Councillors demand surf reef project update (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Councillors demand surf reef project update
5:00pm Wednesday 9th June 2010 in
COUNCILLORS have demanded more information on the progress of the Boscombe Spa Village project and the controversial surf reef.
Cllr Ben Grower told Bournemouth full council meeting that the council needs to know what any problems are now and “not in 12 months’ time”.
He said he had concerns over the sale of the surf pods, which are intended to help cover the cost of the surf reef and the Boscombe Spa Village Project.
His move for an interim report to be presented to cabinet and full council in December this year was lost.
But Bournemouth council leader Cllr Stephen MacLoughlin said a scrutiny panel is set to examine issues surrounding the surf reef before that.
The joint panel is set to meet on July 13 and a final report on the Boscombe Spa Village project to be presented to Cabinet on June 22 next year.
Cllr Grower said: “It has benefited the seafront but Boscombe itself hasn’t benefited at all.
“You only have to walk through Boscombe High Street to see the number of empty properties.
“We need to know as soon as possible what the problems are – not 12 months’ time.
“We need a report to consider things like the sale of the pods – an important part of the finance of the Boscombe Spa Village Project.”
Cllr Ted Taylor said a more urgent update was needed because of concerns about the surf reef.
“One year is too long.
“People I have spoken to have concerns that it is not performing adequately.
“As a council we should be making certain that the surf reef is performing well.”
Cllr MacLoughlin said: “I don’t disagree with the spirit of it, but see no need to wait ’til December.”
Comments(43)
MJD
says...
6:49am Thu 10 Jun 10
Wimwam
says...
9:06am Thu 10 Jun 10
Bob49
says...
10:27am Thu 10 Jun 10
woolamai wrote:The irony of you being the first on here, bleating about the predictability of the 'regulars' posting in response to a surf reef story
Bit of a dry old bone this one - but they'll be on here soon - go for it tide nor time, capt pugwash, reefskeptic, hanging judge, poo stance - it ain't much but it's still a windmill so tilt for all yoiur worth.
busguy
says...
10:27am Thu 10 Jun 10
reefskeptic
says...
1:14pm Thu 10 Jun 10
.
yes thats the pot calling the kettle black isnt it?
I like this story the best - one of our undergraduates is worth a nestfull of their best?
,
http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/news/fe
atures/surfreef/surf
reefstories/8180181.
Student_proved_right
_over_Boscombe_surf_
reef_failings/
bccafriends
says...
4:49pm Thu 10 Jun 10
“You only have to walk through Boscombe High Street to see the number of empty properties...."
Cllr. Grower is so right.
The Council have put absolutely nothing in place to regenerate Central Bocsombe including making use of the Bournemouth Centre for Community Arts (BCCA) - now known as the Boscombe Centre for Community and Arts, which is in Haviland Rd. 100 yards away from the bus station and pedestrianised shopping area.
The Council have submitted a planning application to demolish the BCCA and having obtained a £2.3 million grant for an "integrated services hub" plan to build ONLY the hub on the site, when they could have included a community centre too. So far 470 people have submitted objections to the planning application. The grant criteria (a copy is on our website www.boscombearts.org
.uk) not only allows a community centre to benefit too but gives preference for "hubs" where there is a community centre so that "psychological barriers are broken down" for clients coming to the hub.
We, the Friends of the BCCA, feel so frustrated that our business plan (which the Council praised) to reopen the BCCA with programmes designed to bring tourists to the area, and curb anti-social behaviour has been pushed out of the site.
The Council Leader's offer of the two Victorian rooms listed by English Heritage is a "non-offer", since they also demand we have - and pay for -a separate entrance and reception area, which means the rooms have to be redesigned. They also demand we install and find the funds for separate central heating, electrics, gas, and water and refurbishments and pay for asbestos removal in the listed rooms. Funders will not provide capital funds for all this work when it is clear we cannot bring in enough income to provide long term financial sustainability from two rooms only.
