are being urged to avoid Bournemouth's controversial surf reef amid safety concerns.

In November, the Daily Echo revealed that an independent report found that the £3 million reef had safety risks, including the possibility of surfers drowning if they got caught in the voids between its sand-filled bags.

At that time, the council said all health and safety precautions were being taken and there was no need to close the reef.

But now, after a six-monthly inspection, it is advising people not to use it while constructors ASR carry out extra maintenance work.

The company was already due to return to carry out improvement work but the inspection has revealed repair work is also needed.

The council said "substantial changes have altered the profile of the reef structure. Preliminary inspections suggested that this may alter current flows over the reef and these need to be carefully assessed to guide the remedial works scheduled for 2011 that will improve performance and maintain health and safety."

Surfer, Chris Skone-Roberts, said: "I couldn't agree more, just from standing at the beach looking at it you can tell it's got a dangerous current around it.

"It's just a question of time before someone dies on that reef - that's not being melodramatic or sensational."

Tony Williams, executive director at Bournemouth council, said more investigations would take place.

He added: “Until we know further information, we are erring on the side of caution and advising people not to use the reef.

“We have made ASR aware of the results of the survey and have requested details on how they will dovetail with the refinement works scheduled this spring.

Mr Williams added that health and safety had always been paramount, as surfing was an extreme sport.

Nick Behunin, MD of ASR, which is evaluating the inspection findings, said: “Now that the winter season is coming to an end work can begin.”

David Weight, who came up with the original idea for the reef in the mid-1990s, said that if there were “unforeseen dangers” such as loose pieces of material, then it made sense to urge caution.

Comments (90)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:27pm Thu 31 Mar 11

smithy34 says...

Schooner enter stupid comment below:
Schooner enter stupid comment below: smithy34

5:36pm Thu 31 Mar 11

all seeing cat says...

Chris Scone Roberts is there at the heart of the action as usual... should be working for the beeb in Libya or somewhere, we seek him here, we seek him there... that scone roberts gets eveywhere!!!!

echo - do you have a red flashing phone for taking CSR's calls???
Chris Scone Roberts is there at the heart of the action as usual... should be working for the beeb in Libya or somewhere, we seek him here, we seek him there... that scone roberts gets eveywhere!!!! echo - do you have a red flashing phone for taking CSR's calls??? all seeing cat

5:39pm Thu 31 Mar 11

busguy says...

The expensive farce continues..........
The expensive farce continues.......... busguy

5:42pm Thu 31 Mar 11

enid2 says...

Surprise, surprise!

Could the Council please immediately order the removal of all traffic signs and tourist information referring to this wretched reef.

The whole episode has been a shameful failure of which we need no further reminding.
Surprise, surprise! Could the Council please immediately order the removal of all traffic signs and tourist information referring to this wretched reef. The whole episode has been a shameful failure of which we need no further reminding. enid2

5:42pm Thu 31 Mar 11

b26b says...

And the saga continues, soon enough this topic will have over 40 odd comments in a day or so.
And the saga continues, soon enough this topic will have over 40 odd comments in a day or so. b26b

5:45pm Thu 31 Mar 11

politicaltrainspotter says...

i think we should have some resignations and now!!
i think we should have some resignations and now!! politicaltrainspotter

5:52pm Thu 31 Mar 11

jinglebell says...

In November, the Echo stated that the official diver's report made it clear that someone could get trapped and drown on the reef.
It really is quite unbelievable that warning signs were not put out at that time .........is human life so little valued?
In November, the Echo stated that the official diver's report made it clear that someone could get trapped and drown on the reef. It really is quite unbelievable that warning signs were not put out at that time .........is human life so little valued? jinglebell

6:01pm Thu 31 Mar 11

b26b says...

politicaltrainspotte
r
wrote:
i think we should have some resignations and now!!
I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone.
Oh and I blame Gaddafi.
It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing.
[quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: i think we should have some resignations and now!![/p][/quote]I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone. Oh and I blame Gaddafi. It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing. b26b

6:31pm Thu 31 Mar 11

MJD says...

Vote them out in May.
Vote them out in May. MJD

6:34pm Thu 31 Mar 11

BmthNewshound says...

When is the Council going to wake up to the fact that the surf reef was a big mistake and arrange for it to be dismantled. A few sandbags are no match to the full forces of nature and irrespective of whether ASR are able to improve performance the reef will require ongoing and expensive maintenance to ensure that it remains safe.
.
The council is simply burying its head in the sand (no pun intended) and hoping that reef will sort itself out. Empty surf pods, dangerous surf reef, £3m wasted. Add this to the £8m being wasted on the Imax and you have to ask yourself will Bournemouth Council ever get it right.
When is the Council going to wake up to the fact that the surf reef was a big mistake and arrange for it to be dismantled. A few sandbags are no match to the full forces of nature and irrespective of whether ASR are able to improve performance the reef will require ongoing and expensive maintenance to ensure that it remains safe. . The council is simply burying its head in the sand (no pun intended) and hoping that reef will sort itself out. Empty surf pods, dangerous surf reef, £3m wasted. Add this to the £8m being wasted on the Imax and you have to ask yourself will Bournemouth Council ever get it right. BmthNewshound

6:42pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Bob49 says...

b26b wrote:
politicaltrainspotte r wrote: i think we should have some resignations and now!!
I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone. Oh and I blame Gaddafi. It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing.
You seem to work on the same principle as the council - no one should be held accountable. Given that it was 'our' money that was wasted (£3m) then it does mater whose fault it was.

As to fixing it then you can't have really been paying too much attention. It cannot be fixed. It has been disintegrating and breaking up since almost day one.

.

What should be a grave concern is that this idiocy hasn't suddenly fallen apart in the last few days. It has been a serious danger since last November (as recorded) and much earlier (unrecorded). So, in that light, why on earth were there no warnings signs in place when the surf competition was on less than a fortnight ago. An inspection should have been carried out BEFORE that went ahead. I think we can all guess why.

.

So perhaps the council can tell us all
.
Where the funding will come from for any attempts at fixing it ?
.
How much more money are the rest of us going to keep paying to subsidise this area ?

.

In that light perhaps the Echo could check through it's records and find the pictures of how this place was to be. We were told it would be cafes, shops and a 'Cornish village' style development where everybody could stroll through on their way to the beach.

.

So the choice is, either keep it roped off with skull and cross bones covered warning notices (achtung reefen) until it finally dissolves away to nothing or (as two councillors I know said last year) it's going to have to come up at some point.
[quote][p][bold]b26b[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: i think we should have some resignations and now!![/p][/quote]I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone. Oh and I blame Gaddafi. It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing.[/p][/quote]You seem to work on the same principle as the council - no one should be held accountable. Given that it was 'our' money that was wasted (£3m) then it does mater whose fault it was. As to fixing it then you can't have really been paying too much attention. It cannot be fixed. It has been disintegrating and breaking up since almost day one. . What should be a grave concern is that this idiocy hasn't suddenly fallen apart in the last few days. It has been a serious danger since last November (as recorded) and much earlier (unrecorded). So, in that light, why on earth were there no warnings signs in place when the surf competition was on less than a fortnight ago. An inspection should have been carried out BEFORE that went ahead. I think we can all guess why. . So perhaps the council can tell us all . Where the funding will come from for any attempts at fixing it ? . How much more money are the rest of us going to keep paying to subsidise this area ? . In that light perhaps the Echo could check through it's records and find the pictures of how this place was to be. We were told it would be cafes, shops and a 'Cornish village' style development where everybody could stroll through on their way to the beach. . So the choice is, either keep it roped off with skull and cross bones covered warning notices (achtung reefen) until it finally dissolves away to nothing or (as two councillors I know said last year) it's going to have to come up at some point. Bob49

6:58pm Thu 31 Mar 11

b26b says...

Bob49 wrote:
b26b wrote:
politicaltrainspotte r wrote: i think we should have some resignations and now!!
I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone. Oh and I blame Gaddafi. It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing.
You seem to work on the same principle as the council - no one should be held accountable. Given that it was 'our' money that was wasted (£3m) then it does mater whose fault it was.

As to fixing it then you can't have really been paying too much attention. It cannot be fixed. It has been disintegrating and breaking up since almost day one.

.

What should be a grave concern is that this idiocy hasn't suddenly fallen apart in the last few days. It has been a serious danger since last November (as recorded) and much earlier (unrecorded). So, in that light, why on earth were there no warnings signs in place when the surf competition was on less than a fortnight ago. An inspection should have been carried out BEFORE that went ahead. I think we can all guess why.

.

So perhaps the council can tell us all
.
Where the funding will come from for any attempts at fixing it ?
.
How much more money are the rest of us going to keep paying to subsidise this area ?

.

In that light perhaps the Echo could check through it's records and find the pictures of how this place was to be. We were told it would be cafes, shops and a 'Cornish village' style development where everybody could stroll through on their way to the beach.

.

So the choice is, either keep it roped off with skull and cross bones covered warning notices (achtung reefen) until it finally dissolves away to nothing or (as two councillors I know said last year) it's going to have to come up at some point.
I take your point they need to be
accountable, and I would be the last person to defend the council.

I just feel that there is a great swathe of opinions on this issue but we still dont know all the facts.

Its a shame really, I wanted it to work, I think its the right thing for the area and I like what they have done with Boscombe seafront.

In terms of the Cornish style seafront, I have not seen the pictures myself.
If it was to look like that then yes I agree we were misled.

I doubt the Echo will probe into it too much thou, they dont want to rock the boat too much.

I guess Im getting tired of all the blame getting spread about, time its sorted for good and that it works.
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]b26b[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]politicaltrainspotte r[/bold] wrote: i think we should have some resignations and now!![/p][/quote]I blame the Bankers,Gordon Brown, Vince Cable, Calamity Clegg, Call me Dave, Charon, Millilililllibands, Ellwood everyone. Oh and I blame Gaddafi. It doesnt matter whos at fault just fix the bloody thing.[/p][/quote]You seem to work on the same principle as the council - no one should be held accountable. Given that it was 'our' money that was wasted (£3m) then it does mater whose fault it was. As to fixing it then you can't have really been paying too much attention. It cannot be fixed. It has been disintegrating and breaking up since almost day one. . What should be a grave concern is that this idiocy hasn't suddenly fallen apart in the last few days. It has been a serious danger since last November (as recorded) and much earlier (unrecorded). So, in that light, why on earth were there no warnings signs in place when the surf competition was on less than a fortnight ago. An inspection should have been carried out BEFORE that went ahead. I think we can all guess why. . So perhaps the council can tell us all . Where the funding will come from for any attempts at fixing it ? . How much more money are the rest of us going to keep paying to subsidise this area ? . In that light perhaps the Echo could check through it's records and find the pictures of how this place was to be. We were told it would be cafes, shops and a 'Cornish village' style development where everybody could stroll through on their way to the beach. . So the choice is, either keep it roped off with skull and cross bones covered warning notices (achtung reefen) until it finally dissolves away to nothing or (as two councillors I know said last year) it's going to have to come up at some point.[/p][/quote]I take your point they need to be accountable, and I would be the last person to defend the council. I just feel that there is a great swathe of opinions on this issue but we still dont know all the facts. Its a shame really, I wanted it to work, I think its the right thing for the area and I like what they have done with Boscombe seafront. In terms of the Cornish style seafront, I have not seen the pictures myself. If it was to look like that then yes I agree we were misled. I doubt the Echo will probe into it too much thou, they dont want to rock the boat too much. I guess Im getting tired of all the blame getting spread about, time its sorted for good and that it works. b26b

7:19pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Xchurch-man says...

It's not worth "repairing", it probably cant be "repaired" anyway, and most likely will need "repairing" after every Winters storms.
Those responsible for this criminal waste of taxpayers money should do the decent thing and resign at once, at the very least withdraw tyheir intention to stand for re-election in May.
Out with the old in with the new, let's have some closure on this. Put the money left to one side to pay ASR towards paying a contractor to rip the bags open, let nature take it's course and wash the sand back to sea leaving the area safe for future generations of kids to swim in without risk of being entangled and drowning.
This is a farce This is Boscombe not Bondai as I have said before. If there was meant to be a "surf reef" here nature would have provided it.
It hasn't beacause we are in England not some exotic Pacific coastal destination.
Stop dreaming get real, Vote em out!!
Oh sorry you live in Bournemouth and will always vote Tory. More of the same then!!!
It's not worth "repairing", it probably cant be "repaired" anyway, and most likely will need "repairing" after every Winters storms. Those responsible for this criminal waste of taxpayers money should do the decent thing and resign at once, at the very least withdraw tyheir intention to stand for re-election in May. Out with the old in with the new, let's have some closure on this. Put the money left to one side to pay ASR towards paying a contractor to rip the bags open, let nature take it's course and wash the sand back to sea leaving the area safe for future generations of kids to swim in without risk of being entangled and drowning. This is a farce This is Boscombe not Bondai as I have said before. If there was meant to be a "surf reef" here nature would have provided it. It hasn't beacause we are in England not some exotic Pacific coastal destination. Stop dreaming get real, Vote em out!! Oh sorry you live in Bournemouth and will always vote Tory. More of the same then!!! Xchurch-man

7:23pm Thu 31 Mar 11

speedy231278 says...

It would have attracted more people to the area in one weekend than this farce will all year if they'd spent the money on helping fund the Vulcan. World record airshow attendance levels can't be wrong! At least she's not cost the local taxpayers three million quid and been deemed a deathtrap!!
It would have attracted more people to the area in one weekend than this farce will all year if they'd spent the money on helping fund the Vulcan. World record airshow attendance levels can't be wrong! At least she's not cost the local taxpayers three million quid and been deemed a deathtrap!! speedy231278

7:34pm Thu 31 Mar 11

ajj-dorset says...

Even if ASR fix it and make it work, in order to receive the withheld £150 000, what is going to happen NEXT time the reef has problems and is unsafe to use, how long will BBC continue to support this farce?

An interesting question for the council in these austerity times, is how much they are putting to one side for maintenance and upkeep of the reef? Clearly it needs money spending on a regular basis, have they assigned a budget or not, if so how much?
Even if ASR fix it and make it work, in order to receive the withheld £150 000, what is going to happen NEXT time the reef has problems and is unsafe to use, how long will BBC continue to support this farce? An interesting question for the council in these austerity times, is how much they are putting to one side for maintenance and upkeep of the reef? Clearly it needs money spending on a regular basis, have they assigned a budget or not, if so how much? ajj-dorset

7:46pm Thu 31 Mar 11

contric says...

lets all forget about the reef have a rest and wait patiently for the next farce it wont be long
lets all forget about the reef have a rest and wait patiently for the next farce it wont be long contric

8:57pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Horridbloke says...

