Category Archives: Tourism

How low can you get?

Here’s a report from Hawthorn about Shannon water levels; here is a press statement from a political chap on the matter [PDF]; here is a post showing quite how important agriculture is to the Irish economy.

In brief: it isn’t. As Constantin Gurdgiev says:

[…] Irish agriculture is an extension of the welfare state, in so far as most of the value added in it is provided for by the subsidies.

Given that the sector as a whole includes the relatively small number of productive farms, the value of marginal farms may well be negative. Those occupying such land should be encouraged to abandon it and to take up some more productive activity elsewhere; Mongolia seems like a good bet. Activities designed to help the landlords to continue to pretend to be engaged in an economic activity are a waste of resources.

The Ulster Orangeway

I am happy to say that the ineffable Professor Billy McWilliams [Visitin’ Lekturer at the Ulster Scots School o’ Dancin’, Ballymena] has provided the answer to one of WI’s problems. I have pointed out that a walking route along the Clones Sheugh would be much cheaper than a restored canal; Professor McWilliams has shown how to make such a route more attractive to members of the Ulster-Scots Community. WI could adopt his idea from Comber and declare the route to be the Ulster Orangeway.

The decreasing importance of cruising

I wrote here about the continuing decline in the numbers of boats recorded as passing through locks (and moveable bridges) on the Shannon. For the first five months of the year, the total number of recorded passages was jusst over half what it was in 2003. Maybe the current hot weather will increase the numbers, but the long-term trend has been downward for ten years, despite a Celtic-Tiger-inspired spike in usage by private boats.

I don’t know to what extent that decline affects Waterways Ireland’s policy-making. Are the hundreds of economists, marketing gurus, MBAs and other high-powered bods in WI’s marketing department engaged in a major search for new and profitable markets? Certainly its sponsorship programme [can’t find info on the WI website], its lists of events and its descriptions of activities are much broader in scope than mere boating, and even within that category small-boat activities are prominent.

WI is cooperating with other official bodies in developing walking [h/t Industrial Heritage Ireland] and cycling routes [h/t KildareStreet] and. with the Irish Sports Council and Irish Leisure Consultants, it has recently published A Guide to Planning and Developing Small Vessel Water Trails in Ireland [PDF]. WI does not, as far as I know, have a strategy for promoting increasing use of its waterways by cruising boats (private or hired), although I’d be happy to be corrected about that if I’m wrong.

All of this is good stuff, and I’m all in favour of widening the, er, user base (apart from those events for which people dress in fluorescent underwear and run around the streets: I share the late Mrs Patrick Campbell’s concern for the horses).

But three points strike me. The first is that the older waterways businesses — hotel boats, hire firms, marinas — involved capital investment and created reasonable numbers of jobs. I do not know whether Waterways Ireland measures employment, or other economic benefits, as an output of its sponsorship, marketing and organisational activities but it seems to me that it would be nice if it were able to show that the benefits outweigh the costs. It would also be interesting to know to what extent the newer activities can profitably attract tourists from overseas: with the water trails, for instance, is it possible for anyone to make a profitable business out of overseas visitors, given the costs of marketing and selling, or are these trails purely for the domestic market?

The second point is that one sector, that of professional event organisers, may indeed be benefiting from WI’s support. But if that disempowers local or voluntary groups, renders them unable to run events without professional assistance or makes the cost of doing so too high, it may not be an unmixed blessing.

The third is that there is a representative body for owners of inland cruising boats, but these new activities do not have inland-waterway-specific user bodies (if they have user bodies at all). That, I think, must make for a different type of relationship between the service provider, Waterways Ireland, and the users: most inland cruiser owners have nowhere else to go, but canoeists or anglers or walkers can easily switch to the sea or to non-WI inland waters, so WI has to compete for their custom.

This piece is written not to provide answers but to ask some questions.

 

 

No worst, there is none.

Pitched past pitch of grief,
More pangs will, schooled at forepangs, wilder wring.
Comforter, where, where is your comforting?

And no more licensed marked fuel traders [.xls] on the Shannon either.

The Exchequer Bill Loan Commission

I noted the other day that the North South Ministerial Council’s inland waterways meeting discussed how it might get the Irish government off the hook of its rash promise to fund the Clones Sheugh. It noted that:

[…] sponsor departments have agreed to examine the potential social benefits and leveraged funding opportunities in that context.

The interesting point is that the blasted thing wonderful investment opportunity was originally funded, using the same excuse, by a loan from the Exchequer Bill Loan Commission set up under the Poor Employment Act 1817. John Strettell Brickwood, Secretary to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners for Public Works [sic], said* that the Commission’s first £1.5 million was allocated in 1817 and that by 1835 £5.5 million had been advanced.