We have an extremely experienced and professional fundraiser as part of our team, and who knows the area well.
The grant criteria also expects the "wider community" to benefit and expects "area regeneration". How will the hub achieve either? The Councils application for the grant (a copy is on our website) lists one of the partners as the Essential Drug and Alcohol Advisory Service, whilst we do not wish to see anymore services for alcoholics and drug addicts coming to Boscombe - neither do those in recovery, telling us too many addicts is like being in "the sweet shop" - we do think other services will be welcomed to the area IF the Council Leaders also include the reopening of the BCCA as a community and arts centre.
Our architects and planning consultants inform us there is plenty of room on the site for both hub and us - so why are Bournemouth Council Leaders preventing this? The Council's planning application states 90 staff will be on site - yet the planning drawing shows room for 306 with still more room left over.
Their planning application also shows a whole portion of the site "to be conserved for future use" - the future IS the children and families and businesses in the area, who need this NOW. Why have the Leaders made this decision?
Has that area been set aside for later community use? We doubt that, since we requested one extra permanent room for one of our partners - a well established professional counselling service - who wished to offer £50K a year of free counselling. The Leaders denied us this. Why?
The Prime Minister, David Cameron states that services will be cut and "government will look to charities to provide those services" - why are the Leaders ignoring this?
We were offering many programmes including art holidays, antique fairs and auctions, a small cinema/film club, surfboard designing/making and other many exciting projects which could aid the Central part of Boscombe.
Grants are scarce and will be much scarcer to come by in the financial dark days ahead - our programmes ARE 'Big Society' why is this Conservative Council ignoring Conservative Party policy?
Cuts in services will be severe and deprived areas such as Boscombe will feel that deprivation even harder - our programmes can aid to weather the storm in many ways. The Prime Minister tells us "we are all in this together" - so why are the Leaders insisting on a path that will bring no benefit to the wider community of Boscombe when the criteria for the grant expects it so they could include us? Don’t they want the community and all groups and organisations to work together?
Will the Council Leaders please align themselves to their own "2026 Vision for Bournemouth - Investing in People" which states, 'Bournemouth Council…looks at ways to improve the quality of life for the people of B’mth, empowering people and bringing marginalized and excluded groups into the mainstream of society.' Only 26% of residents felt that they could influence local decisions.
Bear in mind, the Council’s application form for the grant (on our website) claimed it was to be on a site, “across the road from a major health facility” “no demolition required” and yet they made the unilateral decision to move sites to the BCCA – Mr. Hayward, who oversees the grant on behalf of the Government, has given them plenty of leeway once he knew they moved sites – but how much more will they deviate from the criteria and lose the grant altogether?
As far as the reef is concerned how can Council Leaders live with themselves in the knowledge they have mismanaged the reef project and given so much leeway to a private business yet none to a local community group? As it stands, it looks as though the £2.3 million is yet another sum of money to be mismanaged.
We have sent many emails to the Council Leaders asking them to reconsider their stance and listen and discuss the possibilities which the criteria for the grant allows us both to do. We have even suggested Mr. Mark Hayward sits down with us all to guide us and he is willing to do so but not the Council.
We are now asking them HERE again to arrange a public meeting where a full, frank and open discussion can take place between the public and themselves. We DO all need to work together and if the Leaders plans for the BCCA site is in ALL our best interests they should not hide its light under a barrel but tell us all. Leaders, please arrange a public meeting and answer our questions. You know our email address: bccafriends@hotmail.
com
caracus
says...
7:53pm Thu 10 Jun 10
reefskeptic
says...
8:08am Fri 11 Jun 10
.
http://www.stuff.co.
nz/taranaki-daily-ne
ws/news/3799661/No-s
ign-of-completion-da
te-for-reef
.
"ASR has touted the success of its $6.6m artificial reef in Bournemouth as a guarantee the reef can be built to standard. "
Notalocal
says...