I was wandering around Boscombe seafront last sunday and noticed those much-vaunted "surf pods" have now been rebranded as "beach pods" - tacit admission that Bournemouth's surf dream is over?
I was wandering around Boscombe seafront last sunday and noticed those much-vaunted "surf pods" have now been rebranded as "beach pods" - tacit admission that Bournemouth's surf dream is over? Horridbloke

9:14pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Bob49 says...

" it is advising people not to use it while constructors ASR carry out extra maintenance work."

.

Note the word, while. Given as ASR are not in the country and no workd is being 'carried out' could the council tell us all why the reef is closed now.

.

It would be logical for it to be closed, and the area cordoned off, whilst remedial work was being carried out, so why the notices before any work even looks like being scheduled, never mind being started ?

.

Perhaps the Echo could get a comment from the council as to why the surfpods are now beachpods. Does seem odd in the light of the reef being closed - so the necessary work can be done "that will improve performance"
" it is advising people not to use it while constructors ASR carry out extra maintenance work." . Note the word, while. Given as ASR are not in the country and no workd is being 'carried out' could the council tell us all why the reef is closed now. . It would be logical for it to be closed, and the area cordoned off, whilst remedial work was being carried out, so why the notices before any work even looks like being scheduled, never mind being started ? . Perhaps the Echo could get a comment from the council as to why the surfpods are now beachpods. Does seem odd in the light of the reef being closed - so the necessary work can be done "that will improve performance" Bob49

9:47pm Thu 31 Mar 11

mickeymousenewspapers says...

Why do you think it is the first and only surf reef in Europe!!! because a bunch of knowledgless idiots bowed to a small bunch of boys who thought that a 'lickle wave' could be turned into a 'BIG wave' by paying £3.2M to dump a few bags of hardcore. Listen, having a lickle knowledge of oceanography, Bournemouth never was, never can and never will be a surf resort. The conditions do not allow it and sticking a few rocks in a bag is not going to influence the behaviour of the tides, flow, wind or weather to create what can be experienced in the natural surf resorts of the UK. There should be in the least resignations and public disgust at the waste of taxpayers money over somebodys Scalextric. There are Bournemouth residents who cant even afford to eat everyday and a bunch of monkeys choose to even engage on such a project. Tell u what, if you want to boost the economy, stick to Bingo and ask Wallace Arnold to send in a few more coaches....oh and Charon, roll on May.
Why do you think it is the first and only surf reef in Europe!!! because a bunch of knowledgless idiots bowed to a small bunch of boys who thought that a 'lickle wave' could be turned into a 'BIG wave' by paying £3.2M to dump a few bags of hardcore. Listen, having a lickle knowledge of oceanography, Bournemouth never was, never can and never will be a surf resort. The conditions do not allow it and sticking a few rocks in a bag is not going to influence the behaviour of the tides, flow, wind or weather to create what can be experienced in the natural surf resorts of the UK. There should be in the least resignations and public disgust at the waste of taxpayers money over somebodys Scalextric. There are Bournemouth residents who cant even afford to eat everyday and a bunch of monkeys choose to even engage on such a project. Tell u what, if you want to boost the economy, stick to Bingo and ask Wallace Arnold to send in a few more coaches....oh and Charon, roll on May. mickeymousenewspapers

10:28pm Thu 31 Mar 11

ajj-dorset says...

Just a thought, Given that a substantial area of sea is now off limits can we assume that will have an impact on the Blue flag status of the beach?

Seems we are now not only £3m short but we have a beach that is off limits and could loose its blue flag

does BBC have any alternative but to admit to the need to set aside council tax for ongoing maintenance costs? have they done so already?

There is clear evidence that the reef is not static and needs future work within its lifetime to keep it stable and safe. If BCC doesn't have maintenance on the budget, then why not? what happens when it shifts again?
if it does have a budget, tell us how much!
lets see if they can avoid answering questions on the future costs of the reef now it is clear there will need to significant and ongoing maintenance!
Just a thought, Given that a substantial area of sea is now off limits can we assume that will have an impact on the Blue flag status of the beach? Seems we are now not only £3m short but we have a beach that is off limits and could loose its blue flag does BBC have any alternative but to admit to the need to set aside council tax for ongoing maintenance costs? have they done so already? There is clear evidence that the reef is not static and needs future work within its lifetime to keep it stable and safe. If BCC doesn't have maintenance on the budget, then why not? what happens when it shifts again? if it does have a budget, tell us how much! lets see if they can avoid answering questions on the future costs of the reef now it is clear there will need to significant and ongoing maintenance! ajj-dorset

10:35pm Thu 31 Mar 11

sapphire26 says...

yet again Bournemouth has got it wrong, what with The IMax and now the surf reef. Maybe it's a ploy to get headline news and get Bournemouth noticed, all be it as the laughing stock.
yet again Bournemouth has got it wrong, what with The IMax and now the surf reef. Maybe it's a ploy to get headline news and get Bournemouth noticed, all be it as the laughing stock. sapphire26

10:54pm Thu 31 Mar 11

open mind says...

Was it not the lib dem council that signed the contract prior to the Toru council getting elected?
Was it not the lib dem council that signed the contract prior to the Toru council getting elected? open mind

10:59pm Thu 31 Mar 11

noel1 says...

MJD wrote:
Vote them out in May.
The ones who signed the contract for it were voted ot in 2007!
[quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: Vote them out in May.[/p][/quote]The ones who signed the contract for it were voted ot in 2007! noel1

11:25pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Bob49 says...

"now it is clear there will need to significant and ongoing maintenance!"

.

Sadly not. It has been accepted in certain circles close to a building in Bourne Avenue that this farce cannot be repaired. It will not need any maintenance other than replenishing the warning signs and marker bouys - assuming that an incoming council in May decides to bite on the bullet and remove it.


.

From my understanding enough smoke and mirrors, featuring assorted variations on 'ASR returning to tweak it', would be used to delay any serious recognition and acceptance of this failure. And the obvious financial liability it now imposes on the town.

.

What might be interesting would be if we could see an actual breakdown of where the £3m spent of this absurdity went.
"now it is clear there will need to significant and ongoing maintenance!" . Sadly not. It has been accepted in certain circles close to a building in Bourne Avenue that this farce cannot be repaired. It will not need any maintenance other than replenishing the warning signs and marker bouys - assuming that an incoming council in May decides to bite on the bullet and remove it. . From my understanding enough smoke and mirrors, featuring assorted variations on 'ASR returning to tweak it', would be used to delay any serious recognition and acceptance of this failure. And the obvious financial liability it now imposes on the town. . What might be interesting would be if we could see an actual breakdown of where the £3m spent of this absurdity went. Bob49

11:36pm Thu 31 Mar 11

dremble says...

What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ
e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.
What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective. dremble

11:56pm Thu 31 Mar 11

Bob49 says...

It is not the first news of failure. it has been a failure for the past four years or so.

.

"No one to blame". In the grown up world people are accountable, even more so with £3m of other folks money.

.

As to 'living in mexico' it might not do you any harm to visit planet earth at some point.
It is not the first news of failure. it has been a failure for the past four years or so. . "No one to blame". In the grown up world people are accountable, even more so with £3m of other folks money. . As to 'living in mexico' it might not do you any harm to visit planet earth at some point. Bob49

12:36am Fri 1 Apr 11

Bournefre says...

The surf reef is just a joke.
Is it April 1st already?
Security word: lack-have
The surf reef is just a joke. Is it April 1st already? Security word: lack-have Bournefre

1:00am Fri 1 Apr 11

ajj-dorset says...

"It has been accepted in certain circles close to a building in Bourne Avenue that this farce cannot be repaired." "From my understanding enough smoke and mirrors, featuring assorted variations on 'ASR returning to tweak it', would be used to delay any serious recognition and acceptance of this failure. And the obvious financial liability it now imposes on the town."

I agree that they will all pass the buck, however questions about a budget for ongoing maintenance should flush out some semblance of truth. If they have don't have an ongoing maintainable budget, why not??
Even BBC cant be stupid enough to think the reef will never need additional work, just the 6 monthly H&S checks will need funding, even if ASR did a perfect job, one couldnt expect them to maintain the reef 10 years down the line? Given the level of ineptitude required to have not considered future liabilities , the council and its officers will find it hard to pretend they were oblivious to any ongoing costs?
It would be hard to believe that there is not a figure set aside, but it is politically embarrassing to admit that they are committed to throwing good money after bad.

seems they have 3 choices... admit incompetence... admit the reef will soak up council tax for years to come or Lie?

To your last point, we will never get a breakdown due to the "commercial sensitivity" excuse.
"It has been accepted in certain circles close to a building in Bourne Avenue that this farce cannot be repaired." "From my understanding enough smoke and mirrors, featuring assorted variations on 'ASR returning to tweak it', would be used to delay any serious recognition and acceptance of this failure. And the obvious financial liability it now imposes on the town." I agree that they will all pass the buck, however questions about a budget for ongoing maintenance should flush out some semblance of truth. If they have don't have an ongoing maintainable budget, why not?? Even BBC cant be stupid enough to think the reef will never need additional work, just the 6 monthly H&S checks will need funding, even if ASR did a perfect job, one couldnt expect them to maintain the reef 10 years down the line? Given the level of ineptitude required to have not considered future liabilities , the council and its officers will find it hard to pretend they were oblivious to any ongoing costs? It would be hard to believe that there is not a figure set aside, but it is politically embarrassing to admit that they are committed to throwing good money after bad. seems they have 3 choices... admit incompetence... admit the reef will soak up council tax for years to come or Lie? To your last point, we will never get a breakdown due to the "commercial sensitivity" excuse. ajj-dorset

1:15am Fri 1 Apr 11

ajj-dorset says...

dremble wrote:
What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ

e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.
what an ignorant negative person you are.....
1 this is not the first news of failure!
2 it was never likly to work and was not worth gambling with council tax payers money?
3 Blame most certainly can be laid on the people who took the decisions
4 I will take your bet! £200 says that not all posters are retired!

Everyone I know wanted this to work, but most were sceptical from the outset, it is now worse than anyone could imagine, it isnt being negative to condemn this farce, it is ignorant to keep your head in the sand and ignore the well documented failings and money wasted!
[quote][p][bold]dremble[/bold] wrote: What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.[/p][/quote]what an ignorant negative person you are..... 1 this is not the first news of failure! 2 it was never likly to work and was not worth gambling with council tax payers money? 3 Blame most certainly can be laid on the people who took the decisions 4 I will take your bet! £200 says that not all posters are retired! Everyone I know wanted this to work, but most were sceptical from the outset, it is now worse than anyone could imagine, it isnt being negative to condemn this farce, it is ignorant to keep your head in the sand and ignore the well documented failings and money wasted! ajj-dorset

1:29am Fri 1 Apr 11

Puj says...

And still people moan and gripe about the cost of keeping a Vulcan flying.... !!

The Surf reef @ £3m catering for a minority... must be the biggest foo-pah of all time. The Imax Centre which cost another £20m is runner up IMO.
And still people moan and gripe about the cost of keeping a Vulcan flying.... !! The Surf reef @ £3m catering for a minority... must be the biggest foo-pah of all time. The Imax Centre which cost another £20m is runner up IMO. Puj

2:40am Fri 1 Apr 11

colmc1 says...

Woo - the usual pensioners, curtain-twitchers, the ill-informed, (and all the ones who surely didn't vote in our current council) and the usual cronies all out of the starting blocks like greyhounds on speed regarding this "non-story". No pitching in from the bloke who writes like a pirate/sailor/whatev
er though as yet!

Just to address a couple of the points raised above (awaits smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals)

1- Everybody above is very quick to point out the failings of the local council when it comes to the reef. Everybody is
also ready to point out the lack of explanations by the council regarding the costs, construction, maintenance and function of the reef.

Just a point - If you all have no faith in what the council says at all regarding the reef, then it might be worth you re-reading the above article properly and then considering who is actually issuing the official "statement" regarding the safety of the reef and also closely looking at the substance behind this very loose statement. Some folk are very quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear.

2- There has not been any published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure. There have been reports of studies stating it hasn't met all of its objectives, but these have been undertaken and presented while the reef was still in its formative stages. There have also been reports of opinions from various parties but that is what they were - opinions. Again, some people take statements for gospel when it is what they want to hear.

There is also no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down from day one. Again, reports, hearsay, assumptions - call it what you will.

The "independent report" back in November 2010 remarked on safety issues. Hmm.. has anybody who comments on here read this report in its entirety?

Notwithstanding this - there are safety risks wherever you surf in the world. Sharks, drowning, collisions, getting trapped in rocks, jellyfish, big-waves, rips and currents, tourists (especially in Devon & Cornwall), to name but a few. We are a brave bunch us surfers but hey, we know the risks before we zip up our wetsuits and we are all big boys now.

In the interests of balanced journalism, I would like to think the Echo will publish new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to.

I am the first person to state that the reef isn't performing as expected at this stage. I also think that between them the council and ASR should get off their butts and sort it ASAP. If there are safety concerns, then for that reason alone obviously. But apart from that, it's the potential lost revenue, lost credibility and also loss of use for the local surfing fraternity. It needs sorting now, not when ASR can get here, not when the council will pay this or that and certainly not when it falls into any state of disrepair.

3-Further to a couple of points above. Regarding Bournemouth never being a surf -resort - this is wrong. Although it may never be primarily a surfing resort, it does have a strong and healthy surfing community. There are surfers of mixed abilities locally, some of which actually use the reef and enjoy it. There are from time to time,waves in the bay that you can surf and like anywhere in the UK, these are weather /tidal conditions dependent. These factors alone make Bournemouth a location for surfing. Like it or not folks, we live by the sea, with waves, (basic fact of geography/oceanograp
hy) and people will surf them.(basic fact of life).

The reef was built to enhance this, not replace it. Silly remarks like "Bondai-style" waves and the "Hawaii of England" were borne from ill-informed local "critics" who are more frequenting of this website than the waves down in the bay.

Bournemouth is a resort where you can surf. Not as frequent as Devon or Cornwall but believe it or not, even those areas have their off-days -(called flat-days to those in the know.)

I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" down at Boscombe either. Having lived in a real "Cornish Village", trust me, that's not a good thing. Very few of the surfers on the Cornish beaches live in Cornish Villages.

3- Regarding the surf pods now being called beach pods or whatever. It is ridiculous to try and link this with the situation regarding the reef. I would suggest anyone who wants to query this should do so with the estate agents who are marketing these properties. They are known to change their marketing techniques quite a lot when it suits. My 2up-2down in inner city Manchester was sold as a 2bed townhouse desired residence. They didn't mention the local drug gang at the end of the street, the sewage smell in the summer or the sound of the Trams at the back of the garden.

Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly. I also think that it is to easy for some to jump to conclusions.

I definitely think that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed.

If they were completely informed, then they would be aware of the huge develpoment in the surf-reef story that is about to take place, bringing a huge corporate name & many jobs to the area.

Wouldn't they??
Woo - the usual pensioners, curtain-twitchers, the ill-informed, (and all the ones who surely didn't vote in our current council) and the usual cronies all out of the starting blocks like greyhounds on speed regarding this "non-story". No pitching in from the bloke who writes like a pirate/sailor/whatev er though as yet! Just to address a couple of the points raised above (awaits smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals) 1- Everybody above is very quick to point out the failings of the local council when it comes to the reef. Everybody is also ready to point out the lack of explanations by the council regarding the costs, construction, maintenance and function of the reef. Just a point - If you all have no faith in what the council says at all regarding the reef, then it might be worth you re-reading the above article properly and then considering who is actually issuing the official "statement" regarding the safety of the reef and also closely looking at the substance behind this very loose statement. Some folk are very quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear. 2- There has not been any published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure. There have been reports of studies stating it hasn't met all of its objectives, but these have been undertaken and presented while the reef was still in its formative stages. There have also been reports of opinions from various parties but that is what they were - opinions. Again, some people take statements for gospel when it is what they want to hear. There is also no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down from day one. Again, reports, hearsay, assumptions - call it what you will. The "independent report" back in November 2010 remarked on safety issues. Hmm.. has anybody who comments on here read this report in its entirety? Notwithstanding this - there are safety risks wherever you surf in the world. Sharks, drowning, collisions, getting trapped in rocks, jellyfish, big-waves, rips and currents, tourists (especially in Devon & Cornwall), to name but a few. We are a brave bunch us surfers but hey, we know the risks before we zip up our wetsuits and we are all big boys now. In the interests of balanced journalism, I would like to think the Echo will publish new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to. I am the first person to state that the reef isn't performing as expected at this stage. I also think that between them the council and ASR should get off their butts and sort it ASAP. If there are safety concerns, then for that reason alone obviously. But apart from that, it's the potential lost revenue, lost credibility and also loss of use for the local surfing fraternity. It needs sorting now, not when ASR can get here, not when the council will pay this or that and certainly not when it falls into any state of disrepair. 3-Further to a couple of points above. Regarding Bournemouth never being a surf -resort - this is wrong. Although it may never be primarily a surfing resort, it does have a strong and healthy surfing community. There are surfers of mixed abilities locally, some of which actually use the reef and enjoy it. There are from time to time,waves in the bay that you can surf and like anywhere in the UK, these are weather /tidal conditions dependent. These factors alone make Bournemouth a location for surfing. Like it or not folks, we live by the sea, with waves, (basic fact of geography/oceanograp hy) and people will surf them.(basic fact of life). The reef was built to enhance this, not replace it. Silly remarks like "Bondai-style" waves and the "Hawaii of England" were borne from ill-informed local "critics" who are more frequenting of this website than the waves down in the bay. Bournemouth is a resort where you can surf. Not as frequent as Devon or Cornwall but believe it or not, even those areas have their off-days -(called flat-days to those in the know.) I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" down at Boscombe either. Having lived in a real "Cornish Village", trust me, that's not a good thing. Very few of the surfers on the Cornish beaches live in Cornish Villages. 3- Regarding the surf pods now being called beach pods or whatever. It is ridiculous to try and link this with the situation regarding the reef. I would suggest anyone who wants to query this should do so with the estate agents who are marketing these properties. They are known to change their marketing techniques quite a lot when it suits. My 2up-2down in inner city Manchester was sold as a 2bed townhouse desired residence. They didn't mention the local drug gang at the end of the street, the sewage smell in the summer or the sound of the Trams at the back of the garden. Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly. I also think that it is to easy for some to jump to conclusions. I definitely think that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed. If they were completely informed, then they would be aware of the huge develpoment in the surf-reef story that is about to take place, bringing a huge corporate name & many jobs to the area. Wouldn't they?? colmc1

3:18am Fri 1 Apr 11

Rally says...

colmc1 wrote, "Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly."
And as we all know, surfers and their supporters never hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly.
colmc1 wrote, "Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly." And as we all know, surfers and their supporters never hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly. Rally

8:16am Fri 1 Apr 11

Was Charlie says...

colmc1, The New Zealand surf reef was already exhibiting problems when the councillors went on their council tax payers' "fact-finding" trip, but obviously their glasses were so rose-tinted they didn't notice and their ears so clogged up after the flight that they didn't hear what was being said.
.....
What made them think the Bournemouth one would be any better?
......
Now the New Zealand one is an even worse state than the Bournemouth one.
colmc1, The New Zealand surf reef was already exhibiting problems when the councillors went on their council tax payers' "fact-finding" trip, but obviously their glasses were so rose-tinted they didn't notice and their ears so clogged up after the flight that they didn't hear what was being said. ..... What made them think the Bournemouth one would be any better? ...... Now the New Zealand one is an even worse state than the Bournemouth one. Was Charlie

8:23am Fri 1 Apr 11

freedom for pokesdown says...

DEAR colmc1 at the risk of you writing off my comments as one of the "smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals)

1. You accuse 'some folk' of being "quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear." Are you seriously suggesting it's only logical to either treat all of what the council say as gospel or none of it?

2. re: "Lack of a published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure" - so what? As a local dog walker I see the reef most days, as a surfer I know how pathetic it is - sometimes you don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows.

3. re: "no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down..." nothing official (you seem to be very much in favour of "official") - but once again if you had seen the reef at low tide as many times as I have you'd have noticed the irregular profile that was not in the original design.

4. re: "safety risks wherever you surf in the world" - yes, but we try to mitigate against those risks - we certainly don't spend 3 million pounds creating more.

5: re: the "Echo publishing new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to" - when? 'if' would be more appropriate. After 3 million pounds and 3 years you still can't even admit the possibility that the reef is a failure?

6. re: some locals using the reef: beg to differ here. I live 5 minutes from the cliff top. I walk the dog there. I take the family to the beach. I must have checked out the reef 300 times since it was constructed. And, no exaggeration, I've seen surfers on the reef (checking it out I suppose) on perhaps two occasions - or perhaps the surfers who enjoy the reef are surfing at night?

7. re: The reef being built to enhance the natural surf - true, but it failed.

8. re: You thinking that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed - possibly - but I'd also like to add the category of people who are strangely out of touch with reality.

I'm sorry if you have perhaps some commercial interest in the percieved success of the reef and I must admit your post in this forum was an impressive example of the art of 'spin'. But you are flogging a dead horse - the reef is an abject, complete and abismal failure.
DEAR colmc1 at the risk of you writing off my comments as one of the "smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals) 1. You accuse 'some folk' of being "quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear." Are you seriously suggesting it's only logical to either treat all of what the council say as gospel or none of it? 2. re: "Lack of a published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure" - so what? As a local dog walker I see the reef most days, as a surfer I know how pathetic it is - sometimes you don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows. 3. re: "no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down..." nothing official (you seem to be very much in favour of "official") - but once again if you had seen the reef at low tide as many times as I have you'd have noticed the irregular profile that was not in the original design. 4. re: "safety risks wherever you surf in the world" - yes, but we try to mitigate against those risks - we certainly don't spend 3 million pounds creating more. 5: re: the "Echo publishing new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to" - when? 'if' would be more appropriate. After 3 million pounds and 3 years you still can't even admit the possibility that the reef is a failure? 6. re: some locals using the reef: beg to differ here. I live 5 minutes from the cliff top. I walk the dog there. I take the family to the beach. I must have checked out the reef 300 times since it was constructed. And, no exaggeration, I've seen surfers on the reef (checking it out I suppose) on perhaps two occasions - or perhaps the surfers who enjoy the reef are surfing at night? 7. re: The reef being built to enhance the natural surf - true, but it failed. 8. re: You thinking that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed - possibly - but I'd also like to add the category of people who are strangely out of touch with reality. I'm sorry if you have perhaps some commercial interest in the percieved success of the reef and I must admit your post in this forum was an impressive example of the art of 'spin'. But you are flogging a dead horse - the reef is an abject, complete and abismal failure. freedom for pokesdown

8:54am Fri 1 Apr 11

mickeymousenewspapers says...

It's rubbish, it's shut so bin it and stick to sand castles and bingo, oh and a few lines of coke, that is Bournemouths reputation, oh and a diabilical council!
It's rubbish, it's shut so bin it and stick to sand castles and bingo, oh and a few lines of coke, that is Bournemouths reputation, oh and a diabilical council! mickeymousenewspapers

9:17am Fri 1 Apr 11

Glashen says...

colmc1 wrote:
Woo - the usual pensioners, curtain-twitchers, the ill-informed, (and all the ones who surely didn't vote in our current council) and the usual cronies all out of the starting blocks like greyhounds on speed regarding this "non-story". No pitching in from the bloke who writes like a pirate/sailor/whatev

er though as yet!

Just to address a couple of the points raised above (awaits smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals)

1- Everybody above is very quick to point out the failings of the local council when it comes to the reef. Everybody is
also ready to point out the lack of explanations by the council regarding the costs, construction, maintenance and function of the reef.

Just a point - If you all have no faith in what the council says at all regarding the reef, then it might be worth you re-reading the above article properly and then considering who is actually issuing the official "statement" regarding the safety of the reef and also closely looking at the substance behind this very loose statement. Some folk are very quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear.

2- There has not been any published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure. There have been reports of studies stating it hasn't met all of its objectives, but these have been undertaken and presented while the reef was still in its formative stages. There have also been reports of opinions from various parties but that is what they were - opinions. Again, some people take statements for gospel when it is what they want to hear.

There is also no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down from day one. Again, reports, hearsay, assumptions - call it what you will.

The "independent report" back in November 2010 remarked on safety issues. Hmm.. has anybody who comments on here read this report in its entirety?

Notwithstanding this - there are safety risks wherever you surf in the world. Sharks, drowning, collisions, getting trapped in rocks, jellyfish, big-waves, rips and currents, tourists (especially in Devon & Cornwall), to name but a few. We are a brave bunch us surfers but hey, we know the risks before we zip up our wetsuits and we are all big boys now.

In the interests of balanced journalism, I would like to think the Echo will publish new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to.

I am the first person to state that the reef isn't performing as expected at this stage. I also think that between them the council and ASR should get off their butts and sort it ASAP. If there are safety concerns, then for that reason alone obviously. But apart from that, it's the potential lost revenue, lost credibility and also loss of use for the local surfing fraternity. It needs sorting now, not when ASR can get here, not when the council will pay this or that and certainly not when it falls into any state of disrepair.

3-Further to a couple of points above. Regarding Bournemouth never being a surf -resort - this is wrong. Although it may never be primarily a surfing resort, it does have a strong and healthy surfing community. There are surfers of mixed abilities locally, some of which actually use the reef and enjoy it. There are from time to time,waves in the bay that you can surf and like anywhere in the UK, these are weather /tidal conditions dependent. These factors alone make Bournemouth a location for surfing. Like it or not folks, we live by the sea, with waves, (basic fact of geography/oceanograp

hy) and people will surf them.(basic fact of life).

The reef was built to enhance this, not replace it. Silly remarks like "Bondai-style" waves and the "Hawaii of England" were borne from ill-informed local "critics" who are more frequenting of this website than the waves down in the bay.

Bournemouth is a resort where you can surf. Not as frequent as Devon or Cornwall but believe it or not, even those areas have their off-days -(called flat-days to those in the know.)

I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" down at Boscombe either. Having lived in a real "Cornish Village", trust me, that's not a good thing. Very few of the surfers on the Cornish beaches live in Cornish Villages.

3- Regarding the surf pods now being called beach pods or whatever. It is ridiculous to try and link this with the situation regarding the reef. I would suggest anyone who wants to query this should do so with the estate agents who are marketing these properties. They are known to change their marketing techniques quite a lot when it suits. My 2up-2down in inner city Manchester was sold as a 2bed townhouse desired residence. They didn't mention the local drug gang at the end of the street, the sewage smell in the summer or the sound of the Trams at the back of the garden.

Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly. I also think that it is to easy for some to jump to conclusions.

I definitely think that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed.

If they were completely informed, then they would be aware of the huge develpoment in the surf-reef story that is about to take place, bringing a huge corporate name & many jobs to the area.