Of that, £200,000 (at 3¼% interest) was allocated to Ireland in 1827 and the Ulster Canal was allocated £120,000 of that; it drew down £40,000 in 1833 and the same again in 1835. Mr Blackwood said that the Ulster Canal money was issued under an express act of parliament, leaving the commissioners no discretion. There would be no repayment until the canal was complete, with the interest and principal payable only from the prospective income.

Isn’t economic development wonderful?

First and Second Reports from the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the amount of advances made by the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland with the Minutes of Evidence, Appendix and Index Ordered, by the House of Commons, to be Printed, 26 June and 27 August 1835

 

 

 

Wireless telegraphy

I mentioned here that I thought that, during the major search operation on Lough Derg on 21 June 2013, life would have been easier for everybody if each boat had had a handheld VHF and someone able to operate it. However, I should make it clear that I don’t know what equipment and what sort of organisation and safety procedures the rowing group had, so I’m not going to comment on them. Instead, I’m going to make a general point about what I think are obstacles to the more widespread use of VHF.

Buying a set

Handheld VHF sets can be bought for as little as £50 in the UK or €75 in Ireland. So the technology is now very cheap and, for short range work as on Lough Derg, a handheld VHF should be adequate.

So let’s say you do a bit of searching on tinterweb, say half an hour or so; you find a cheap set from a reliable retailer, give your credit card details and then sit back and wait for the set to be delivered. Elapsed time less than a week, your time say half an hour, the price from say €75 upwards. Getting the hardware is easy and cheap: quite a change from when the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1926 (still applicable) was passed.

But if you want to be legally entitled to use a VHF set, matters are much more complicated.

Hunt the department

Let us suppose that you are a poor benighted foreigner who has decided to hire a boat on the Shannon. You know there is Coast Guard VHF cover there and you think that it would be sensible to bring your handheld set and use it while in Ireland. But, being a poor benighted foreigner, you want to do it all legally.

Your first challenge is to find which Irish government department deals with the matter. Maybe it’s the Department of Communications? You have an old booklet somewhere saying its full name is the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, which sounds promising. However, you notice that the department seems to have dropped “marine” for “energy” and searching its site for “marine vhf” returns no results.

If, at this point, you were tempted to look at the website of the Commission for Communications Regulation, and thought of looking under Radio Spectrum/Licensing, you would find a link that took you to the right place. But let’s suppose instead that, in reviewing an official list of Irish government departments, you noticed that the word “marine” is now (for some reason) part of the title of the Department of Agriculture, along with “food”.

So you troll on over to the farmers’ friends. The main headings on the site’s front page don’t include marine, though; fisheries is the closest topic. If you use the search facility to find “marine” you get 10800 results, which is rather too many to be useful, but you find that there is a Marine Agencies and Programmes Division, which has a list of Useful Links. Unfortunately none of them are to the department that actually deals with most marine matters: the Department of Transport [and Tourism and Sport], which is at both www.transport.ie and www.dttas.ie.

Things are looking up.

Hunt the unit

Your next challenge is to find the section or unit within the Department of Transport Etc that looks after marine VHF. You could use the department’s search engine, which (at least on my computer) is great for showing the word “Loading” but not for anything else. Or you could click on the word “Maritime”, which takes you to a page whereon you read:

Maritime Safety Directorate (MSD)

The Maritime Safety Directorate (MSD) is comprised of two main sections; the Marine Survey Office (MSO) which includes the Marine Radio Affairs Unit (MRAU) and the Maritime Safety Policy Division (MSPD).

Sure enough, clicking on Maritime Safety Directorate in the left-hand column gives you another page whereon you read:

The Maritime Safety Directorate comprises of two main sections: the Maritime Safety Policy Division (MSPD) and the Marine Survey Office (MSO), which includes the Marine Radio Affairs Unit (MRAU). The Mercantile Marine Office (MMO) also works to the Directorate.

This doesn’t quite correspond to the list of headings in the left-hand column on that page, which makes no mention of a Maritime Safety Policy Division and has lots of other stuff that doesn’t seem to fit in the two (and a half?) main sections, but at least there is a link for the Marine Survey Office (MSO), and on that page there is a link to the Maritime Radio Affairs Unit (MRAU), so you click that and finally you’ve arrived.