12:28pm Fri 11 Jun 10
IF the council or an independent review can at least show that the reef does it's job as cost effective as any groynes as part of the BCC beach replenishment budget then maybe the reef won't bee seen as such a financial lemon. IF?
I'd also like the review to look at how the reef is being promoted. I see a major problem in that the main (niche) market was/is surfers.
Seeing as how the concensus among surfers is that the waves generated by the reef aren't appropriate, and the whole project's long term success seems to hinge on this, I'd like to know why the product hasn't been marketed to other potential users. Or has it?
I mean, the body boarding community seem to like the reef judging by the ratio of surfers to body boarders using it. So what has been the promotion for that market? And what about kite/wind surfers? Of which Poole already attracts many. How about fishing trips? Diving?
I never read anything about the reef in any national paper outside the context of surfing.
If the cost of the reef is negligable to that of groynes. If money can be recouped from the construction firm for not delivering a suitable product and if the reef can be used in other ways to promote Boscombe then maybe the project can be a success.
reefwatching
says...
1:47pm Fri 11 Jun 10
It's even possible that the surf reef will worsen erosion by concentrating wave energy; it is well known that the rudimentary computer models that ASR use underestimate the wave energy behind the reefs, thus overestimating the potential for sand build-up.
And I'm sure divers can find better things to look at than a giant sandbag. This reef is for improving surfing only and nothing else. Don't be fooled by this 'multi-purpose' nonsense.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
5:49pm Fri 11 Jun 10
Notalocal wrote:Ahoy ‘Notalocal’
There needs to be a review asap. Something needs to be done to change to current public opinion that the reef is a failure, other than ASR claiming it isn't. The whole idea was to use the reef to attract visitors and £££.
IF the council or an independent review can at least show that the reef does it's job as cost effective as any groynes as part of the BCC beach replenishment budget then maybe the reef won't bee seen as such a financial lemon. IF?
I'd also like the review to look at how the reef is being promoted. I see a major problem in that the main (niche) market was/is surfers.
Seeing as how the concensus among surfers is that the waves generated by the reef aren't appropriate, and the whole project's long term success seems to hinge on this, I'd like to know why the product hasn't been marketed to other potential users. Or has it?
I mean, the body boarding community seem to like the reef judging by the ratio of surfers to body boarders using it. So what has been the promotion for that market? And what about kite/wind surfers? Of which Poole already attracts many. How about fishing trips? Diving?
I never read anything about the reef in any national paper outside the context of surfing.
If the cost of the reef is negligable to that of groynes. If money can be recouped from the construction firm for not delivering a suitable product and if the reef can be used in other ways to promote Boscombe then maybe the project can be a success.
With due respect have thee cast yer spyglass upon ‘Weights Reef’ (to give it’s official title)
The Brehtren, surfers, tourists, hoteliers, bodyboarders, RNLI, Plymouth University, lifeguards even the Purse String Holders themselves be well aware that yer Southern Hemisphere Pirates have pulled a right pelt of New Zealand ‘wool’ over yer egotistical councils eyes.
I did forewarn the Brethren that if ye BBC and ASR be gradually stating that yer reef be classified as a ‘Multi-purpose’ construction then the real (surfing) purpose, the cost, responsibility, function will be eroded quicker than ‘Weights Elephant’ itself.
I do be reluctant to describe a futile attempt to control the sea in such a way as a ‘reef’ I’ll lay me charts out sir, me Bosun and crew do cordially invite thee and any other soul aboard me little Whaler ‘Peapod’ to mark for me a natural reef fit fer surfing in either hemisphere that do bear any similarity of the configuration of ‘Weights Elephant’.
Again Sir with respect yer above comment is as suspect in its content as ‘Weights Elephant’ is in substance.
Notalocal
says...