Wouldn't they??
It is good to hear from someone else who sees something positive in the surf reef story.
-
It is easy to point to the mistakes, but there are positives. Boscombe seafront has been transformed by the project, there are thriving businesses there now and there have been a number of prestige blocks of flats built since the reef was started. (I know how dare I welcome, well off people moving to Boscombe!, they are the ones who will really make Boscombe change for the better)
-
As others have pointed out both of the major local parties supported this project and advice from many experts was obtained. Did ASR and others exaggerate their expertise in this area - undoubtedly. Should warning bells have been ringing over the NZ reef probably. The surf reef element was always high risk, and for that I congratulate the council in being prepared to take the plunge, although I think there have been instances of lamentable project planning along the way.
-
The announcement of the notices declaring the reef closed is a bit of non story, the reef was supposedly unused and due to be modified anyway, so really this story is just an opportunity for the usual suspects to have a go.
-
Can the reef produce decent surf at times, I can see no reason why not, will it need some maintenance - Yes, but as colmc1 says that must have been realized from the start and remember those businesses, Urban reef and Sorted are paying rent to the council so there are funds coming in, I too will be interested in seeing the accounts of the project, but not everything appears in profit & loss.
[quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: Woo - the usual pensioners, curtain-twitchers, the ill-informed, (and all the ones who surely didn't vote in our current council) and the usual cronies all out of the starting blocks like greyhounds on speed regarding this "non-story". No pitching in from the bloke who writes like a pirate/sailor/whatev er though as yet! Just to address a couple of the points raised above (awaits smart nit-picking replies and well-rehearsed put-downs from the usuals) 1- Everybody above is very quick to point out the failings of the local council when it comes to the reef. Everybody is also ready to point out the lack of explanations by the council regarding the costs, construction, maintenance and function of the reef. Just a point - If you all have no faith in what the council says at all regarding the reef, then it might be worth you re-reading the above article properly and then considering who is actually issuing the official "statement" regarding the safety of the reef and also closely looking at the substance behind this very loose statement. Some folk are very quick to disregard what the council says one minute, then all of a sudden they fall at its feet worshipping a statement when it is one they want to hear. 2- There has not been any published report which states the reef is, has been or will be a failure. There have been reports of studies stating it hasn't met all of its objectives, but these have been undertaken and presented while the reef was still in its formative stages. There have also been reports of opinions from various parties but that is what they were - opinions. Again, some people take statements for gospel when it is what they want to hear. There is also no official evidence of the reef disintegrating or breaking down from day one. Again, reports, hearsay, assumptions - call it what you will. The "independent report" back in November 2010 remarked on safety issues. Hmm.. has anybody who comments on here read this report in its entirety? Notwithstanding this - there are safety risks wherever you surf in the world. Sharks, drowning, collisions, getting trapped in rocks, jellyfish, big-waves, rips and currents, tourists (especially in Devon & Cornwall), to name but a few. We are a brave bunch us surfers but hey, we know the risks before we zip up our wetsuits and we are all big boys now. In the interests of balanced journalism, I would like to think the Echo will publish new reports when ASR do declare that the project is complete and the reef is performing as it was designed to. I am the first person to state that the reef isn't performing as expected at this stage. I also think that between them the council and ASR should get off their butts and sort it ASAP. If there are safety concerns, then for that reason alone obviously. But apart from that, it's the potential lost revenue, lost credibility and also loss of use for the local surfing fraternity. It needs sorting now, not when ASR can get here, not when the council will pay this or that and certainly not when it falls into any state of disrepair. 3-Further to a couple of points above. Regarding Bournemouth never being a surf -resort - this is wrong. Although it may never be primarily a surfing resort, it does have a strong and healthy surfing community. There are surfers of mixed abilities locally, some of which actually use the reef and enjoy it. There are from time to time,waves in the bay that you can surf and like anywhere in the UK, these are weather /tidal conditions dependent. These factors alone make Bournemouth a location for surfing. Like it or not folks, we live by the sea, with waves, (basic fact of geography/oceanograp hy) and people will surf them.(basic fact of life). The reef was built to enhance this, not replace it. Silly remarks like "Bondai-style" waves and the "Hawaii of England" were borne from ill-informed local "critics" who are more frequenting of this website than the waves down in the bay. Bournemouth is a resort where you can surf. Not as frequent as Devon or Cornwall but believe it or not, even those areas have their off-days -(called flat-days to those in the know.) I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" down at Boscombe either. Having lived in a real "Cornish Village", trust me, that's not a good thing. Very few of the surfers on the Cornish beaches live in Cornish Villages. 3- Regarding the surf pods now being called beach pods or whatever. It is ridiculous to try and link this with the situation regarding the reef. I would suggest anyone who wants to query this should do so with the estate agents who are marketing these properties. They are known to change their marketing techniques quite a lot when it suits. My 2up-2down in inner city Manchester was sold as a 2bed townhouse desired residence. They didn't mention the local drug gang at the end of the street, the sewage smell in the summer or the sound of the Trams at the back of the garden. Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly. I also think that it is to easy for some to jump to conclusions. I definitely think that some who contribute are either ill-informed or not completely informed. If they were completely informed, then they would be aware of the huge develpoment in the surf-reef story that is about to take place, bringing a huge corporate name & many jobs to the area. Wouldn't they??[/p][/quote]It is good to hear from someone else who sees something positive in the surf reef story. - It is easy to point to the mistakes, but there are positives. Boscombe seafront has been transformed by the project, there are thriving businesses there now and there have been a number of prestige blocks of flats built since the reef was started. (I know how dare I welcome, well off people moving to Boscombe!, they are the ones who will really make Boscombe change for the better) - As others have pointed out both of the major local parties supported this project and advice from many experts was obtained. Did ASR and others exaggerate their expertise in this area - undoubtedly. Should warning bells have been ringing over the NZ reef probably. The surf reef element was always high risk, and for that I congratulate the council in being prepared to take the plunge, although I think there have been instances of lamentable project planning along the way. - The announcement of the notices declaring the reef closed is a bit of non story, the reef was supposedly unused and due to be modified anyway, so really this story is just an opportunity for the usual suspects to have a go. - Can the reef produce decent surf at times, I can see no reason why not, will it need some maintenance - Yes, but as colmc1 says that must have been realized from the start and remember those businesses, Urban reef and Sorted are paying rent to the council so there are funds coming in, I too will be interested in seeing the accounts of the project, but not everything appears in profit & loss. Glashen

9:28am Fri 1 Apr 11

Paul Humber says...

nice one Colmc1, all these people are so horrified about their tax money being spent on the reef, I wonder if they realise what a negative effect them and the echo are having on tourism by writing all this negative b*llshit everyday. There are a few people who have positive attitudes towards this project and can see the potential that this area has to have a great surf scene, even if the reef is not directly benefiting every surfer in the area it has undeniably been a catalyst for some amazing things happening in the area. It's just a shame so many people are so fixated on failure to see these things. I just hope the council try another innovative project so everybody has something else to aim all their negativity at.
nice one Colmc1, all these people are so horrified about their tax money being spent on the reef, I wonder if they realise what a negative effect them and the echo are having on tourism by writing all this negative b*llshit everyday. There are a few people who have positive attitudes towards this project and can see the potential that this area has to have a great surf scene, even if the reef is not directly benefiting every surfer in the area it has undeniably been a catalyst for some amazing things happening in the area. It's just a shame so many people are so fixated on failure to see these things. I just hope the council try another innovative project so everybody has something else to aim all their negativity at. Paul Humber

9:33am Fri 1 Apr 11

Schooners says...

When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite.

I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that?

I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours.

We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'.

I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE.

Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead.

I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing.

Let me pose 2 questions

1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken?

2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns.

If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people.

Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple.

Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment.

Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie
When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite. I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that? I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours. We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'. I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE. Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead. I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing. Let me pose 2 questions 1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken? 2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns. If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people. Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple. Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment. Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie Schooners

9:54am Fri 1 Apr 11

Glashen says...

Paul Humber wrote:
nice one Colmc1, all these people are so horrified about their tax money being spent on the reef, I wonder if they realise what a negative effect them and the echo are having on tourism by writing all this negative b*llshit everyday. There are a few people who have positive attitudes towards this project and can see the potential that this area has to have a great surf scene, even if the reef is not directly benefiting every surfer in the area it has undeniably been a catalyst for some amazing things happening in the area. It's just a shame so many people are so fixated on failure to see these things. I just hope the council try another innovative project so everybody has something else to aim all their negativity at.
Just to clarify: at this point no "tax money" has been spent on the reef or the seafront, the funds came from sale of the car park to Barratts, and the other income from the project. Whether in the end it will be necessary to take funds from council reserves remains to be seen.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Humber[/bold] wrote: nice one Colmc1, all these people are so horrified about their tax money being spent on the reef, I wonder if they realise what a negative effect them and the echo are having on tourism by writing all this negative b*llshit everyday. There are a few people who have positive attitudes towards this project and can see the potential that this area has to have a great surf scene, even if the reef is not directly benefiting every surfer in the area it has undeniably been a catalyst for some amazing things happening in the area. It's just a shame so many people are so fixated on failure to see these things. I just hope the council try another innovative project so everybody has something else to aim all their negativity at.[/p][/quote]Just to clarify: at this point no "tax money" has been spent on the reef or the seafront, the funds came from sale of the car park to Barratts, and the other income from the project. Whether in the end it will be necessary to take funds from council reserves remains to be seen. Glashen

10:00am Fri 1 Apr 11

Glashen says...

Schooners wrote:
When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite.

I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that?

I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours.

We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'.

I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE.

Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead.

I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing.

Let me pose 2 questions

1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken?

2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns.

If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people.

Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple.

Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment.

Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie
Schooners, the council have taken what they believe to be the correct action in closing the reef, that is the only thing they could do.
-
I understand that you feel very strongly about this and for understandable reasons which I feel sympathy for.
-
However Surfing clearly does involve some risks and being overly emotive risks hiding the real issues and possible solutions.
[quote][p][bold]Schooners[/bold] wrote: When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite. I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that? I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours. We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'. I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE. Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead. I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing. Let me pose 2 questions 1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken? 2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns. If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people. Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple. Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment. Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie[/p][/quote]Schooners, the council have taken what they believe to be the correct action in closing the reef, that is the only thing they could do. - I understand that you feel very strongly about this and for understandable reasons which I feel sympathy for. - However Surfing clearly does involve some risks and being overly emotive risks hiding the real issues and possible solutions. Glashen

10:06am Fri 1 Apr 11

busguy says...

Schooners wrote:
When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite. I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that? I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours. We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'. I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE. Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead. I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing. Let me pose 2 questions 1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken? 2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns. If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people. Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple. Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment. Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie
Well said, Schooners.
[quote][p][bold]Schooners[/bold] wrote: When any of you have stood on Bournemouth Beach with a dead surfer next to you and been to his inquest and seen the utter devastation caused by someone drowning in the sea then please come to me and take the proverbial but until such time please keep your comments on here civil and polite. I am a fully qualified PADI Rescue Diver, Medic, ex-Surf Rescue Lifeguard, Professional Watersports Photographer, Kitesurfer of 9 years, Surfer of 35 years and I have been to New Zealand personally and seen both Reefs first hand - How many of you can say that? I speak with deeply concerned friends in NZ weekly who currently fear ASR will not ever return to fix their issues, yet alone ours. We also speak with ASR and their disgraceful communications are shocking and concerning. Comments like, 'The Council need to GET OVER IT'. I fully believe Sorted have been incredible at dragging Boscombe up from the mire but, as I said, I know what it is like to see someone drown on OUR beach. DEAD, EXPIRED, GONE. Yet you see fit to chastise me and take the mickey. Might I suggest that is disrespectful of the dead. I have no commercial benefit whatsoever doing what I am doing, other than stopping a bunch of 'suits' who do not have a clue what they are doing. Let me pose 2 questions 1) How in Gods name can remedial works, 'Dovetailing' and routine works effect 1000 tonnes of wave beaten sand in a huge bag laying on the sea bed to undertaken? 2) We have had no winter storms to speak of in the last 6 months yet the Reef has changed so much? Those currents have been there fairly much sine day one and it is just a matter of time before, as we have always said, someone drowns. If any of you really do want to discuss this Google me, get in touch and come and meet Kitesurfers who went to Charlies Funeral and we will explain to you over a coffee what death by sea drowning does to people. Forget the money, its gone. ASR will we suggest, never return and if they do it will be fly here to rob us of £50k. That Reef is unfixable, simple. Lastly - Yes I call The Echo, but The BBC call me, as do The Echo when they want a comment. Please play nicely on here for the memory of Charlie[/p][/quote]Well said, Schooners. busguy

10:28am Fri 1 Apr 11

lostinessex says...

Did anyone else see that Simpson's episode about the monorail?
Did anyone else see that Simpson's episode about the monorail? lostinessex

10:53am Fri 1 Apr 11

Cookie75 says...

Do ASR do refunds???
Defective product = money back
Or is that every local and national authority in this country doesn't know how to negotiate a contract?
Do ASR do refunds??? Defective product = money back Or is that every local and national authority in this country doesn't know how to negotiate a contract? Cookie75

10:53am Fri 1 Apr 11

colmc1 says...

Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning!
Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning! colmc1

10:55am Fri 1 Apr 11

Capt. Ahab (ret.) says...

Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day.
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day. Capt. Ahab (ret.)

10:59am Fri 1 Apr 11

rorusmaximus says...

Yet another shameful white elephant for Bournemouth. A total disgrace and a huge waste of money. Whoever gave the go ahead for such an utter failure should be brought to account and shamed. This represents the entire image that the local council has made for itself. Poor judgement, crap planning and, as a result, the total lack of local support. If i had to think of one image to sum this council up it would be that of the tens of thousands of bright eyed and excited people lining the promenade and cliffs in expectation...to see a floating platform set fire and hailed as a world record beating success for the most fireworks launched at once. Or i could just stare at the few sorry buoys which bob along in the waves shamefully designating the site of the dead whale reef beneath.
Yet another shameful white elephant for Bournemouth. A total disgrace and a huge waste of money. Whoever gave the go ahead for such an utter failure should be brought to account and shamed. This represents the entire image that the local council has made for itself. Poor judgement, crap planning and, as a result, the total lack of local support. If i had to think of one image to sum this council up it would be that of the tens of thousands of bright eyed and excited people lining the promenade and cliffs in expectation...to see a floating platform set fire and hailed as a world record beating success for the most fireworks launched at once. Or i could just stare at the few sorry buoys which bob along in the waves shamefully designating the site of the dead whale reef beneath. rorusmaximus

11:15am Fri 1 Apr 11

colmc1 says...

Capt. Ahab (ret.) wrote:
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day.
Amazed it took so long.

Where you been? Surfing? ( real surfing that is, not on that thar interweb )
[quote][p][bold]Capt. Ahab (ret.)[/bold] wrote: Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day.[/p][/quote]Amazed it took so long. Where you been? Surfing? ( real surfing that is, not on that thar interweb ) colmc1

11:16am Fri 1 Apr 11

0racle says...

Bournefre wrote:
The surf reef is just a joke. Is it April 1st already? Security word: lack-have
I don't think the date makes any difference in BBC. They have more than enough fools to last all year round.
[quote][p][bold]Bournefre[/bold] wrote: The surf reef is just a joke. Is it April 1st already? Security word: lack-have[/p][/quote]I don't think the date makes any difference in BBC. They have more than enough fools to last all year round. 0racle

11:56am Fri 1 Apr 11

Capt. Ahab (ret.) says...

colmc1 wrote:
Capt. Ahab (ret.) wrote:
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day.
Amazed it took so long.

Where you been? Surfing? ( real surfing that is, not on that thar interweb )
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
However long it took me to reply it don’t change thar fact this ‘day’ truly belongs to thee, me crew still be giggling that after so much of yer energetic postulating on here yer still confirmed it be April “Fools” day, what a faux pas.
[quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Capt. Ahab (ret.)[/bold] wrote: Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ Thee have truly outdone thy self this day but then of course it be April “Fools” day.[/p][/quote]Amazed it took so long. Where you been? Surfing? ( real surfing that is, not on that thar interweb )[/p][/quote]Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ However long it took me to reply it don’t change thar fact this ‘day’ truly belongs to thee, me crew still be giggling that after so much of yer energetic postulating on here yer still confirmed it be April “Fools” day, what a faux pas. Capt. Ahab (ret.)

