Contact: Tony Clatworthy, tel 01489 576387

email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The River Hamble supports six fishing boats, all under 12 metres, which are moored mid-stream on a pontoon off Warsash. Their main catch depends on the season but varies from netting white fish to cockles, mussels, whelks, oysters, crabs and squid. The working fleet in the Hamble has declined over the last ten years in line with the trend shown with this type of vessel working in the Solent. The Solent is the largest natural oyster bed in Europe and has witnessed the decline in vessels of the kind operating from Hamble. The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' (DEFRA) Shellfish Licensing Scheme is now encouraging longevity of the fleet.

1.2 The facilities for landing this type of catch at Warsash is minimal and creates a risk for the fishermen and other river users with the current methods used. The transfer of the catch is normally carried out in the dark with minimal lighting aboard the small tenders used by the fishermen. The risk of collision, swamping or sinking is very high and mainly occurs during the transfer of the catch by tender to the slipway at Warsash from the mid-stream fishermen's pontoon, a total distance of 350 metres. On occasions nets of shellfish are dumped on the slipway at high tide from the boats and retrieved later at low water. During transfer and landing of the catch the danger to navigation and the risk to the fishermen is unacceptably high and these dangers increase after dusk. Seafish, having completed a risk assessment of the current situation, stated that "the risk factor therefore is rated as high and must be attended to".

1.3 A proposed landing jetty at Warsash would improve the facilities available for fishermen and also reduce the risk of collision, swamping or sinking of vessels during transfer of the catch. It would also improve the quality of the product as it would not be handled as frequently.

1.4 Fishing vessels constantly use the Harbour Master's (HM) jetty to lay alongside for repairs and maintenance, taking up space on the outside of the jetty. The storage of fishermen's tenders on the inside of the HM jetty takes space from other users. This area has become overcrowded and is causing damage to tenders and the jetty.

1.5 The report written by Seafish on the proposed landing facilities for commercial fishing vessels at Warsash on the River Hamble, Hampshire will be available at the meeting (Report number CR203 dated June 2004.)

2. Permission

2.1 The Harbour Authority will be applying to Fareham Borough Council, the Marine Consents and Environment Unit, DEFRA, Trinity House Light House Service and the Department for Transport for planning permission for the development and extension of the pontooning and piling at Warsash Slipway.

2.2 Consent may be granted by the Harbour Authority permitting harbour works in the navigation of the River Hamble to accord with the Southampton Harbour Act 1924 and 1949, as amended by the River Hamble Harbour Revision Orders 1969 to 1989. Within the Harbour Authority's statutory duties lie the responsibilities to ensure that all matters concerning navigational safety are addressed. This area of responsibility includes the area known as Warsash Slipway.

2.3 The Fishermen's pontoon would be a responsibility of Hampshire County Council and therefore would need to fall under the County Council's self-insurance scheme.

3. Financial Implications

3.1 Financial implications associated with the installation of Fisherman's Jetty are divided into three headings.

(i) Build and Installation Cost

This has been assessed as £40,000 to £45,000, of which 50% will be a grant from the EU and 50% will come from Hampshire County Council. The Sea Fish Industry Authority has indicated that it would recommend seeking a grant of 50% of the cost of the project from European Funding. The grant would be applied for under the `Improving of Fishing Port Facilities' and aid will be available for "capital investments which are of collective interest to fishermen using the port". The project must contribute to the development of the port and represent an improvement of services offered to fishermen. Investments may be single projects or parts of an overall harbour development and must comprise, in respect of the port concerned, coordinated investment designed to bring about a lasting improvement in conditions for the landing and initial sale of fish and contribute to lasting economic benefits or improve safety conditions. Projects must be substantiated on the basis of the benefits to the fishing industry and priority will be given to projects which:

(a) contribute to the general development of the port and to the improvement of services offered to fishermen;

(b) improve the conditions under which fishery products are landed, handled and stored in ports;

(c) support fishing vessels' activities (provision of repair and maintenance of vessels); and

(d) improve jetties with a view to improving safety during the landing or loading of products.

Projects undertaken for the collective good of the fishing industry could qualify for a Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) grant at a rate of 25% to 50%. The balance of the project costs would have to be met by a public authority. DEFRA will not be providing national back-up funding for this measure. The South East Fishing Development Agency has advised a 50% grant would be available if the County Council provided a matching 50% funding. The possibility of a bid against the Coastal Budget (Policy and Resources) is in the process of being investigated during the period of the production of this report.

(ii) Maintenance Costs

Maintenance costs would be paid from a maintenance budget set aside from funds collected from visiting fishing vessels and an added fee of £100 to each resident fishing boat. It has been estimated that £1,000 each year will be collected and set aside for maintenance. The maintenance costs have been estimated as: none for the first two years, then approximately £300 to £350 each year, with a total rebuild required after 25 years. There will be a shortfall after 25 years of approximately £30,000 for the rebuild cost at today's prices. The situation regarding funding would again have to be explored.

(iii) Services Supply

Services such as power and fresh water will be supplied but will be paid for by the users either by a card/electronic system or coin box operation.

4. Insurance

4.1 The Harbour Authority will be taking on the management of the maintenance of the jetty and therefore it has been confirmed, from Legal Practice, that the County Council's self insurance will need to cover the jetty.

5. Legal Implications

5.1 Consents may be granted by the Harbour Authority permitting harbour works under Section 10 of the Southampton Harbour Act 1924 and Section 48 of the Southampton Harbour Act 1949, as amended by the River Hamble Harbour Revision Order 1969 to 1989. Within the Harbour Authority's statutory duties lie the responsibilities to ensure that all matters concerning navigational safety are addressed.

5.2 Previous legal advice was given that consents should be sought from the Regulatory Committee and a decision was made on 14 September authorising this. Subsequently, it has been advised that the decision should be made by the Executive Member, therefore this report is being submitted for decision.

6. Operational Risk Assessment

6.1 An operational risk assessment is attached to this report showing any predicted risk that may occur following the completion of the project.

8868A/TC

RIVER HAMBLE HARBOUR AUTHORITY

PORT MARINE SAFETY CODE

RISK ASSESSMENT REPORT

(Proposed Development)

FISHERMEN'S JETTY

ADJACENT

to the

SLIPWAY at WARSASH

16 August 2004

1. INTRODUCTION

The Government looks to all Harbour Authorities to implement the requirements of the Port Marine Safety Code (The Code). The Code is intended to apply to all Harbour Authorities to the extent that they have duties and powers relating to marine safety.

It is particularly directed at Harbour Authorities and to Directors, Commissioners or Trustees who are members of the boards of such Harbour Authorities. The Code is not optional it applies to ports of all sizes, irrespective of resources or levels of traffic.

The Code represents the national standard against which policies, procedures and performance of Harbour Authorities may be measured. It is obligatory for the purpose of meeting the standard in the Code that measures are taken to reduce all risks associated with port marine operations to As Low As Reasonably Practical (ALARP).

2. SCOPE

The Code does not apply to duties and powers other than those related to marine operations. Marine operations are those that facilitate the safe use of a harbours by vessels. They include the direction of shipping and the regulation of safety of navigation in a harbour and the maintenance of aids to navigation within the jurisdiction of a harbour.

3. BACKGROUND

The production of a risk assessment to investigate the proposed development at Stone Pier Yard led to the discovery of the possibility of a fatal consequence to people. (Serial 18) The Harbour Master has therefore further investigated the current practices employed within the area, which allows a comparison of the risks to be undertaken.

4. RISK ASSESSMENT

The Code requires that each Harbour Authority assess risks associated with marine operations and manages those risks to reduce them to As Low As Reasonably Possible (ALARP). Risk assessment is an ongoing process to this end the risk assessment has been carried out by the Harbour Master to consider the risks associated within the main channel and the immediate area around Stone Pier Yard.

5. DEFINITIONS

For the purpose of this report the following definitions will apply:

A hazard is anything that can cause harm to a person, property or the environment;

A risk is the chance, high or low, that a person, property or the environment will be harmed by the hazard.

6. METHODOLOGY

To assess risks in The River Hamble four steps are followed:

1. Hazards are identified;

2. The consequence of the hazard materialised are assessed;

3. The risk and existing precautions are evaluated;

4. The findings are recorded.

It is also recognised that provision must be made to review and revise this assessment as necessary.

The aim of the risk assessment is to ensure that all of the significant hazards (potential accidents) associated with marine operations are identified and quantified in terms of risk to people, property and/or the environment.

This information provides an essential input to the continual development of The River Hamble Harbour Authority Safety Management System and will be used by the Harbour Authority as a rational basis on which to decide priorities and to set objectives for eliminating hazards and or reducing risks to As Low As Reasonably Practical.

The risk assessment identifies each hazard and then categorises them as either a collision, contact, grounding or a swamping hazard:

Collision: Collision between two or more vessels which are underway, regardless of whether the vessel(s) are not under command or disabled in any way but excluding wrecks.

Contact A vessel striking, or being struck by, an external object or a vessel that is not underway (eg anchored or moored), excluding the sea bed.

Grounding: A vessel coming to rest on, or riding across, underwater features or objects.

Swamping: The excessive ingress of water over the gunwale of a vessel such that it becomes waterlogged and may sink.

An estimated degree of risk is assigned to each identified hazard to provide a relative rating between risks. The following scoring system has been applied:

LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE

CONSEQUENCE

Each hazard has been assigned a score of 1 to 5 for the "likelihood of occurrence" and a score of 1 to 5 for "consequence". The "risk rating" has then been obtained by multiplying the two scores together giving a maximum rating of 25. The higher the rating the more serious the potential consequences. Rating risks help to give an indication of their significance.

As a guide it is considered that any "risk rating" of 12 and above, is not ALARP and therefore additional precautions should be implemented to ensure compliance with the Code.

Risk assessment for the operation of the immediate area around the proposed fishermen's jetty and vessels approaching or departing from the jetty at Warsash

7. RESULT OF RISK ASSESSMENT AND RISK MANAGEMENT

Of the 14 identified hazards 2 obtained risk ratings that would indicate that they would not at present be ALARP.

The following table lists precautions that would be introduced to manage the identified risks and therefore reducing the Highest Risk Rating to ALARP. These are shown within ( ).

Precautions:

Control of entrance or departure to the River of all commercial craft. Commercial vessel deemed a danger will not be allowed entrance during periods of heavy volumes of traffic.

If necessary an escort will be given by the harbour patrol vessel.

Precautions:

Attendance at the time of the incident by Harbour Authority Staff and Patrol Boats.

Pre-planning, written and established actions that have been practiced by Harbour Authority staff.

Risk assessments written with action plan for the four emergency services that would attend such an incident.

Full consideration will be given to the precautions identified above, reducing the Highest Risk Rating to below 12.

8. CONCLUSION AND HARBOUR MASTERS RECOMMENDATIONS

Whilst the risk assessment indicates that the there is a risk that is not considered As Low As Reasonably Practical, by introducing the precautions identified above in section 7 serial 7 and 14, the risks can be managed and reduced to As Low As Reasonably Practical, this accords with the Port Marine Safety Code.

The Harbour Masters also makes the following recommendation and comments:

(i) Visiting larger passenger vessels such as "Leisure Scene" and other commercial traffic have controlled entry and would not be permitted during periods of heavy traffic.

(ii) The fore and aft moorings in the main channel do form a barrier and therefore produce a secondary channel but these moorings also become a danger owing to vessels hitting them and getting caught up on them.

(vii) These dangers only appear during periods of strong tides and/or heavy traffic in the main channel.

9. ONGOING RISK ASSESSMENTS

The assessments of risks is an ongoing process. This risk assessment will be regularly reviewed and updated and/or amended as appropriate. New risks that emerge as conditions or the use of the harbour change will be given immediate attention.

Risk assessment and the management of risks is a continual process.

A G Clatworthy

Harbour Master

18 August 2004