12:03am Sat 12 Jun 10
Like I say the idea is to increase visitor numbers to the newly regenerated area of Boscombe, there is no reason why the reef cannot still help do this even if the intended market is longer an option. But the continued press about the reefs failure as a 'surf reef' can only be detrimental to Boscombe hence why a review is needed before more rot sets in.
Ps. Good luck with the BCCA. Signed my objection even tho I ain't local. Is that wrong?
Plus..., news filtering through is of a bag on the Kovalam, India reef having split in heavy seas.
http://www.tripadvis
or.co.uk/ShowTopic-g
311295-i10148-k32535
03-o20-Latest_on_the
_reef-Kovalam_Kerala
.html
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
2:06am Sat 12 Jun 10
Notalocal wrote:Ahoy ‘Notalocal’
I hear ye cap'n. I just feel that although the reef isn't performing it's intended purpose it would be ignorant to dismiss it totally before any other benefit, environmental or commercial, is also considered.
Like I say the idea is to increase visitor numbers to the newly regenerated area of Boscombe, there is no reason why the reef cannot still help do this even if the intended market is longer an option. But the continued press about the reefs failure as a 'surf reef' can only be detrimental to Boscombe hence why a review is needed before more rot sets in.
Ps. Good luck with the BCCA. Signed my objection even tho I ain't local. Is that wrong?
Plus..., news filtering through is of a bag on the Kovalam, India reef having split in heavy seas.
http://www.tripadvis
or.co.uk/ShowTopic-g
311295-i10148-k32535
03-o20-Latest_on_the
_reef-Kovalam_Kerala
.html
I do right accept thy right to hold yer point of view but the Brethrens gold coins be specifically spent, on their behalf, by PSHs (BCC) and readily accepted by ASR (the world leaders in artificial reef design and construction) to provide a ‘SURF REEF’ not a coastal defence, marine habitat or fishing area.
Pray sir do tell me and thousands of disappointed Brethren how many of yer projected visitors be a travelling to Bournemouth to view a South Sea mollusc that hitched a ride upon ASRs ‘equipment?’ Please do also convey to the Brethren how it be beneficial that ‘tourists’ be casting hooks onto already decomposing sandbags is going to promote the area enough to compensate for the outlay? And the ‘surfers’ CANT use ‘Weights Elephant’ as it is.
Har don’t ye think that the PSHs would be a parting with many a gold coin just to get a spyglass upon a successful ‘surfer’ to be able in part to justify such an offensive waste of monies?
With due respect (yet again) ye do seem to blame anyone that says it do be a unmitigated failure, thou cannot keep suggesting ‘give it a try’
Thar be more to Boscombe re-generation than the ‘Weights Elephant’ or so the Brethren were led to believe and I be a gambling (a flagon of whale oil) thee would not entertain Boscombe High Street after dark.
I do not take lightly yer inference that I be ‘ignorant’ simply because of differing opinions, Har!!
If I may say sir, yer do seem to have missed the boat on this subject and only reinforces me original comment to ye.
colin 50
says...
7:56am Sat 12 Jun 10
reefskeptic
says...
9:42am Sat 12 Jun 10
BUNCOMBE for BOSCOMBE from the very start .. when ludicrous expectations where aroused by the buncombe from the promoters. Its even more ludicrous that "anything goes" is accepted and excused as a means of promotion. Are we surprised by the reports from India?
Notalocal
says...
9:50am Sat 12 Jun 10
I also agree with everything you say. However, I feel that unless something is done NOW to use the reef as a productive tool to draw in visitors it will remain a blight on Boscombe's image for many years, to the detriment of the local people and businesses - The sooner the rot stops the better surely.
And although I concur that the reef was not intended for marine life propagation or Coastal protection, there is no reason why these 'benefits' cannot be utilised, assuming there are such benefits.