11:57am Fri 1 Apr 11

Cookie75 says...

dremble wrote:
What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ

e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.
You are a person after my own heart.....sadly the negative people don't see what is starkly obvious to others and wont change. They are so dogmatic that they think that you/the world should change to suit them. BTW They actually enjoy moaning, being negative and pi**ing on people's parade but if you ask them for a solution or be constructive or actually do something themselves, whoops they can't deliver.
Too many pious people in Bournemouth (who think it is the centre of the universe). It is utterly frustrating to keep your cool with them
[quote][p][bold]dremble[/bold] wrote: What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.[/p][/quote]You are a person after my own heart.....sadly the negative people don't see what is starkly obvious to others and wont change. They are so dogmatic that they think that you/the world should change to suit them. BTW They actually enjoy moaning, being negative and pi**ing on people's parade but if you ask them for a solution or be constructive or actually do something themselves, whoops they can't deliver. Too many pious people in Bournemouth (who think it is the centre of the universe). It is utterly frustrating to keep your cool with them Cookie75

11:58am Fri 1 Apr 11

Adrian Fudge says...

open mind wrote:
Was it not the lib dem council that signed the contract prior to the Toru council getting elected?
The answer to your feeble attempt to shift the blame from the Tories is NO!!
The Previous Lib Dem Administration started off the discussions when it was suppossedly going to cost £1M but the Contract was signed by the Tories when they claimed that they had secured a better deal , including according to Nick King "a guarantee", costing £3.2M
By the way before other claims are made for the record I personally never supported the reef from the outset because I never believed it would work and Council minutes prove that
This whole episode has been a disaster from day one , the reef doesnt work and it is pretty obvious that it never will and now a structure has been created that as several others have pointed out will require continual maintenance and monitering to prevent it from becoming a lethal hazard.
Those responsable for the current situation should have the courage to admit their mistake and bite the bullet and remove the hazard before they throw even more bucket loads of Council tax payers money on this ill conceived concept
[quote][p][bold]open mind[/bold] wrote: Was it not the lib dem council that signed the contract prior to the Toru council getting elected?[/p][/quote]The answer to your feeble attempt to shift the blame from the Tories is NO!! The Previous Lib Dem Administration started off the discussions when it was suppossedly going to cost £1M but the Contract was signed by the Tories when they claimed that they had secured a better deal , including according to Nick King "a guarantee", costing £3.2M By the way before other claims are made for the record I personally never supported the reef from the outset because I never believed it would work and Council minutes prove that This whole episode has been a disaster from day one , the reef doesnt work and it is pretty obvious that it never will and now a structure has been created that as several others have pointed out will require continual maintenance and monitering to prevent it from becoming a lethal hazard. Those responsable for the current situation should have the courage to admit their mistake and bite the bullet and remove the hazard before they throw even more bucket loads of Council tax payers money on this ill conceived concept Adrian Fudge

12:42pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Bob49 says...

A couple of points to add further to freedomforpokesdown'
s excellent deconstruction of colmc1's rather confused, contradictory and ill informed ramble.

.

It is not some insightful revelation that certain leisure activities carry an element of risk. That is obvious to all. It is often that very risk and challenge that causes them to be popular. The reef (as was) was built by Bournemouth council and as such they have what's termed a 'duty of care'. ie they are responsible for ensuring that it is safe as can reasonably be expected' therefore there is no equation with risk elsewhere that does not have the same duty of care.

.

As to "I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" then colmc1 cannot not have been around when all the posters were up showing pictures of what was described as a Cornish village - colmc1 could have done a quick google search. Quite a few pages of results will come up, frequently with the words "in the complex designed to look like a Cornish village". I suggest you have a look colmc1.

.

As to points elsewhere any negative effect being created is a consequence of the councils actions, not those commenting on that failure. Or perhaps Paul Humber would have us believe that the cause of the second world war was Pathe News.

,

As to any nitpicking then trying to differentiate between what is tax money and what is taxpayers money is nitpicking. Who does Glashen think the carpark belonged to ?

.

Finally as an April fools joke then well done colmc1 for his jest about surfers on the reef. That it is closed and there are signs up warning people of that fact - and a very expensive life guard station to monitor any use should have flagged up it was a joke. However as stated above there never is anyone on the reef. I have just returned from my circular morning constitutional that takes in that part of the seafront. There was no one there this morning.

.

In that light might I suggest to those that appear to have some interest in this fiasco that they would better serve their cause if they were to concentrate more on accuracy and less on emotion.
A couple of points to add further to freedomforpokesdown' s excellent deconstruction of colmc1's rather confused, contradictory and ill informed ramble. . It is not some insightful revelation that certain leisure activities carry an element of risk. That is obvious to all. It is often that very risk and challenge that causes them to be popular. The reef (as was) was built by Bournemouth council and as such they have what's termed a 'duty of care'. ie they are responsible for ensuring that it is safe as can reasonably be expected' therefore there is no equation with risk elsewhere that does not have the same duty of care. . As to "I also don't remember seeing the promise of a "Cornish Village" then colmc1 cannot not have been around when all the posters were up showing pictures of what was described as a Cornish village - colmc1 could have done a quick google search. Quite a few pages of results will come up, frequently with the words "in the complex designed to look like a Cornish village". I suggest you have a look colmc1. . As to points elsewhere any negative effect being created is a consequence of the councils actions, not those commenting on that failure. Or perhaps Paul Humber would have us believe that the cause of the second world war was Pathe News. , As to any nitpicking then trying to differentiate between what is tax money and what is taxpayers money is nitpicking. Who does Glashen think the carpark belonged to ? . Finally as an April fools joke then well done colmc1 for his jest about surfers on the reef. That it is closed and there are signs up warning people of that fact - and a very expensive life guard station to monitor any use should have flagged up it was a joke. However as stated above there never is anyone on the reef. I have just returned from my circular morning constitutional that takes in that part of the seafront. There was no one there this morning. . In that light might I suggest to those that appear to have some interest in this fiasco that they would better serve their cause if they were to concentrate more on accuracy and less on emotion. Bob49

12:43pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Couchy125 says...

Get rid of the surf reef. And get rid of the IMAX. Both are a waist of time if you ask me. And while you are at it can we have some security or police officers going round to the south side of the pavillion and having a word with skate boarders who and damaging the news steps that have been built during the winter for our new summer attraction.
Get rid of the surf reef. And get rid of the IMAX. Both are a waist of time if you ask me. And while you are at it can we have some security or police officers going round to the south side of the pavillion and having a word with skate boarders who and damaging the news steps that have been built during the winter for our new summer attraction. Couchy125

12:43pm Fri 1 Apr 11

tjayuk says...

this is obviously and april fool surely it has to be! it cant be true
this is obviously and april fool surely it has to be! it cant be true tjayuk

12:48pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Schooners says...

Please people, it is quite simple.

We got mis-sold for a £3.6m turkey, it does not work, it has never worked but you want us to just say 'oh okay thats fine'. Now it is closed and you still want us to say 'Oh Okay then'.

ASR are playing games with our money.

WE LOVE BOSCOMBE - WE LIVE HERE

ASR will never return here, look at this, they wont even return to their OWN COUNTRY!!!!

http://www.stuff.co.
nz/taranaki-daily-ne
ws/news/4798348/Surf
-reef-trust-left-hig
h-and-dry
Please people, it is quite simple. We got mis-sold for a £3.6m turkey, it does not work, it has never worked but you want us to just say 'oh okay thats fine'. Now it is closed and you still want us to say 'Oh Okay then'. ASR are playing games with our money. WE LOVE BOSCOMBE - WE LIVE HERE ASR will never return here, look at this, they wont even return to their OWN COUNTRY!!!! http://www.stuff.co. nz/taranaki-daily-ne ws/news/4798348/Surf -reef-trust-left-hig h-and-dry Schooners

1:00pm Fri 1 Apr 11

jinglebell says...

Its great to try new ideas, however, in November when the diving company appointed by the Council stated the reef was dangerous, the Council should have put warning signs up then.
£3 million is a huge sum of money but for all their efforts to provide something unique to the area to aid it turn from deprivation to being regenerated, the Council would do better now to cut their loses with the reef and invest in the centre of Boscombe.
"Schooner" is right, a person's life is too precious to risk for what seems to be the Council's embarrassment that it has all gone wrong.
As for local businesses benefiting from the seafront investment - maybe those at the front have, which is great. Certainly, we love chilling out at the restuarant.
Several friends who had businesses in Boscombe centre, however, felt no benefit whatsoever as no improvements have been made in the High Street.
How can Boscombe be improved - it cannot be done by a "make-over" simply at the seafront but from providing other attractions for tourists particularly on wet days. The Council intend to spend money on the centre of Bournemouth but have failed to provide anything for Boscombe.
Even the Shelley theatre has not been completed and the Council have no intention of doing so, why?
The new restuarants and bars in Sea Road and at the Crescent will end up going bust in a couple of years if the Council don't start stumping up some investment in Boscombe. The Vintage Market is doing well but this is all private investment and although they are thriving, to continue to do so, the area needs Council help.
Short term thinking, provides only short term solutions.
By the way, when Canadian friends contacted Bournemouth tourist office asking for a good hotel in Boscombe because they wanted to be near the surf reef, they were told they wouldn't like Boscombe, and would be better staying in a hotel in Bournemouth - what was wrong with the Chine Hotel which has been in the area for decades or Urban Beach?
Its great to try new ideas, however, in November when the diving company appointed by the Council stated the reef was dangerous, the Council should have put warning signs up then. £3 million is a huge sum of money but for all their efforts to provide something unique to the area to aid it turn from deprivation to being regenerated, the Council would do better now to cut their loses with the reef and invest in the centre of Boscombe. "Schooner" is right, a person's life is too precious to risk for what seems to be the Council's embarrassment that it has all gone wrong. As for local businesses benefiting from the seafront investment - maybe those at the front have, which is great. Certainly, we love chilling out at the restuarant. Several friends who had businesses in Boscombe centre, however, felt no benefit whatsoever as no improvements have been made in the High Street. How can Boscombe be improved - it cannot be done by a "make-over" simply at the seafront but from providing other attractions for tourists particularly on wet days. The Council intend to spend money on the centre of Bournemouth but have failed to provide anything for Boscombe. Even the Shelley theatre has not been completed and the Council have no intention of doing so, why? The new restuarants and bars in Sea Road and at the Crescent will end up going bust in a couple of years if the Council don't start stumping up some investment in Boscombe. The Vintage Market is doing well but this is all private investment and although they are thriving, to continue to do so, the area needs Council help. Short term thinking, provides only short term solutions. By the way, when Canadian friends contacted Bournemouth tourist office asking for a good hotel in Boscombe because they wanted to be near the surf reef, they were told they wouldn't like Boscombe, and would be better staying in a hotel in Bournemouth - what was wrong with the Chine Hotel which has been in the area for decades or Urban Beach? jinglebell

1:13pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Azphreal says...

I have a nasty thought that because there is so much public hatred about giving ASR any more money that now the 'reason' to pay them will be safety so then the people who are aginst giving ASR any more cash are then seen as the 'bad guys' the same way as someone worried about immigration is now a 'racist'.
I have a nasty thought that because there is so much public hatred about giving ASR any more money that now the 'reason' to pay them will be safety so then the people who are aginst giving ASR any more cash are then seen as the 'bad guys' the same way as someone worried about immigration is now a 'racist'. Azphreal

1:19pm Fri 1 Apr 11

freedom for pokesdown says...

colmc1 wrote:
Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning!
Just a footnote - DEAR colnc1 - could those "4 guys" you saw have been seagulls?
The reason I ask is that lifeguards know nothing about anyone using the reef since the warning notices went up yesterday.
[quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning![/p][/quote]Just a footnote - DEAR colnc1 - could those "4 guys" you saw have been seagulls? The reason I ask is that lifeguards know nothing about anyone using the reef since the warning notices went up yesterday. freedom for pokesdown

1:19pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Gooby says...

Dear Colmc 1,

Your effort to point out the facts misses the important point. The reef was due to cost circa £1 to £1.5m. So far in direct costs to ASR it has cost over double the intial price.

The quoted price of circa £1.5m was a waste of money and over inflated numbers of people using the surf reef was used to justify, especially as there is no no place for thausands of surfers to park. The cumulative gain to the community of the surf reef was over stated to a bizzare length. Then the costs over run to £3.4m For a bag of sand?!?

At the same time the grade 1 listed building adjacent (the pier) failed to find a buyer as it was in desperate need of repair. The council duly set about repairing the pier but due to escalating costs applied to the secretary of state to remove the grade 1 listing so they could do half a job and shorten the pier. Why not remove the grade 1 listing then sell it?

Your rose tinted glasses are incredible. Millions upon millions wasted and if there were 3 waves surfed from the reef they would be the most expensive waves in history.

This is all fine because the rest of the town is in such great shape. There are no potholes and none of the schools are failing.

The residents are angry that we are funding these farces from the Imax to the reef it is just incredible how dumb these people are!
Dear Colmc 1, Your effort to point out the facts misses the important point. The reef was due to cost circa £1 to £1.5m. So far in direct costs to ASR it has cost over double the intial price. The quoted price of circa £1.5m was a waste of money and over inflated numbers of people using the surf reef was used to justify, especially as there is no no place for thausands of surfers to park. The cumulative gain to the community of the surf reef was over stated to a bizzare length. Then the costs over run to £3.4m For a bag of sand?!? At the same time the grade 1 listed building adjacent (the pier) failed to find a buyer as it was in desperate need of repair. The council duly set about repairing the pier but due to escalating costs applied to the secretary of state to remove the grade 1 listing so they could do half a job and shorten the pier. Why not remove the grade 1 listing then sell it? Your rose tinted glasses are incredible. Millions upon millions wasted and if there were 3 waves surfed from the reef they would be the most expensive waves in history. This is all fine because the rest of the town is in such great shape. There are no potholes and none of the schools are failing. The residents are angry that we are funding these farces from the Imax to the reef it is just incredible how dumb these people are! Gooby

1:28pm Fri 1 Apr 11

ajj-dorset says...

few points on the previous posts
1 The reef is rubbish, dont blame others for the bad publicity, the root cause is the failure of the reef to do what we were promised.
2 stop playing politics, both ruling political parties are involved.
3 stop being negative about people being negative, sometimes there are issues that deserve to be condemned, 4 Dont shoot the messenger, bringing stories like this to peoples attention is exactly what news organisations should be doing. If you want just good news, there are plenty of countries with state media you can look at.
5 it is preposterous to belittle people on here for not offering solutions as no one is in possession of all the facts. I personally suspect this saga will drag on until ultimately a decision to decommission the unsafe area is forced on BBC.
6 the council should not be gambling huge amounts of council tax payers money on dubious schemes that provide little tangible benefit to the local community.
7 as for the jobs and "rich people" My understanding is that much of the development which benefited most from the publicity is occupied as second homes or holiday lets, the build was not done by local companies but a large national firm and little new money was brought in.
finaly The point that it has not cost the tax payer, as it was funded from the sale of land is one of the most bizarre arguments i have ever heard. the money goes into a central pot and is then used as is seen fit, of course council tax has been used, otherwise they could have used the carpark money on other things!
few points on the previous posts 1 The reef is rubbish, dont blame others for the bad publicity, the root cause is the failure of the reef to do what we were promised. 2 stop playing politics, both ruling political parties are involved. 3 stop being negative about people being negative, sometimes there are issues that deserve to be condemned, 4 Dont shoot the messenger, bringing stories like this to peoples attention is exactly what news organisations should be doing. If you want just good news, there are plenty of countries with state media you can look at. 5 it is preposterous to belittle people on here for not offering solutions as no one is in possession of all the facts. I personally suspect this saga will drag on until ultimately a decision to decommission the unsafe area is forced on BBC. 6 the council should not be gambling huge amounts of council tax payers money on dubious schemes that provide little tangible benefit to the local community. 7 as for the jobs and "rich people" My understanding is that much of the development which benefited most from the publicity is occupied as second homes or holiday lets, the build was not done by local companies but a large national firm and little new money was brought in. finaly The point that it has not cost the tax payer, as it was funded from the sale of land is one of the most bizarre arguments i have ever heard. the money goes into a central pot and is then used as is seen fit, of course council tax has been used, otherwise they could have used the carpark money on other things! ajj-dorset

1:28pm Fri 1 Apr 11

jinglebell says...