Hunt the information

The MRAU has a top-level page and two lower-level pages. The top-level page has an email address, which is good, and a list (dated 6 April 2011) of nine PDFs of Marine Notices relevant to radio. They are identified by numbers rather than by names: there is nothing to indicate what any of them is about,  so the eager seeker after knowledge will have to read all of them. Some are about EPIRBs and suchlike; as far as I can see, the only three relevant to our poor benighted foreigner, wanting to use a handheld VHF, are this one [PDF], that one [PDF] and the other one about fees [PDF].

Selecting the Contact Us page gives you names and phone numbers as well as email addresses. So the page with the detailed information must be the other one headed Forms (and not this one, which seems to be orphaned). Each of the links on the Forms page takes you, for some reason, to another page, from which you can download a document: most are indeed PDFs but two are Word DOC files.

The documents cover three topics:

Thre is also e FAQ [PDF], which outlines the rules. It also suggests that one document is missing from those downloadable: it may be called Ships Radio
Operators Certification and may be an application form.

The FAQ does not explain the different types of licences that are mentioned in Marine Notice 35 of 2010:

An Irish Certificate of Equivalent Competency (CEC) or Irish Certificate of  Competence (COC) issued by the Department of Transport, Ireland, when such
certificate states that the holder has a valid Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS), General Operator Certificate (GOC) or Restricted Operator Certificate (ROC) qualification. An Irish CEC or Irish COC must be accompanied by the persons separate valid GMDSS, GOC or ROC qualification.

I have no idea whether I have a CEC, a GOC, a ROC or a … the other thing. And I can’t make out which of them a new applicant (or a poor benighted foreigner) should apply for.

Then Marine Notice 12 of 2004 adds another variant, the SRC:

Radio Operators on board Irish recreational craft, and on board certain other Irish craft  that are required to comply with Merchant Shipping legislation regarding the carriage of maritime radio equipment, must hold as a minimum qualification the Radio Operator’s Short Range Certificate of Competency(SRC) issued by the Commission for Communications Regulation, or an equivalent certificate that is recognised by the Commission as being the equivalent of the Irish SRC.

Is ComReg still involved? I didn’t think so.

But the main point of this marine notice is to say that the only poor benighted foreigners whose short range certificates of competency are recognised in Ireland are the Finns and the Germans; only they can get the Authority to Operate. What should other foreigners do? I don’t know and I can’t see the answer anywhere.

Information

So far, then, it seems to me that (for someone outside the system) it is hard to find the bit of the Irish government web presence that holds the information. (That, of course, is not the fault of the Department of Transport.) Once you’ve got to the relevant part of the Department of Transport website, you have to read far too many documents to find the information you want; it’s not easy to understand and it may be incomplete.

Getting a certificate and a licence

As far as I can see, the process is this:

  • attend a course from one of the approved providers [DOC]. It’s not clear to me which course our poor benighted foreigner [or other would-be operator] would have to do; BIM offers courses ranging from two to ten days, but doesn’t show the costs; I suspect that courses for pleasure-boat operators, especially those from private-sector providers, take rather less time, but I don’t know the cost. The elapsed time could be several months, depending on local supply of and demand for courses
  • take an exam from one of the approved examiners [DOC]. Again, I don’t know the duration (it used to be less than half a day), the cost or the elapsed time (how long you would have to wait until a course is available locally). As far as I can see, the syllabus is not published, so you have no choice but to go to one of the approved providers; that sounds like an anti-competitive practice
  • apply to the department for a certificate. That, it seems, has to be done on paper; the fee [PDF] depends on the certificate you need, which I don’t know, but is either €50 or €60
  • when you’ve got the certificate, you apply for a licence for your, er, ship, using this form [PDF] and paying €100. You give details of the radio operator’s certificate; if it’s a non-Irish certificate you provide a copy, and I guess that you have already applied for an Authority to Operate [PDF].

So your cost is €150 or €160 plus the course fee plus the exam fee; the elapsed time could be several months. All for permission to operate a piece of equipment that is rather less complex than a modern smartphone.

Costs and benefits

Years ago, there was some abuse of VHF channels, which were sometimes used for casual chit-chat. From what I can hear, that is no longer a problem; folk probably send text messages instead. I don’t see any reason to fear an increase in the number of VHF users, and indeed I see many reasons to promote such an increase.

Some of the recent reports of the Marine Casualty Investigation Board on small-boat accidents describe cases in which handheld VHFs could have summoned assistance faster — and would, I think, have been more useful than orange smoke flares. In other cases, folk summoning assistance have relied on mobile phones.

It seems to me that the present system, designed almost ninety years ago for an entirely different context, for large and cumbersome equipment on large vessels, is unsuited to modern leisure boating, with large numbers of small boats that could carry small, cheap, battery-powered handheld VHF sets.