Thoughout history there are many examples of items being successfully used NOT for their intended purpose. I just think we should endevour to try to salvage something from the debacle before dismissing it outright.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
4:20pm Sat 12 Jun 10
Notalocal wrote:Ahoy 'Notalocal'
Maybe ignorant was the wrong choice of words. And in any event it was not directed at you. More to anyone, council included, who feel that promoting the reef is flogging a dead horse now that it is officially non functioning as intended... A SURF REEF.
I also agree with everything you say. However, I feel that unless something is done NOW to use the reef as a productive tool to draw in visitors it will remain a blight on Boscombe's image for many years, to the detriment of the local people and businesses - The sooner the rot stops the better surely.
And although I concur that the reef was not intended for marine life propagation or Coastal protection, there is no reason why these 'benefits' cannot be utilised, assuming there are such benefits.
Thoughout history there are many examples of items being successfully used NOT for their intended purpose. I just think we should endevour to try to salvage something from the debacle before dismissing it outright.
I do rightly accept yer apology with the same good grace ye offered it but I still be sat aboard 'Peapod' with a wry smile as to what be at all positive about such a waste of so much coinage.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
4:53pm Sat 12 Jun 10
woolamai wrote:Ahoy ‘woolamai’
Bit of a dry old bone this one - but they'll be on here soon - go for it tide nor time, capt pugwash, reefskeptic, hanging judge, poo stance - it ain't much but it's still a windmill so tilt for all yoiur worth.
Do try to use peoples correct titles, ye have precious ‘friends’ on here as it be now, if thy continue with yer disdain of others then thar will be as alone on dry land as ye are on that midnight wave.
I have discovered that me little whaler ‘Peapod’ can be steered through Weights Elephant on an ebb tide which doth remove some weedage from its keel but them grow bags not be strong enough to dislodge Southern Ocean barnacles
So me little ‘Promenade Pirate’ when next ye be afloat could ye be about waxing me planking?
reefskeptic
says...
6:56pm Sat 12 Jun 10
woolamai
says...
10:13pm Sat 12 Jun 10
You lot must really hate Bournemouth and Boscombe the way you are trying to portray it as a moaners paradise. Where do you actually come from - a competing resort?
cathy l
says...
10:33pm Sat 12 Jun 10
Now I don't like to complain but I will be writing to ASR on this matter.
Over the last two weeks we have had some New Zealand lamb that has been quite honestly dreadful. On Monday I made a lovely stew but by the time we picked the gristle out we were left with almost no meat to speak of at all. I really think it preposterous that we pay £3.9 million pounds to this company from New Zealand and get meat that is nothing but bone, fat and gristle. I'd like to know what Bournemouth Council and ASR intend to do about it.
Yours Sincerely,
Cathryn Lebbit
whingeyminge
says...
10:40pm Sat 12 Jun 10
Plain food is what people want. Ahab knows - ham egg and chips - that's a nice meal, on some decent china and a table with a lace tablecloth. That's what you get in the navy isn't it Ahab.
reefskeptic
says...
12:22am Sun 13 Jun 10
.
Sounds a bit like " well youse have been fleeced and you had better keep quiet about it because it will only cost you more"
sad try wooli!
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
11:13am Sun 13 Jun 10
woolamai wrote:Ahoy 'woolamai'
Pugwash - when I can count amongst my 'friends' the whining, whingeing, complaining fossils of a place like Bournemouth I'll know my surfing days are over and I'm due a trip to Switzerland.
You lot must really hate Bournemouth and Boscombe the way you are trying to portray it as a moaners paradise. Where do you actually come from - a competing resort?
I told ye afore not to stand to close and 'downwinge' of me smoking tar barrel thy senses not sturdy enough to cope with tha fumes. It do addle thy brain,stamp me ivory, I aint had me barrel lit fer months,Oh dear me little 'Promenade Pirate' things dont bode well fer thee at all.
Ye are confused of mind though, Its because many a Brethren hold Boscombe dear to them and not the opposite as ye seem to think that they state comments of dismay.