Schooner - just read the link you provided. Here is an extract:

"The project began five years ago with a budget of $1.1 million, which has now blown out to more than $2m with the South Taranaki District Council pouring $1.5m into the development.

When construction began, Dr Kerry Black of ASR said it could be finished within two weeks. Since then ASR has been taken over by American company Sealutions LLC and Dr Black is no longer with the company."

So the reality of ASR returning is remote since they no longer exist. Whether the company which took them over (Sealutions LLC) will honour ASR's contracts is also highly unlikely. It would seem best that the bags are now ripped open allowing the sand to disperse.
With an election on 5th or 6th May (not sure) I can't imagine the Council will be upfront about any of this now.
Surely its in the public's interest to know if the reality is that ASR will not return and what the Council really intend to do now - Bournemouth Echo please find out....its worrying that people are still surfing on it and the summer is to come...don't lets have a death here!
Schooner - just read the link you provided. Here is an extract: "The project began five years ago with a budget of $1.1 million, which has now blown out to more than $2m with the South Taranaki District Council pouring $1.5m into the development. When construction began, Dr Kerry Black of ASR said it could be finished within two weeks. Since then ASR has been taken over by American company Sealutions LLC and Dr Black is no longer with the company." So the reality of ASR returning is remote since they no longer exist. Whether the company which took them over (Sealutions LLC) will honour ASR's contracts is also highly unlikely. It would seem best that the bags are now ripped open allowing the sand to disperse. With an election on 5th or 6th May (not sure) I can't imagine the Council will be upfront about any of this now. Surely its in the public's interest to know if the reality is that ASR will not return and what the Council really intend to do now - Bournemouth Echo please find out....its worrying that people are still surfing on it and the summer is to come...don't lets have a death here! jinglebell

2:02pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Capt. Ahab (ret.) says...

Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
Allow me to surmise a tad. IF (most unlikely though) Peapods crew perhaps alongside ALL other Brethren that do separate fact from yer fiction were to ‘agree’ with thee and yer ‘colleagues’ that ‘Weights Elephant’ be thy international success, would it improve thy performance of ‘Weights Elephant’, would thy waves be increased in size and numbers, would it become thar tourist attraction it claimed, would yer ‘Surf Reef Festivals’ have bin successful, would thy very culprit fer this idiotic extravaganza be stating himself it don’t work, would yer BBC,who claimed fer so long how Boscombe be a ‘surf magnet’ have closed it down themselves, wouldn’t people actually use IT ?? Of course it wouldn’t.
….
Yer truly do have me sympathies, best ye have yer self a holiday, maybe away from the sea, somewhere quietly inland fer I not convinced ye be a true surfer anyway ‘cos thee have announced too many errors relating to this topic in thar past but I do give thee credit fer making this the most original April “Fools” day.
Regards.
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ Allow me to surmise a tad. IF (most unlikely though) Peapods crew perhaps alongside ALL other Brethren that do separate fact from yer fiction were to ‘agree’ with thee and yer ‘colleagues’ that ‘Weights Elephant’ be thy international success, would it improve thy performance of ‘Weights Elephant’, would thy waves be increased in size and numbers, would it become thar tourist attraction it claimed, would yer ‘Surf Reef Festivals’ have bin successful, would thy very culprit fer this idiotic extravaganza be stating himself it don’t work, would yer BBC,who claimed fer so long how Boscombe be a ‘surf magnet’ have closed it down themselves, wouldn’t people actually use IT ?? Of course it wouldn’t. …. Yer truly do have me sympathies, best ye have yer self a holiday, maybe away from the sea, somewhere quietly inland fer I not convinced ye be a true surfer anyway ‘cos thee have announced too many errors relating to this topic in thar past but I do give thee credit fer making this the most original April “Fools” day. Regards. Capt. Ahab (ret.)

2:18pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Dave2207 says...

Should have spent the money on funding a season of classical music concerts at the end of Boscombe Pier - much more cerebral than posers with blonde hair, in wetsuits, riding aquatic skateboards.
Should have spent the money on funding a season of classical music concerts at the end of Boscombe Pier - much more cerebral than posers with blonde hair, in wetsuits, riding aquatic skateboards. Dave2207

2:40pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Bob49 says...

Jinglebell, I would suggest that you look at all the evidence you have regarding this supposed regeneration and consider whether the reef was not merely a diversion to allow the car park to be handed over to developers and the subsequent tidying up merely a necessity required to selling those flats ?

.

Perhaps it's not too obvious at the moment, but as each failure unfolds it becomes the more probable explanation as to why the promises and claims of benefits to the area have not been fulfilled.
Jinglebell, I would suggest that you look at all the evidence you have regarding this supposed regeneration and consider whether the reef was not merely a diversion to allow the car park to be handed over to developers and the subsequent tidying up merely a necessity required to selling those flats ? . Perhaps it's not too obvious at the moment, but as each failure unfolds it becomes the more probable explanation as to why the promises and claims of benefits to the area have not been fulfilled. Bob49

2:58pm Fri 1 Apr 11

neesdon says...

Bob49 wrote:
Jinglebell, I would suggest that you look at all the evidence you have regarding this supposed regeneration and consider whether the reef was not merely a diversion to allow the car park to be handed over to developers and the subsequent tidying up merely a necessity required to selling those flats ?

.

Perhaps it's not too obvious at the moment, but as each failure unfolds it becomes the more probable explanation as to why the promises and claims of benefits to the area have not been fulfilled.
That is what happens when you have Developers running the Council.

Look what happened to the Lapland Brothers and they didn't have health and safety issues. Time for prosecutions and prison for some of our crooked Council?
[quote][p][bold]Bob49[/bold] wrote: Jinglebell, I would suggest that you look at all the evidence you have regarding this supposed regeneration and consider whether the reef was not merely a diversion to allow the car park to be handed over to developers and the subsequent tidying up merely a necessity required to selling those flats ? . Perhaps it's not too obvious at the moment, but as each failure unfolds it becomes the more probable explanation as to why the promises and claims of benefits to the area have not been fulfilled.[/p][/quote]That is what happens when you have Developers running the Council. Look what happened to the Lapland Brothers and they didn't have health and safety issues. Time for prosecutions and prison for some of our crooked Council? neesdon

3:03pm Fri 1 Apr 11

neesdon says...

Rally wrote:
colmc1 wrote, "Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly."
And as we all know, surfers and their supporters never hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly.
Hi Sharon or is that Beastley? will be a glum night at the developers lodge tonight.
[quote][p][bold]Rally[/bold] wrote: colmc1 wrote, "Finally - I don't think every contributor on here is retired. Surely some of them have some purpose in life. I do think though that a lot of them hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly." And as we all know, surfers and their supporters never hear and see what they want to and act on it accordingly.[/p][/quote]Hi Sharon or is that Beastley? will be a glum night at the developers lodge tonight. neesdon

3:07pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Glashen says...

jinglebell wrote:
Its great to try new ideas, however, in November when the diving company appointed by the Council stated the reef was dangerous, the Council should have put warning signs up then.
£3 million is a huge sum of money but for all their efforts to provide something unique to the area to aid it turn from deprivation to being regenerated, the Council would do better now to cut their loses with the reef and invest in the centre of Boscombe.
"Schooner" is right, a person's life is too precious to risk for what seems to be the Council's embarrassment that it has all gone wrong.
As for local businesses benefiting from the seafront investment - maybe those at the front have, which is great. Certainly, we love chilling out at the restuarant.
Several friends who had businesses in Boscombe centre, however, felt no benefit whatsoever as no improvements have been made in the High Street.
How can Boscombe be improved - it cannot be done by a "make-over" simply at the seafront but from providing other attractions for tourists particularly on wet days. The Council intend to spend money on the centre of Bournemouth but have failed to provide anything for Boscombe.
Even the Shelley theatre has not been completed and the Council have no intention of doing so, why?
The new restuarants and bars in Sea Road and at the Crescent will end up going bust in a couple of years if the Council don't start stumping up some investment in Boscombe. The Vintage Market is doing well but this is all private investment and although they are thriving, to continue to do so, the area needs Council help.
Short term thinking, provides only short term solutions.
By the way, when Canadian friends contacted Bournemouth tourist office asking for a good hotel in Boscombe because they wanted to be near the surf reef, they were told they wouldn't like Boscombe, and would be better staying in a hotel in Bournemouth - what was wrong with the Chine Hotel which has been in the area for decades or Urban Beach?
I'm not going to comment on the safety aspect apart from to say it is somewhat unusual to be accusing council officers of putting health & safety second. Put that is an issue for them and if an accident had occurred (which of course it didn't) they would have had to deal with it in court.
-
I'm glad you agree the seafront has improved, and hopefully that effect will spread to the high street.
-
But then you somewhat bizarrely complain that much of this investment is private and you want more public money spent. I don't enough has been invested in Boscombe by the council for the time being. (The money was of course from the sale of the car park etc.,)
-
If the negativity on here prevails your prediction of businesses going bust will no doubt be correct, but I hope that the seafront and indeed the new prestige flats that have been built in the last 5 years, and not just Barratts will prove to be the seed corn that will truly transform the whole of Boscombe.
[quote][p][bold]jinglebell[/bold] wrote: Its great to try new ideas, however, in November when the diving company appointed by the Council stated the reef was dangerous, the Council should have put warning signs up then. £3 million is a huge sum of money but for all their efforts to provide something unique to the area to aid it turn from deprivation to being regenerated, the Council would do better now to cut their loses with the reef and invest in the centre of Boscombe. "Schooner" is right, a person's life is too precious to risk for what seems to be the Council's embarrassment that it has all gone wrong. As for local businesses benefiting from the seafront investment - maybe those at the front have, which is great. Certainly, we love chilling out at the restuarant. Several friends who had businesses in Boscombe centre, however, felt no benefit whatsoever as no improvements have been made in the High Street. How can Boscombe be improved - it cannot be done by a "make-over" simply at the seafront but from providing other attractions for tourists particularly on wet days. The Council intend to spend money on the centre of Bournemouth but have failed to provide anything for Boscombe. Even the Shelley theatre has not been completed and the Council have no intention of doing so, why? The new restuarants and bars in Sea Road and at the Crescent will end up going bust in a couple of years if the Council don't start stumping up some investment in Boscombe. The Vintage Market is doing well but this is all private investment and although they are thriving, to continue to do so, the area needs Council help. Short term thinking, provides only short term solutions. By the way, when Canadian friends contacted Bournemouth tourist office asking for a good hotel in Boscombe because they wanted to be near the surf reef, they were told they wouldn't like Boscombe, and would be better staying in a hotel in Bournemouth - what was wrong with the Chine Hotel which has been in the area for decades or Urban Beach?[/p][/quote]I'm not going to comment on the safety aspect apart from to say it is somewhat unusual to be accusing council officers of putting health & safety second. Put that is an issue for them and if an accident had occurred (which of course it didn't) they would have had to deal with it in court. - I'm glad you agree the seafront has improved, and hopefully that effect will spread to the high street. - But then you somewhat bizarrely complain that much of this investment is private and you want more public money spent. I don't enough has been invested in Boscombe by the council for the time being. (The money was of course from the sale of the car park etc.,) - If the negativity on here prevails your prediction of businesses going bust will no doubt be correct, but I hope that the seafront and indeed the new prestige flats that have been built in the last 5 years, and not just Barratts will prove to be the seed corn that will truly transform the whole of Boscombe. Glashen

3:43pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Bob49 says...

"hopefully that effect will spread to the high street"

.

Perhaps Glashen could furnish us with some evidence of when the word 'hopefully' was used when the carpark was being handed over to developers. It was not. If you cast your mind back, or look it up, we were told it would lead to the regeneration of Boscombe. That was the 'contract' we agreed to. That was the pact, deal, call it what you want but that was the agreement for us seeing public owned land handed over to private developers. It has failed. Failed very badly. Failed in the sense that even you admit the best we have is 'hopefully'.

.

Whingeing on about it looking better is an insult to all. An insult in the same way that were my elderly neighbour to have been conned out of thousands by some dodgy tarmac workers I was to keep carping on about how it looked better than it was.

.


Maybe the seafront was left in the state it was originally to allow a better deal on the land, who knows ? What is known is that whatever it looks like now it is not £12m worth of 'looking better'. A £12m figure that, disturbingly for local taxpayers, does not have a bottom line under it.

.

Was does need a bottom line under it is all the apologists, fellow travellers and other self servers posting up factually inaccurate stuff under some idiotic belief that the reef and the area will magically mend itself under the power of their encouraging words.

.

Part of how we get out of this mess is understanding how we got into this mess - another part might be for some to stop kidding themselves it is not a mess. We need to know what are the current estimated costs for long term maintanance or removal of this 'reef'. Where will this money come from the seafront budget as before ? And how much of the seafront budget has been diverted solely to this project ?

.