At present, the rational decision for a boat-owner is to buy a cheap VHF without bothering to get either a certificate for the operator or a licence for the vessel. This is the rational decision because the official channels for getting certificates and licences are slow, expensive and cumbersome. It may therefore be — who knows? — that the populace has already decided to ignore the regulations.

For leisure boating within some sensible distance of the shore, I suggest that the current regulations be either drastically simplified or, perhaps better, scrapped altogether. That might mean giving the International Telecommunication Union a kick up the transom, but the present system is counterproductive: it seems to limit the use of handheld VHFs in cases where they could be very useful, if only to allow search and rescue volunteers to stand down earlier.

 

Searching Lough Derg

Last Friday evening, 21 June 2013, was not a good time to be out on Lough Derg. We were heading north, with the waves behind us, and had little difficulty until entering port, but we could hear on the VHF what must have been one of the biggest search and rescue operations on the Shannon in recent years.

We had switched on at what seemed like a fairly early point in the proceedings, and kept listening until the Coast Guard were assured that everybody was accounted for. We weren’t able to attend to the whole thing, as manoeuvres during and after berthing occupied our attention for some time, but we got a pretty clear picture. The Irish Times report (which will probably disappear behind a paywall at some stage) is here; I think it has some minor details wrong but the gist of it is correct; its later report is here. The Clare Herald has a very detailed account here, the Clare Champion account is here and the Limerick Post adds some information here.

The event was said by the Irish Times to be “hosted for FISA in Ireland by St Michael’s Rowing Club of Limerick” but I can’t see anything about it on either organisation’s website. I presume that the boats were something like this one.

Quad at Clonlara in 2011

It’s a quad, with each rower using two oars; it carries a cox and it’s used for touring rowing, so it’s not as slim as a standard racing shell.

By the way, just to be clear, none of the photos on this page were taken during last Friday’s operation.

RNLI Lough Derg lifeboat

From what we could hear, the operation involved volunteers from Killaloe Coast Guard, the RNLI at Dromineer, the Community Rescue Boats from Mountshannon and Limerick and at least one yacht, which (I think) took one of the rowing boats in tow; that yacht’s participation and careful provision of information to the Coast Guard was admirable.

Killaloe Coast Guard RIB

Killaloe Coast Guard RIB

We heard discussion of proposals to ask the Civil Defence to participate as well, and the Clare Herald confirms they did turn out. It seems that the University of Limerick Activity Centre boat was out too, as was Peter Hooker of RNLI in his own boat.

Limerick Marine SAR Land Rover

Limerick Marine SAR Land Rover

That’s just the volunteers, and if I’ve left anybody out I’m sorry; let me know and I’ll amend this.

Then there were the professionals: the Coast Guard staff on VHF, the Gardaí on shore, the helicopter crew. And, again, the Clare Herald makes it clear that lots of other people were involved too: fire brigade and ambulance units, paramedics and a hospital consultant.

All in all, this was a major operation and a lot of people put in a lot of effort that night, in bloody awful weather.

Communications

I formed the impression that communication amongst the members of the rowing fleet, and between them and the rescue services, was poor. It was difficult to establish what rowers were where and how many were unaccounted for. The Clare Herald story seems to support that conclusion: it says that Gardaí had to travel to the rowers’ hotel to make sure that everybody had turned up and that the search was not formally stood down until 11.30pm.

I don’t know what communications equipment and what sort of organisation and safety procedures the rowing group had, so I’m not going to comment on them. Instead, I want to go off at a tangent. It struck me that life would have been easier for everybody if each boat had had a handheld VHF and someone able to operate it. Such sets can be bought for as little as £50 in the UK or €75 in Ireland.

So the technology is now very cheap and, for short range work as on Lough Derg, a handheld VHF should be adequate. But if you want to be legally entitled to use a VHF set, matters are much more complicated. I’ll discuss that in another post.

The multitudinous seas incarnadine …

… making the green one read? The green one being the list of licensed marked fuel (green diesel) traders [xls], which shows no new licensed traders on the Shannon, the Erne or (since list week’s addition of Lowtown Marine) the Grand Canal.

News from the NSMC

The communiqué from the North South Ministerial Council inland waterways meeting held on 19 June 2013 is here. This is my selection of the interesting bits.

The NSMC got reports on WI’s additional moorings (368m during some unspecified period), sponsorship programme, maintenance (“with 99.8% of waterways remaining open during the month of April”), publications (food guide and What’s On 2013) and website.

The WI business plan for 2012 was approved, which seems a bit pointless in the middle of 2013. A budget of €31.15m (£27.10m) was approved for an unspecified year. Then there’s this oddity:

5. They also noted progress on the development of the 2013 Business Plan and budget. Following approval by Sponsor Departments and Finance Ministers the plan will be brought forward for approval at a future NSMC meeting.

This is the middle of 2013. The next NSMC inland waterways meeting will be held in September 2013. What is the point of approving the budget and business plan for 2013 three quarters of the way through the year?

And another point: why is it taking so long? My guess is that, if things were running smoothly, and allocations were easy, the work would have been finished by now, so I deduce that WI’s budget is under pressure, with consequences for its future activity and thus its business plan.

The NSMC “noted” WI’s annual report and draft accounts for 2012; they’re not on its website, so presumably someone else has to note them as well before they can be published.

The unfortunate Bastables seeking treasure to pay for the Clones Sheugh had their second meeting in May 2013 (their first was in September 2012). In the absence of any GB, and with half-sovereigns rather scarce, the Bastables have adopted the “Lo! the poor Indian” strategy:

[…] sponsor departments have agreed to examine the potential social benefits and leveraged funding opportunities in that context.

The NSMC decided that Waterways Ireland won’t have a Board but will think about governance again some time. And it appointed Dawn Livingstone as WI CEO.

Bottles in Limerick

Limerick has a new Economic and Spatial Plan, with lots of downloadable files and the general tone of a letter to Santa Claus. It has lots of adjectives, though, and fashionable concepts; all it lacks is money.

It wants a renaissance of the Limerick waterfront. It seems, though, that that doesn’t mean lots of dockers unloading timber, turf boats from Poulnasherry Bog, ships taking the ground at low tide, gales throwing vessels against the bridge, mills at Curragour, tolls on the bridges or other features of past life along the quays. Instead there will be things like this:

A New Public Waterfront

 Arthur’s Quay Park will be transformed into a signature Waterfront public space that draws visitors, hosts special events and provides a key stopping point within the City Centre and along the Waterfront and Riverwalk;

 This new Riverside Park will run the length of the City Centre from Sarsfield Bridge through where Sarsfield House currently stands, along between the Hunt Museum and the River and over a new pedestrian bridge into a pedestrianised Potato Market area linking up to the upgraded King John’s Castle tourist attraction;

 A new appropriately sized iconic building could be developed in the new Riverside Park on the former Dunnes Stores Site to accommodate tourism/cultural uses;

 New landscape, trees, surfaces, lighting, furniture, public art and interpretation should be structured to create a landmark WaterfrontPark, designed to international standards reflecting the prominence of this location within Limerick;

 A new space should be defined to host public events including celebrations, performance, festivals and start and finish points to Limerick based marathons and races;

 Clear, high quality pedestrian connections from Patrick Street and O’Connell Street and Henry Street would draw people to the Park;

 Signage and materials should identify the water’s edge as part of the continuous Riverwalk linking bridges across the Shannon and the two sides of the Shannon River;

 A new public open space should be created at the Sarsfield House site in the event of government office relocation, to reveal the view north along the Shannon to King’s Island from the City Centre and extend Arthur’s Quay Park;

 The Waterfront and public space at the Hunt Museum should be strengthened to provide an intimately scaled green space with external seating from the Hunt Museum restaurant and destination in its own right along the Riverwalk.

What is being proposed here (page numbered 99; page 124 of 172 in An Economic and Spatial Plan for Limerick [PDF]) is that Sarsfield House should be demolished and the area above the Custom House moorings would be opened up, with citizens not just permitted but encouraged to enter. Later on (page 108; PDF page 133 of 172) we read this:

Limerick Quays will be defined as the principal visitor and entertainment zone in the City  Centre – passive and active – accommodating a new visitor destination, walking, as well as eating and drinking in bars and restaurants that will activate the quays overlooking the River. This will be fully pedestrianised.

Now, that’s all very nice in theory, but what it means in practice is that any boats moored at the only safe moorings in Limerick, at Custom House Quay, will be within range of any bottles that may be thrown by the less domesticated portion of the citizenry, on their way home from getting tanked up in the bars and restaurants.

But perhaps the planners have thought of that and solved it in their own way. Figure 36: City Centre Proposals – Aerial View 1 on page 116 (141/172) is an aerial photo with coloured bits added; it shows the Custom House moorings. But Figure 37: City Centre Proposals – Aerial View 2 on page 117 (142/172), taken from a different angle, shows the pontoon at the corner of the weir, and the water space in the corner behind the Custom House, but the mooring pontoons have disappeared.