Best ye lay down fer a while and consider why tis ye do have these 'mental conflicts?'
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
11:31am Sun 13 Jun 10
Me scribe did omit a Post Script…………
….. P.S. Also thar be many a good private ‘Sanatorium’ in Switzerland! Might a check-up be prudent whilst ye there??
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
7:17pm Sun 13 Jun 10
reefskeptic wrote:Ahoy ‘reefskeptic’
Ahoy Ahab, that be the gap that the councils engineer was holding back last due payment on due to safety concerns? The same gap that Woolamai said not so long back was unsafe? The same gap the contractor said was alright as all their reefs all had gaps and it was ok to be paid? what the heck was going on ?? What the heck is going on?? It be a board on enquiry at the Admiralty that maybe should be going on? Perhaps we should all submit a bill as its field day on the coffers?
It do be a right pleasure to exchange words with ye yet again.
Me ships surgeon do suspect that ‘woolamai’ be in desperate need of medication (as suggested by the honourable Sherlock Holmes) ‘cos I do fear fer ‘his peace of mind’; yet his outbursts do cause me to smile and I aint got the heart to ignore him.
I do possess a leaky whale oil barrel that the Brethren may find suitable if a ‘Brethren Fund’ be set up?
Whilst It do have a seepage problem with me ‘oils’ it be sturdy enough to contain Brethrens coinage should they be of a mind to embark upon a public (legal) contestation of potential misappropriation of funds and responsibilities of ye PSHs.
I do be afeard unless an ‘independent’ enquiry be sought the possibly of a miscarriage of justice may occur. Investigators rarely find much awry with ‘themselves’ (Sherlock Holmes will vouch fer that I be sure).
The tide be on the turn now so I be steering a course fer ‘Weights Elephant’ in the hope ‘woolamai’ be afloat with a tinny of wax fer me planking Har.
woolamai
says...
7:19pm Sun 13 Jun 10
I think any hope of getting ASR back to answer legitimate criticism has been lost - and you'll have contributed well to that. After all if they were to hold your barely legible drivel up as an example of the criticism they have received from Bournemouth most sensible people would think they were thoroughly entitled to ignore it. Well done - do you work for them or are for some other beachside resort that is hoping for Bournmouth to fail:?
sherlock_holmes
says...
11:24pm Sun 13 Jun 10
.
Methinks that something smells in the state of Denmark alright.
Ich habe exchanged telegrams mit mein freund Zigmund Freud and his observations were briefly as follows
1.surf city illusion trip
2. seven seas illusion trip
3. illusion of "surf god" status trip
4. excess "reefers' illusion trip
5. Excess demands satisfied trip
6. appeasement rewarded disorder
7. vision2reality disorder
and lastly the most worrying of the lot..... the guilt trip leading to the feable "cop out" trip.
All of these ziegmund says are entirely predictable as prime examples of the "surfgod" syndrom that the publicity machine spins out as false reality. The least of all to take any notice of is the "guilt trip".
The "copout" is just any easy option for some people when reality becoomes obvious.
.
Everyone has been suffering a bit tooo much "surf tripping" in his opinion. His remedy was for all to "take a cold shower" to start thinking clearly again. Then all will present as it really is.
.
fare thee well my brave and competant ships master!
SH&W&SF.
.
disclaimer ... references to anyone living or dead in this communication is purely co-incidental ..etc
woolamai
says...
8:56am Mon 14 Jun 10
Thank goodness the council isn't comprised of people like you. They may not be popular but at least they get things done.
Any dates you'd care to share for when you will have achieved anything - this year, next year, next World Cup? Laughable.
sherlock_holmes
says...
9:58am Mon 14 Jun 10
The problem is that council have paid and the things have not been done.
they have kept their side of the bargain now its the turn of the people that promised things to get done to provide the "value for money" . So far council and the town have been taken for one big roller coaster ride.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
6:00pm Mon 14 Jun 10
woolamai wrote:Ahoy ‘woolamai’
Pugwash - you really are either an idiot of very sneaky.