If we can start from that basis we might start to move forward and recognise what's going to be needed to be done.
"hopefully that effect will spread to the high street" . Perhaps Glashen could furnish us with some evidence of when the word 'hopefully' was used when the carpark was being handed over to developers. It was not. If you cast your mind back, or look it up, we were told it would lead to the regeneration of Boscombe. That was the 'contract' we agreed to. That was the pact, deal, call it what you want but that was the agreement for us seeing public owned land handed over to private developers. It has failed. Failed very badly. Failed in the sense that even you admit the best we have is 'hopefully'. . Whingeing on about it looking better is an insult to all. An insult in the same way that were my elderly neighbour to have been conned out of thousands by some dodgy tarmac workers I was to keep carping on about how it looked better than it was. . Maybe the seafront was left in the state it was originally to allow a better deal on the land, who knows ? What is known is that whatever it looks like now it is not £12m worth of 'looking better'. A £12m figure that, disturbingly for local taxpayers, does not have a bottom line under it. . Was does need a bottom line under it is all the apologists, fellow travellers and other self servers posting up factually inaccurate stuff under some idiotic belief that the reef and the area will magically mend itself under the power of their encouraging words. . Part of how we get out of this mess is understanding how we got into this mess - another part might be for some to stop kidding themselves it is not a mess. We need to know what are the current estimated costs for long term maintanance or removal of this 'reef'. Where will this money come from the seafront budget as before ? And how much of the seafront budget has been diverted solely to this project ? . If we can start from that basis we might start to move forward and recognise what's going to be needed to be done. Bob49

4:32pm Fri 1 Apr 11

TheDistrict says...

colmc1 wrote:
Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning!
I doubt it very much with the signage in place putting the reef out of bounds. Another silly comment to add to your long list above.
.
Those who indicate that it did not cost taxpayers maybe true, but the fact that the council sold off various parts of the seafront to Barratts still does not give them the right to waste such an amount of money on something that was not going to work, and will never work. Anyone who knows about the local seas, weather, etc, will know that Bournemouth/Poole Bay is not a surfing area, and no sand bags are going to make any difference.
.
As for blaming the Council. Why not. From the outset this administration has wasted £12.1m on this project which includes many unsold Pods (Surf or Beach), and of course the reef that flopped.
.
The Council went to New Zealand and witnessed for themselves the problems that arose from such a project, and heard lots about ASR. The NZ Reef have been in contact with our own Council to sort this out, but our Council state they do not know of any problems.
.
As said the council were on it from the start. The Brown, Dunlop and Co, with McLoughlin and Beesley, followed with Charon. Of course there was Nick King and now Tony Williams. Who are they, all councillors or council officers.
.
From the outset the reef has been a failure waiting to happen as told by many who belong to the surfing fraternity, and business, from those with the knowledge of the sea.
.
As someone pointed out the other day, in affect the council have wasted money on project outside their jurisdiction, as the boundary stops at the middle tide mark I believe.
.
Let the reef become a natural marine life home, at least fisherman will get pleasure out of it.
[quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning![/p][/quote]I doubt it very much with the signage in place putting the reef out of bounds. Another silly comment to add to your long list above. . Those who indicate that it did not cost taxpayers maybe true, but the fact that the council sold off various parts of the seafront to Barratts still does not give them the right to waste such an amount of money on something that was not going to work, and will never work. Anyone who knows about the local seas, weather, etc, will know that Bournemouth/Poole Bay is not a surfing area, and no sand bags are going to make any difference. . As for blaming the Council. Why not. From the outset this administration has wasted £12.1m on this project which includes many unsold Pods (Surf or Beach), and of course the reef that flopped. . The Council went to New Zealand and witnessed for themselves the problems that arose from such a project, and heard lots about ASR. The NZ Reef have been in contact with our own Council to sort this out, but our Council state they do not know of any problems. . As said the council were on it from the start. The Brown, Dunlop and Co, with McLoughlin and Beesley, followed with Charon. Of course there was Nick King and now Tony Williams. Who are they, all councillors or council officers. . From the outset the reef has been a failure waiting to happen as told by many who belong to the surfing fraternity, and business, from those with the knowledge of the sea. . As someone pointed out the other day, in affect the council have wasted money on project outside their jurisdiction, as the boundary stops at the middle tide mark I believe. . Let the reef become a natural marine life home, at least fisherman will get pleasure out of it. TheDistrict

4:52pm Fri 1 Apr 11

jinglebell says...

Glashen -
* The high street needs Council investment, for example, the pavers in the pedestrian area were earmarked for replacement more than 10 years ago. No private investor will do this. The Council are going to spend money in the Centre of Bournemouth, I think some should be invested in Boscombe instead of all going to Bournemouth Centre.
*
As for "talking up" Boscombe rather than being truthful - I can't see how that helps at all. Are you advocating that if we say only positive things that tourists to Boscombe will not believe what they see with their own eyes?
* What about some wet weather
attractions in Boscombe? The Council are intent on spending money on the Imax as an investment in Bournemouth Centre. Wouldn't it be a better option to leave the Imax alone in the current financial climate and invest a fraction of what they intend to spend in Boscombe instead?
After reading the article advised by "Schooner" about ASR - I think its unlikely they will return. The simpliest and safest thing to do will be to open up the bags of sand and let it disperse.
Any money owed to ASR could be used to invest in Boscombe.
Councillors have tried something - it doesn't work - its unsafe - say so - get rid of it.
We have a great beach front, which has cost an arm and a leg so its done, we need to think of the future now and how Boscombe can really be improved.
Glashen - * The high street needs Council investment, for example, the pavers in the pedestrian area were earmarked for replacement more than 10 years ago. No private investor will do this. The Council are going to spend money in the Centre of Bournemouth, I think some should be invested in Boscombe instead of all going to Bournemouth Centre. * As for "talking up" Boscombe rather than being truthful - I can't see how that helps at all. Are you advocating that if we say only positive things that tourists to Boscombe will not believe what they see with their own eyes? * What about some wet weather attractions in Boscombe? The Council are intent on spending money on the Imax as an investment in Bournemouth Centre. Wouldn't it be a better option to leave the Imax alone in the current financial climate and invest a fraction of what they intend to spend in Boscombe instead? After reading the article advised by "Schooner" about ASR - I think its unlikely they will return. The simpliest and safest thing to do will be to open up the bags of sand and let it disperse. Any money owed to ASR could be used to invest in Boscombe. Councillors have tried something - it doesn't work - its unsafe - say so - get rid of it. We have a great beach front, which has cost an arm and a leg so its done, we need to think of the future now and how Boscombe can really be improved. jinglebell

4:59pm Fri 1 Apr 11

colmc1 says...

freedom for pokesdown wrote:
colmc1 wrote:
Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning!
Just a footnote - DEAR colnc1 - could those "4 guys" you saw have been seagulls?
The reason I ask is that lifeguards know nothing about anyone using the reef since the warning notices went up yesterday.
Yawn....

A pity I don't have the leisure time to look at this column all day and reply to each post as they appear. Unlike others.

Firstly - regarding the guys on the reef this morning - no April Fool's Joke. And also no lifeguards on duty at 715am this morning. Therefore they wouldn't have seen them. Just myself and a few dog-walkers/commuter
s etc. They were paddling just in front of the reef.

Didn't even realise it was All Fools Day until the much anticipated appearance of the "regulars" on here.

As for the various accusations of "spin", "contradiction", "delusion", and all the other silliness, well those in glass houses etc..

I have no personal or commercial financial interest in the reef at all. As I said in my original comments, between ASR & the local council it needs to be put right no matter what. And I say this for the exact reasons as per my original post for those who obviously didn't bother to read it in its entirety and instead read what they wanted to.

One final note, to Mr Ahab the sailor who isn't convinced I am a "true surfer" (that comment alone speaks volumes), then I reiterate what I have said in the past - If you and of the other faceless critics of the reef/anything else that's new & positive for the area,would like to pop down the beach one morning, borrow a wetsuit and a board, then you will be happily accompanied out in the water and made to feel very welcome. We wouldn't pressure you into smiling but then again you might actually enjoy yourselves. We wouldn't even ask you to look at the reef! There you go- an open invite. Please bear in mind though that my knees aren't what they were so although I am a "true surfer" I may not be the best out there!

Also, please don't rabble on with that Captain hook language because we don't want anyone getting locked up.

Have a nice weekend. An imax article must be due along any minute.
[quote][p][bold]freedom for pokesdown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: Just a footnote - 4 guys ( I think male) out on surfboards on the reef this morning![/p][/quote]Just a footnote - DEAR colnc1 - could those "4 guys" you saw have been seagulls? The reason I ask is that lifeguards know nothing about anyone using the reef since the warning notices went up yesterday.[/p][/quote]Yawn.... A pity I don't have the leisure time to look at this column all day and reply to each post as they appear. Unlike others. Firstly - regarding the guys on the reef this morning - no April Fool's Joke. And also no lifeguards on duty at 715am this morning. Therefore they wouldn't have seen them. Just myself and a few dog-walkers/commuter s etc. They were paddling just in front of the reef. Didn't even realise it was All Fools Day until the much anticipated appearance of the "regulars" on here. As for the various accusations of "spin", "contradiction", "delusion", and all the other silliness, well those in glass houses etc.. I have no personal or commercial financial interest in the reef at all. As I said in my original comments, between ASR & the local council it needs to be put right no matter what. And I say this for the exact reasons as per my original post for those who obviously didn't bother to read it in its entirety and instead read what they wanted to. One final note, to Mr Ahab the sailor who isn't convinced I am a "true surfer" (that comment alone speaks volumes), then I reiterate what I have said in the past - If you and of the other faceless critics of the reef/anything else that's new & positive for the area,would like to pop down the beach one morning, borrow a wetsuit and a board, then you will be happily accompanied out in the water and made to feel very welcome. We wouldn't pressure you into smiling but then again you might actually enjoy yourselves. We wouldn't even ask you to look at the reef! There you go- an open invite. Please bear in mind though that my knees aren't what they were so although I am a "true surfer" I may not be the best out there! Also, please don't rabble on with that Captain hook language because we don't want anyone getting locked up. Have a nice weekend. An imax article must be due along any minute. colmc1

5:27pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Schooners says...

ALL - PLEASE - cease with the bickering. Swap numbers and speak like adults.

This article is being read worldwide and you are coming across as less than favourable. Yes that is right, this link goes out all over the world. New Zealand readers conduct themselves as we should.

SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY

That is all that we are talking about. Not some Council Health and Safety moron, we are talking about a subsea structure with holes and ragged sections of cloth = dangerous.

Please stop the bickering and call each other or go for a beer BUT STOP hiding behind false profiles and slanging matches.

Go and sit on the Bench we donated after Charlie died and see it from a different perspective. The sea kills.
ALL - PLEASE - cease with the bickering. Swap numbers and speak like adults. This article is being read worldwide and you are coming across as less than favourable. Yes that is right, this link goes out all over the world. New Zealand readers conduct themselves as we should. SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY That is all that we are talking about. Not some Council Health and Safety moron, we are talking about a subsea structure with holes and ragged sections of cloth = dangerous. Please stop the bickering and call each other or go for a beer BUT STOP hiding behind false profiles and slanging matches. Go and sit on the Bench we donated after Charlie died and see it from a different perspective. The sea kills. Schooners

5:45pm Fri 1 Apr 11

plastic says...

Another failing of the current council leadership, councillors and executives.

Land given away, public funds (our money) achieving no return on investment, no alternative plan.

The most self serving council in the history of Bournemouth (probably) ?
Another failing of the current council leadership, councillors and executives. Land given away, public funds (our money) achieving no return on investment, no alternative plan. The most self serving council in the history of Bournemouth (probably) ? plastic

5:51pm Fri 1 Apr 11

neesdon says...

"As said the council were on it from the start. The Brown, Dunlop and Co, with McLoughlin and Beesley, followed with Charon. Of course there was Nick King and now Tony Williams. Who are they, all councillors or council officers."

I don't know all of them but surely they should be sacked before they try the same scam in Bournemouth car parks and at the Imax. Selling off public owned land to private developers is a con and the only way to stop them is voting the Tory admin out in May! Then see about possible legal prosecutions if any underhand or backhanders can be traced.
"As said the council were on it from the start. The Brown, Dunlop and Co, with McLoughlin and Beesley, followed with Charon. Of course there was Nick King and now Tony Williams. Who are they, all councillors or council officers." I don't know all of them but surely they should be sacked before they try the same scam in Bournemouth car parks and at the Imax. Selling off public owned land to private developers is a con and the only way to stop them is voting the Tory admin out in May! Then see about possible legal prosecutions if any underhand or backhanders can be traced. neesdon

6:09pm Fri 1 Apr 11

b26b says...

Cookie75 wrote:
dremble wrote:
What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ


e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.
You are a person after my own heart.....sadly the negative people don't see what is starkly obvious to others and wont change. They are so dogmatic that they think that you/the world should change to suit them. BTW They actually enjoy moaning, being negative and pi**ing on people's parade but if you ask them for a solution or be constructive or actually do something themselves, whoops they can't deliver.
Too many pious people in Bournemouth (who think it is the centre of the universe). It is utterly frustrating to keep your cool with them
I agree, its clear that many have nothing better going on in their lives. They need to find fault and blame for almost everything.
Armchair experts who have not even got the foggiest idea of anything they spew, but love their half arsed, ill-informed ideas to be broadcast to all and sundry.
Despite what you may think of this surf reef, no point crying over spilt milk, Life shall go on.
[quote][p][bold]Cookie75[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dremble[/bold] wrote: What a load of negative people you are. The first news of failure or fault, the negative jump in for a good stab. Shouldnt the comments be " yes it cost a lot but if it worked it would have been great, its a shame". And no.one is to blame. They tried and it didnt work. At least they are trying ideas that would benefit the town and its tourism, id put money on betting you negetive people are similar ages, probably retired and have nothing better to do then knock down peoples ideas ect. The problem with this town is people like you..........negativ e people pushing out nergative vibes. Rain check, its the 21st century, things have to change and of course money will be lost. Try living in mexico or somewhere similar, then youl have a different perspective.[/p][/quote]You are a person after my own heart.....sadly the negative people don't see what is starkly obvious to others and wont change. They are so dogmatic that they think that you/the world should change to suit them. BTW They actually enjoy moaning, being negative and pi**ing on people's parade but if you ask them for a solution or be constructive or actually do something themselves, whoops they can't deliver. Too many pious people in Bournemouth (who think it is the centre of the universe). It is utterly frustrating to keep your cool with them[/p][/quote]I agree, its clear that many have nothing better going on in their lives. They need to find fault and blame for almost everything. Armchair experts who have not even got the foggiest idea of anything they spew, but love their half arsed, ill-informed ideas to be broadcast to all and sundry. Despite what you may think of this surf reef, no point crying over spilt milk, Life shall go on. b26b

6:56pm Fri 1 Apr 11

Was Charlie says...