I think any hope of getting ASR back to answer legitimate criticism has been lost - and you'll have contributed well to that. After all if they were to hold your barely legible drivel up as an example of the criticism they have received from Bournemouth most sensible people would think they were thoroughly entitled to ignore it. Well done - do you work for them or are for some other beachside resort that is hoping for Bournmouth to fail:?
Do calm thou few senses yer have about thee, I appreciate how upset ye must be right upset even 'disturbed' now, One minute you be privy to ASRs inner secrets, well enough to state several times ‘I have it on good authority?’ snippets of important information to relay to the Brethren then of course thy PSHs and ASR leave thee standing alone when nought of what ye spoke make sense! In fact It be proven by many a learned professor at Plymouth University that the ‘Weights Elephant’ be precisely that and now ye stating that ME a mere whaling Captain could possibly influence the ‘World Leaders in Artificial Reef Design’ I think ye do flatter me too much but I’ll instruct me scribe to contact ASR, perhaps I may use thee as a reference??
‘woolamai’ if not, with me best will can understand half of what ye do spout, the other half do smile at.
Now if me contact with ye make me an ‘idiot’ then look upon it kindly almost ‘therapeutic’ to yer needs, as fer me be ‘sneaky?’ Not sure a one legged 1820s ships Captain stomping on an ivory leg and have an ‘oily effluvia’ about himself would ever be regarded as ‘sneaky’.
Do seek some rest, take a powder perhaps, I could send me Boson with an appropriate sedative, second thoughts no not me Boson he aint forgiven ye fer singing his eyebrows off, they grew back but ginger (not his natural colour) and be very bushy so that now it do look like two ends of coconuts meeting above his snout whenever he smiles (that aint much these days) Best I leave medication upon the reef where it be dry and undisturbed for a few hours Har.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
8:09pm Mon 14 Jun 10
sherlock_holmes wrote:Ahoy 'SH&W'
Council pays to get things done.
The problem is that council have paid and the things have not been done.
they have kept their side of the bargain now its the turn of the people that promised things to get done to provide the "value for money" . So far council and the town have been taken for one big roller coaster ride.
Tis right pleased I am to have thee on the 'case' again, I suspect thee have bin embroiled in another case/cases abroad? But as ye can observe 'woolamai' not bin medicating himself and I do be right concerned his grasp of reality be 'surfing' on a never-ending ebb tide.
He do quote that yer PSHs 'Do get things done'??? Pray what doth he mean? Be he stating that yer BBC spent £millions of gold coins on re-locating beach sand fer NO provable reasoning 'Got something done?' That building on what must be regarded as a profitable car-park facility has produced a benefit when most of the outlay still be even re-covered let alone turned into profit. When thy pier be no more than a short (dry) walk out to sea & back. Has other areas of Boscombe been brought up to date, Nah.
Yet again would be the time and occasion to re-open ‘Weights Elephant’ with the very man himself (Mr Weight) surrounded by thy Brethrens PSHs who continually praise their success, after all where be the shame in ‘bathing’ in such glory?
reefwatching
says...
11:16am Tue 15 Jun 10
Naming it Weight’s Reef will also serve the town of Bournemouth with a fitting reminder of what happens when the council submits to the will of a small pressure group, and bypasses the dreaded red tape of the normal checks and procedures into spending such large amounts of public money. The council, with Dave at their side, courageously ignored several warnings from naysayers claiming a wealth of experience or knowledge, but who were plainly intent of only denying Dave his moment of glory.
I for one would fully support a plaque being placed on the reef in a long-lasting ceremony starting at low tide, the only respite from it producing ‘world-class’ waves, attended by all those associated with the triumph of Weight’s Reef!
sherlock_holmes
says...
10:03pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
12:57pm Wed 16 Jun 10
Again excellent comments from both of ye, I know there be many a stalwart Brethren out there in full agreement with yer thinkings.
With respect I not sure if placing the commemorative plaque ‘on’ Weights Reef would be permanent or stable enough a site? Given the deteriorating speed of ‘Weights Elephant’ but how ironic if it were to wash up on a beach in Newquay Har
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
4:24pm Thu 17 Jun 10
My scribe just mentioned that he no longer be able to make contact with yer ‘Wessex Surf Club’ with his new ‘tekkie’ thingy and gather information that do relate to Mr Weights accepted ‘invitation’ to visit Mr Kerry Black.
I will stand to be corrected but me scribe do remember reading Mr Weights and friends/colleague glowing reports on their return and be about posting it on Wessex Surf Clubs web page!! Have anyone else had such ‘connection’ problems or be it me scribes ‘arthritic digits’ no longer seaworthy.
reefwatching
says...
5:14pm Thu 17 Jun 10
Rather amusingly, I do remember the aforementioned gentlemen commenting that the waves on the Narrowneck reef weren’t up to much during his visit, but this was of course fully explained by……can’t quite remember now, but it was one of the usual excuses that are now being used for all of the other reefs that don’t work either.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
11:47am Fri 18 Jun 10
Thank ye right kindly fer thou reply, me scribe be most insistent that I read yer message back to him (it his way of proving to me his digits still be in good function) we do recollect some mention of a ‘planet?’ or heaven on earth? But such memories may well have bin the result of too much ‘grog’ as me scribe still not able to view Wessex Surf Club WebPages and verify Mr Weights account of it.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
12:06pm Fri 18 Jun 10
whingeyminge wrote:Ahoy ‘whingeyminge’
Oh yes . You try to get a nice bowl of stew down there Cathy. I asked for one and well they looked at me like I came from another planet. Fancy food that's all they have. Who's going to come to visit a place like that.
Plain food is what people want. Ahab knows - ham egg and chips - that's a nice meal, on some decent china and a table with a lace tablecloth. That's what you get in the navy isn't it Ahab.
I do right apologise fer not replying to thee at earlier stages and whilst our ‘agendas’ do appear to differ yer comments, when read aloud to me crew, do cause many a ripple of mirth onboard. As fer ham, egg and chips that be a luxury only sampled yet readily scoffed when ashore. Our usual fare be either salted or dried foodstuffs so ye have near caused a mutiny at the mention of ham, egg and chips, even me aged scribe be ‘salivating’ now Har.
sherlock_holmes
says...
2:18pm Fri 18 Jun 10
.
"the supporter triP"
.
all leading to one big "trip up" that has become one big bad trip for everyone.
Capt. Ahab (ret.)
says...
2:54pm Sat 19 Jun 10
Me scribe and me crew do appreciate what ye say but me aged scribe do wonder if it be his fingers thats be suffering that NOT enable him to contact Wessex Surf Clubs webpage on his new 'thingy keypad' and he/we be wondering IF another Brethren has tried to make similar contact and bin 'refused' a connection, if so then I do wonder why??
sherlock_holmes
says...
10:15am Sun 20 Jun 10
all gone to the island in the sun?
(now that the pier has problems as well). You havent had any enquiries for a charter to down under lately?
More Surf Reef stories
- Researchers look into value of £3m Boscombe surf reef
- Boscombe surf reef: Marine firms claim ASR owes them £60,000
- Sub-contractor wins county court judgement against ASR
- Boat strike at surf reef is no longer ‘clear cut’
- £150,000 in reserve cash being spent on surf reef
- ASR to come back in 2012 to improve surf reef
- Handling of surf reef not been our 'finest hour'
- Future of Boscombe surf reef hangs in balance
- Weather delays surf reef repairs
- Work begins on Boscombe Surf Reef
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
woolamai says...
5:43pm Wed 9 Jun 10