Colmc1: "Firstly - regarding the guys on the reef this morning - no April Fool's Joke. And also no lifeguards on duty at 715am this morning. Therefore they wouldn't have seen them."
.........
Then these guys must be completely and utterly stupid, or totally brain dead (or unable to read). The sign says: "Surf Reef not in operation. Do not use." Quite clear.
.......
What do you think is the reaction of visitors who follow the signs to the reef and then find it's nothing special, even when it is "working". I suspect they go home and vow never to return. Yes it does give a good image of Bournemouth. Not.
Colmc1: "Firstly - regarding the guys on the reef this morning - no April Fool's Joke. And also no lifeguards on duty at 715am this morning. Therefore they wouldn't have seen them." ......... Then these guys must be completely and utterly stupid, or totally brain dead (or unable to read). The sign says: "Surf Reef not in operation. Do not use." Quite clear. ....... What do you think is the reaction of visitors who follow the signs to the reef and then find it's nothing special, even when it is "working". I suspect they go home and vow never to return. Yes it does give a good image of Bournemouth. Not. Was Charlie

7:01pm Fri 1 Apr 11

s-pb2 says...

As a Boscombe resident of many many years i so wanted this to succeed, but for me and other Boscombe residents who i have spoken to today, this really is the final straw. This debacle has gone too far.
As a Boscombe resident of many many years i so wanted this to succeed, but for me and other Boscombe residents who i have spoken to today, this really is the final straw. This debacle has gone too far. s-pb2

8:19pm Fri 1 Apr 11

joncon says...

Would people like to concede that health and safety does have it's purpose? Aside from giving you another chance to moan about councillors, that is
Would people like to concede that health and safety does have it's purpose? Aside from giving you another chance to moan about councillors, that is joncon

8:37pm Fri 1 Apr 11

CB1985 says...

This is the next plan of action - http://www.channel5.
com/shows/cowboy-bui
lders. Littlewood will chase after ASR in his Subaru, whilst Messenger dives down the reef with some plywood and a nail gun. They'll have it done by lunchtime.
This is the next plan of action - http://www.channel5. com/shows/cowboy-bui lders. Littlewood will chase after ASR in his Subaru, whilst Messenger dives down the reef with some plywood and a nail gun. They'll have it done by lunchtime. CB1985

9:28pm Fri 1 Apr 11

BIGTONE says...

I think The Clown Hall should be shut amid safety fears of taxpayers money........ security word.....fund-rest. haaaa where do they get these sooooo apt security words?
I think The Clown Hall should be shut amid safety fears of taxpayers money........ security word.....fund-rest. haaaa where do they get these sooooo apt security words? BIGTONE

2:57am Sat 2 Apr 11

gr82bheard says...

This poject WAS paid for by the council tax payers - the car park sold to developers to build a private housing estate did belong to the community - it was their resource and is now lost. The developers made a big fat profit, council officers had their ego trip collecting dodgy design awards, and local tax payers are left with an underwater sand castle, a stubby pier and the prospect of a big bill to repair the damage. Are there government people who can investigate this independently??
This poject WAS paid for by the council tax payers - the car park sold to developers to build a private housing estate did belong to the community - it was their resource and is now lost. The developers made a big fat profit, council officers had their ego trip collecting dodgy design awards, and local tax payers are left with an underwater sand castle, a stubby pier and the prospect of a big bill to repair the damage. Are there government people who can investigate this independently?? gr82bheard

8:26am Sat 2 Apr 11

freedom for pokesdown says...

I too wished it would work, but knew it wouldn't when I saw the design. Only 100 feet wide? Even if it had produced the best waves on the south coast - how many surfers can surfers can surf in 100 feet? There would be people drawn in from miles around, plus students from the university surf degree course (lol). It'd be more crowded than Penzance - and that is the pits. And how long before the sandbags fell apart and have to be replaced? (not long it turned out)

What really annoyes is being treated like idiots by the council. They must love those who don't take an interest in local affairs, who meekly keep on paying their council tax without questioning the BS schemes they come up with in the town hall (or is that the masonic lodge?).
But the bottom line is that the reef failed about as badly as anything has ever failed - and I make no apologies about being negative about the reef - Our money, Our beach. Our right and responsibility to keep an eye on what Our council is up to.

And ‘colmc 1’ - so now "4 guys using the reef" has become "4 guys in front of the reef" - any other part of your initial posting you'd like to change?
I too wished it would work, but knew it wouldn't when I saw the design. Only 100 feet wide? Even if it had produced the best waves on the south coast - how many surfers can surfers can surf in 100 feet? There would be people drawn in from miles around, plus students from the university surf degree course (lol). It'd be more crowded than Penzance - and that is the pits. And how long before the sandbags fell apart and have to be replaced? (not long it turned out) What really annoyes is being treated like idiots by the council. They must love those who don't take an interest in local affairs, who meekly keep on paying their council tax without questioning the BS schemes they come up with in the town hall (or is that the masonic lodge?). But the bottom line is that the reef failed about as badly as anything has ever failed - and I make no apologies about being negative about the reef - Our money, Our beach. Our right and responsibility to keep an eye on what Our council is up to. And ‘colmc 1’ - so now "4 guys using the reef" has become "4 guys in front of the reef" - any other part of your initial posting you'd like to change? freedom for pokesdown

9:03am Sat 2 Apr 11

reefskeptic says...

@freedom for pokesdown,
so now "4 guys using the reef" has become "4 guys in front of the reef" - it was the reef that attracted them to be nearby - so its not a failure? :(
not!
i think that they must be still convinced that the following sales hype found may come true one day? Only doubters would not believe it?

found!
.
Original estimates of the reef costing around £500,000 have been halved by ***** to be built for the same cost or less than the traditional Wooden groynes, so long a feature of Bournemouths seafront. If the plans for the reef are adopted, new reefs could be built every year instead of groynes. this would eventually make the beach a lot bigger, and transform Bournemouth into the Watersports Mecca of Europe !

****** returned to Bournemouth in June to present the findings of his study, including the Benefit-cost analysis. This showed a staggering 37-1 ratio for the Reef at Southbourne, and 21-1 at Boscombe.

Here is a brief summary of ***** recommendations:
Southbourne: Southbourne with be just one right hander of about 110m long. It will provide the coastal protection which is needed for this area at a capital cost similar to groynes and cheaper over 50 years, and it is hoped that funds will be obtained from MAFF for coastal protection, and from the lottery sports fund. This should be a challenging wave, probably a 6 - 7grade. (Pipeline would be 7-8, and Raglan a 5). Initial ideas suggest that the reef be based on Bingin, a reef break on Bali . (***** team have surveyed the bottom contours of all the renowned reef breaks around the pacific). It hoped that by breaking up the line of swell and creating refraction, one or two decent banks should form on each side, thus creating two or three breaks where there are currently none. (This effect has occurred at Narrowneck- they still have to get the top layer on there, but it shows very good form on large swells).

Boscombe: The Boscombe pier reef would be double sided reef with a left hander of about 90 metres and a right hander of about a 100 metres. The reef would be designed to protect a slightly shortened pier which is in a poor state and which would otherwise have to be demolished, or else rebuilt at great cost in the near future. The Boscombe reef would be a bit less severe than Southbourne, probably a grade 5. This is partly to give variety, but also to appeal to the intermediate or merely competent surfers. It is hoped to have night-lights on the pier so that people can surf after work in the winter.

oh dear, security - word water-looo

( just leave it alone it WILL send you blind!)
@freedom for pokesdown, so now "4 guys using the reef" has become "4 guys in front of the reef" - it was the reef that attracted them to be nearby - so its not a failure? :( not! i think that they must be still convinced that the following sales hype found may come true one day? Only doubters would not believe it? found! . Original estimates of the reef costing around £500,000 have been halved by ***** to be built for the same cost or less than the traditional Wooden groynes, so long a feature of Bournemouths seafront. If the plans for the reef are adopted, new reefs could be built every year instead of groynes. this would eventually make the beach a lot bigger, and transform Bournemouth into the Watersports Mecca of Europe ! ****** returned to Bournemouth in June to present the findings of his study, including the Benefit-cost analysis. This showed a staggering 37-1 ratio for the Reef at Southbourne, and 21-1 at Boscombe. Here is a brief summary of ***** recommendations: Southbourne: Southbourne with be just one right hander of about 110m long. It will provide the coastal protection which is needed for this area at a capital cost similar to groynes and cheaper over 50 years, and it is hoped that funds will be obtained from MAFF for coastal protection, and from the lottery sports fund. This should be a challenging wave, probably a 6 - 7grade. (Pipeline would be 7-8, and Raglan a 5). Initial ideas suggest that the reef be based on Bingin, a reef break on Bali . (***** team have surveyed the bottom contours of all the renowned reef breaks around the pacific). It hoped that by breaking up the line of swell and creating refraction, one or two decent banks should form on each side, thus creating two or three breaks where there are currently none. (This effect has occurred at Narrowneck- they still have to get the top layer on there, but it shows very good form on large swells). Boscombe: The Boscombe pier reef would be double sided reef with a left hander of about 90 metres and a right hander of about a 100 metres. The reef would be designed to protect a slightly shortened pier which is in a poor state and which would otherwise have to be demolished, or else rebuilt at great cost in the near future. The Boscombe reef would be a bit less severe than Southbourne, probably a grade 5. This is partly to give variety, but also to appeal to the intermediate or merely competent surfers. It is hoped to have night-lights on the pier so that people can surf after work in the winter. oh dear, security - word water-looo ( just leave it alone it WILL send you blind!) reefskeptic

11:39am Sat 2 Apr 11

polblagger says...

Please tell me that council tax isn't still being paid to these New Zealand chancers? If the surf reef were a car, trading standards would have prosecuted the salesman and crushed the car by now.
Please tell me that council tax isn't still being paid to these New Zealand chancers? If the surf reef were a car, trading standards would have prosecuted the salesman and crushed the car by now. polblagger

11:40am Sat 2 Apr 11

polblagger says...

Please tell me that council tax isn't still being paid to these New Zealand chancers? If the surf reef were a car, trading standards would have prosecuted the salesman and crushed the car by now.
Please tell me that council tax isn't still being paid to these New Zealand chancers? If the surf reef were a car, trading standards would have prosecuted the salesman and crushed the car by now. polblagger

12:14pm Sat 2 Apr 11

Capt. Ahab (ret.) says...

Ahoy ‘colmc 1’
Begging yer pardon but which part of me comment, in which I refute thee to be a true surfer “speaks volumes?” me scribe did pen those word in plain English just fer you. As fer yer ‘invitation’ I weren’t aware I would need one to enter thy Boscombe waters accompanied or not if I choose to surf. I again note with interest yer wordage and if I may.. “We wouldn’t even ask you to look at the reef!” what point be yer trying to inflect now?
….
Me scribe were weary at the end of thar day so unfortunately unable to communicate with thee then. He don’t hold much hope of a reply from thee though, well not fer another 12mths at least. …
Regards.
Ahoy ‘colmc 1’ Begging yer pardon but which part of me comment, in which I refute thee to be a true surfer “speaks volumes?” me scribe did pen those word in plain English just fer you. As fer yer ‘invitation’ I weren’t aware I would need one to enter thy Boscombe waters accompanied or not if I choose to surf. I again note with interest yer wordage and if I may.. “We wouldn’t even ask you to look at the reef!” what point be yer trying to inflect now? …. Me scribe were weary at the end of thar day so unfortunately unable to communicate with thee then. He don’t hold much hope of a reply from thee though, well not fer another 12mths at least. … Regards. Capt. Ahab (ret.)

7:19pm Sat 2 Apr 11

colmc1 says...

I'm a bit disappointed.

I was in Boscombe this afternoon and the Victorian Market was in full swing at The Crescent. People were buying and selling, playing bongo drums, dancing eating, drinking etc. A good atmosphere with lots going on and folk enjoying themselves.

It was at least 4 hours ago, it happened in Boscombe and there's not one moaner anywhere on this site today, criticising it, being negative about it and generally having the usual pointlessa gripe.

The local grumps, grouches and growlers are starting to slack.
I'm a bit disappointed. I was in Boscombe this afternoon and the Victorian Market was in full swing at The Crescent. People were buying and selling, playing bongo drums, dancing eating, drinking etc. A good atmosphere with lots going on and folk enjoying themselves. It was at least 4 hours ago, it happened in Boscombe and there's not one moaner anywhere on this site today, criticising it, being negative about it and generally having the usual pointlessa gripe. The local grumps, grouches and growlers are starting to slack. colmc1

8:09pm Sat 2 Apr 11

busguy says...

colmc1 wrote:
I'm a bit disappointed. I was in Boscombe this afternoon and the Victorian Market was in full swing at The Crescent. People were buying and selling, playing bongo drums, dancing eating, drinking etc. A good atmosphere with lots going on and folk enjoying themselves. It was at least 4 hours ago, it happened in Boscombe and there's not one moaner anywhere on this site today, criticising it, being negative about it and generally having the usual pointlessa gripe. The local grumps, grouches and growlers are starting to slack.
Sorry mate, no time. We have all been out campaigning for the common-sense and integrity party.
------
Anyway, what are you moaning about on a nice day, with everyone having fun in good old Boscombe?
Get a life..............
[quote][p][bold]colmc1[/bold] wrote: I'm a bit disappointed. I was in Boscombe this afternoon and the Victorian Market was in full swing at The Crescent. People were buying and selling, playing bongo drums, dancing eating, drinking etc. A good atmosphere with lots going on and folk enjoying themselves. It was at least 4 hours ago, it happened in Boscombe and there's not one moaner anywhere on this site today, criticising it, being negative about it and generally having the usual pointlessa gripe. The local grumps, grouches and growlers are starting to slack.[/p][/quote]Sorry mate, no time. We have all been out campaigning for the common-sense and integrity party. ------ Anyway, what are you moaning about on a nice day, with everyone having fun in good old Boscombe? Get a life.............. busguy

11:30am Sun 3 Apr 11

PTBarnum says...

Since when has it been a sin to turn a dollar at the expense of gullible simple folk?

Its just business and as its said "if you cant hack it - get over it!"

remember my saying : "theres one born every minute"

the three worlds best sales pitch words are
1. the checks in the mail
2. of course I will love you forever
3. yes I will tell you when its time.

so whats the problem with that?
Its just business if you understand?
nothing personal!
Since when has it been a sin to turn a dollar at the expense of gullible simple folk? Its just business and as its said "if you cant hack it - get over it!" remember my saying : "theres one born every minute" the three worlds best sales pitch words are 1. the checks in the mail 2. of course I will love you forever 3. yes I will tell you when its time. so whats the problem with that? Its just business if you understand? nothing personal! PTBarnum

11:02pm Tue 5 Apr 11

martaaay2 says...

"It's just a question of time before someone dies on that reef - that's not being melodramatic or sensational."

err both
"It's just a question of time before someone dies on that reef - that's not being melodramatic or sensational." err both martaaay2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree