Hampshire County Council River Hamble Harbour Management Committee 3 July 2006 Two Yearly Navigational Safety Update Report Report of the Director of Environment

Item 9

Contact: Tony Clatworthy, tel 01489 576387

email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report follows a risk-based system as recommended in the Port Marine Safety Code; it proposes improvements to the navigational system for the River Hamble and provides a cost benefit analysis for the changes recommended. A navigational safety survey and associated report will in future be completed every two years.

1.2 The Port Marine Safety Code sets out procedures to be followed regarding consultation with interested parties. These procedures have been followed during the production of this report. Details of the process are given in Appendices 1 and 2.

2. Methodology

2.1 A holistic approach has been adopted for the survey and among the many reports and references taken into consideration are the following:

(i) Incidents: Inspection and review of the records of incidents within the River recorded over the last 12 months (Appendix 3).

(ii) Risk Assessments: Review the Safety Management System (Port Marine Safety Code) and its risk assessments noting any changes (Appendix 4).

(iii) Staff Meetings: Review of the minutes of staff meetings during the last 12 months.

(iv) Consultation Process: Appendices 1 and 2.

(v) Notice to River Users: Review of relevant Notices to River Users (NtRU). NtRU are available on the Harbour Authority website.

(vi) Marine Operations Safety Committee: Advice from the Marine Operations Safety Committee. This committee is chaired by the Harbour Master and the members include all Harbour Office staff, both administrative and operational.

(vii) Code of Practice for Racing, Regattas and Events Held in the River: Review of the Code of Practice.

(viii) Safety Management System Audits: Review of the Port Marine Safety Code Audits and Action Plans.

3. Navigational Safety Issues

3.1 For the purpose of this report the River has been divided into areas that follow a natural progression, starting at the River entrance and proceeding upstream. The results of the consultation, at Appendix 1, are used to highlight problems and concerns raised by River users for each of these sections of the River.

River Entrance

3.2 Speeding and Wash: There remains some concern about wash from larger boats affecting smaller boats and dinghies. Smaller craft are susceptible to wash, especially in shallow water at low tide in the river entrance. The Harbour Master has imposed a 6 knot speed limit which has been widely publicised. The Harbour Authority has established two signs on the piles at the entrance to the River and erected a large banner on the College jetty at Warsash. A further ten `6 Knot Speed Limit' signs have been located throughout the River. Twenty five speed limit and wash limit signs are displayed in marinas and boatyards. The radar speed gun is used to measure speed and as a tool to warn and educate.

3.3 Speeding vessels are frequently stopped by the patrol or reported to the Harbour Authority by River users and are naturally a concern for all in small boats. A possible way of enhancing boat owners' awareness of the 6 knot limit would be to inform them when they are given a licence or contract for a mooring. This could be achieved with the publication of a good quality leaflet made available to all River users.

3.4 Many River users misunderstand where the speed restriction starts. The main reason for this is that the 6 knot speed limit sign is located on the double piles at beacon No. 7. The location of the sign might lead skippers to believe that the restriction commences at that point. There are good reasons why it is placed at beacon No. 7 and changing its location would be costly (approximately £3,500). Removing the one pile and sign and re-positioning them at beacon No. 1 may not work as those entering the River from Southampton would not see the sign. The current sign can be seen by all, regardless of their direction of approach. A smaller sign has been placed on beacon No. 1, but is mostly ignored by speeding vessels. Positioning yet another sign at beacon No. 1 risks making the River entrance look more like a motorway.

3.5 Light Pollution: The sector light at Warsash Sailing Club suffers from competition from the street lighting along Shore Road. The Harbour Master is currently working with Hampshire County Council in an effort to reduce this effect. The new buoy No. 11, positioned under the white sector of the sector light, has helped the identification of the sector light.

3.6 New Buoyage System: The new buoyage system, buoys Nos. 11, 13 and 15, is proving to be an excellent investment and has undoubtedly improved ease of navigation and safety.

3.7 Removal of the seven fore and aft moorings off the Harbour Master's Jetty has opened the area up, making the approach to the Harbour Master's Jetty and Stone Pier Yard safer. The danger of vessels getting caught on the moorings has been removed and lines of sight are better. In particular, skippers of vessels in the main channel have a much clearer view of smaller boats operating in the area.

3.8 There is potential to locate another buoy, green No. 17, to better identify a safe approach to the upstream fore and aft moorings above the ferry hard. Establishing another buoy would cost approximately £2,000 (including purchase of the buoy, light, chains, sinkers, carriage and labour to establish on site). This action is recommended.

Warsash to Hamble

3.9 Dinghy racing and racing starts in the main channel and fairway - see paragraph 4.26 below.

3.10 The fore and aft moorings on the eastern side of the River tend to create a pinch-point. This is not considered to be a hazard at this time but will be monitored by the Harbour Patrols.

3.11 The proposed works at the Royal Southern Yacht Club will be the subject of further risk assessments once the proposed bridge design has been completed.

3.12 The location of Hamble Lifeboat causes some concern as it requires a long transit to exit the River. On some occasions when life is at risk the lifeboat departs at full speed, causing wash which is a danger to others. The Harbour Master would like to see the Hamble Lifeboat located closer to the entrance to the River. However, relocation would cause added logistical problems for the lifeboat crew. Problems include increased reaction time for the crew and finding a suitable location. The present location has also become somewhat traditional and even a visitor attraction on the Hamble foreshore.

Hamble to Mercury

3.13 This area is frequently used by small tenders which use the incorrect side of the main channel. The practice is looked upon by the Harbour Authority as extremely dangerous, causing conflict with larger vessels. Tenders are not easily observed from the steering position of a large yacht (any vessel over 30 feet) and are not easily observed by skippers departing from Port Hamble. Vessels orbiting the fuel barge are a danger to small tenders moving against the correct flow of traffic. In this area (as in all others) passage upstream must be made on the eastern (starboard) side of the River, in accordance with the Collision Regulations.

3.14 The `Boat Scrubber' installation has not had any adverse reports or any incidents recorded.

3.15 The `X' one-design keelboats (XODs) cause some concern when departing from or returning to their pontoon to the north of Hamble Yacht Services in low winds and strong tide. The Harbour Master would ideally like to see the pontoon for the XODs, which do not have engines, moved nearer to the mouth of the River.

3.16 The Fl. R. 4s. light on pile C15 is not bright enough and requires replacing with a stronger light. Fitting a standard two mile light will cost £300.

Mercury to Swanwick

3.17 Mercury Channel at Mercury Bend: Skippers proceeding downstream, at night, from Mercury Bend have difficulty in identifying the main channel after turning at the beacon. There is a tendency to move across to the Mercury marina side of the channel and confuse the two secondary channels as the main channel, even though there is a light indicating the port side edge of the channel (red Fl. 4s 2M) on the last pile of the G run (G68). It can be difficult to identify the light because of its characteristics (flashing every 4 seconds). On some occasions vessels have incorrectly chosen to proceed through the other channels on that side of the River.

3.18 Because skippers tend to come round the bend to the north of Mercury Marina, staying close to the marina, they see the red painted pile or, at night, the red flashing light quite late, allowing insufficient time to respond safely.

3.19 There are a number of options available to make this area safer, as detailed below:

(i) Change the light on G68 pile from a flash every four seconds to a quick flashing light, approximate cost £300.

(ii) Change the light on G68 pile from a flash every four seconds to a quick flashing light together with a starboard hand light on the last pile upstream before the bend, H50. This would form a `gateway' with port and starboard lights and marks, approximate cost £600.

(iii) Establish a red buoy with a red quick flashing light 70 metres upstream from pile G68 and 15 metres off the large Mercury hammerhead pontoon, approximate cost £2,100.

(iv) Establish a red buoy with a red quick flashing light 70 metres upstream from pile G68 and 15 metres off the large Mercury hammerhead pontoon together with a starboard hand light on the last pile upstream before the bend, H50. This would form a `gateway' with port and starboard lights and marks, approximate cost £2,400.

3.20 Option (ii) is recommended as the most suitable course of action because it gives a more distinctive characteristic on the port hand light and will help skippers to identify the mark more quickly. The proposed green light on the starboard side of the River (H50) will give a better indication of the `gateway' to the main channel. Further, the light on H50 could be partially obscured so it is not seen until the vessel has cleared the beacon on the bend. The total estimated cost for this option is £600 initially, repeated every five to six years when the lights would require replacement.

3.21 Establishing a buoy will be costly both for the initial purchase but also for predicted maintenance expenses. A buoy in that particular location would also restrict manoeuvring space for vessels entering or departing Mercury Marina.

Swanwick Bend and Beacon

3.22 Swanwick Bend is the most dynamic part of the River with regard to tidal flow. Skippers proceeding upstream from the Universal Channel, passing L32 and J27, have difficulty in identifying the port hand mark and light at Bursledon Bend. On some gloomy days the red pile is difficult to identify and therefore on occasions those not familiar with the river have experienced difficulties in picking out the correct channel. The red pile blends into the background and is not easily identified.

3.23 To overcome the problem of not being able to distinguish and identify the port hand beacon at Swanwick Bend it is recommended to establish a port hand top mark on the Swanwick port hand beacon and change the characteristic of the light from a red flash every four seconds to a quick flashing red light. Approximate cost £550, with an additional £300 every five to six years when the light requires replacement.

Swanwick to M27 Bridge

3.24 For information on the Safe Overhead Clearance (air draft) see Training paragraph 4.10 below.

3.25 Some mention has been made of a secondary channel between the A27 bridge and the railway bridge at Cabin Boatyard. Over eight years ago Cabin Boatyard was granted conditional Harbour Works consent to establish a pontoon bridge to the outer pontoon of Cabin Boatyard, thereby closing the inner channel. The pontoon was to be fixed in a manner allowing it to be moved if instructed to do so by the Harbour Authority.

3.26 Two mentions of this pontoon have been received: it was mentioned at the Annual Forum and the Harbour Master also received a telephone call about this subject. On both occasions the strength of the tide and the funnelling effect were mentioned. It was also considered that a secondary channel at this location would allow small boats to escape from the strong tide and other traffic in the main channel.

3.27 During the seven years that the pontoon has been in place, no incidents that could be associated with the installation have been recorded. Therefore the Harbour Master recommends that the pontoon remains in place but under the original conditions (that it can be removed easily if required).

3.28 The modernisation of Riverside Boatyard is likely to go ahead this year. The project will enhance this area of the River making navigation much easier. Once the marina has been completed and redundant moorings removed, a buoyage system for the area will be investigated.

3.29 Because of the dangers from children jumping from the A27 road bridge into the River, and because of a recent incident when equipment was thrown from the bridge, Notice to River Users 22 of 2006 was issued.

3.30 The work on the Railway Bridge is due to be completed in October 2006.

M27 and Upper Hamble

3.31 Harbour Patrols have been present in the Upper Hamble during busy summer weekends to ensure that wash and speeding are kept to a minimum. The Upper Hamble is enjoyed by many groups and would quickly become both dangerous and spoilt if the patrols ceased. The patrols allow River users to enjoy the quiet area without the excessive noise and wash of speeding boats.

3.32 Keeping a presence in the Upper Hamble during these summer weekends is not without its costs, not least to the budget for the employment of summer coxswains. Transit times to and from the area are lengthy and this makes the speedy re-deployment of assets difficult when higher priority tasks occur, see section 5 below.

Upper Hamble

3.33 The Harbour Master has received a number of requests from river users to establish beacons, piles or a buoyage system in the upper Hamble. The Harbour Master does not recommend such action for the following reasons:

(i) such markings would detract from the appearance and environment of the Upper Hamble;

(ii) much of the Upper Hamble is not navigable during periods of approximately three hours either side of low water. Thus, for much of the time any such markings would be meaningless and might give unfamiliar navigators a false sense of security; and

(iii) the channels shift frequently and any marks would have to be moved on a regular basis, which would be costly.

4. Other Areas of Concern

Fuel Barges and Fuelling Berths

4.1 It has been suggested that a better system of taking payment would speed up the re-fuelling process and therefore reduce the waiting period. This would reduce the number of vessels standing off in the channel, awaiting their turn. The Harbour Master will discuss this with the operators.

4.2 It has been suggested that a holding pontoon would reduce the number of orbiting boats waiting to use the facility. Again this is a matter for the operators.

Notice to River Users

4.3 All Notices to River Users concerning safety and navigational safety are available on the Harbour Authority website and the main NtRUs concerning safety of navigation are:

(i) 1 of 2006 Harbour Master Direction - 6 knot speed limit;

(ii) 2 of 2006 Recovery of Casualties Persons and Vessels;

(iii) 4 of 2006 VHF Radio Communications. Note: This will be amended to read `all commercial vessels over 35 feet';

(iv) 5 of 2006 Pollution Prevention and Waste Disposal;

(v) 6 of 2006 Lifeboat, Life Raft and Man Overboard Operations College Jetty;

(vi) 7 of 2006 Reporting Pollution;

(vii) 8 of 2006 Swimming;

(viii) 9 of 2006 Diving Regulations;

(ix) 10 of 2006 Maintenance Piles;

(x) 12 of 2006 Safety on the River Hamble;

(xi) 15 of 2006 RIB Accident Lock Lomond Safety and Vessel Maintenance;

(xii) 20 of 2006 Harbour Masters Direction - Collision Regulations;

(xiii) 21 of 2006 Reporting concerns Relating to Safety; and

(xiv) 22 of 2006 Dangerous Activities A27 Road Bridge.

Marks, Lights and Shapes, and Navigation Training

4.4 There have been requests from mooring and berth holders to erect notices and other street or traffic style signage in the River. There are many reasons not to proceed along that route and the Harbour Authority will only establish navigation marks and lights recognised within the IALA system and conforming with Hydrographic Office publications.

4.5 Moving away from a well-established and internationally recognised system would put River users in danger of collision from masters of visiting vessels who are not familiar with such a local scheme.

4.6 Any boat owner or skipper who does not believe they have sufficient knowledge to safely navigate using the approved system of markings should complete an appropriate Royal Yachting Association training course. Such training would not only be a benefit to understanding navigation but also establish an excellent foundation for seamanship and can only make leisure boating a safer activity for all who participate. Vessels which intend to navigate within Southampton Water, the Solent and beyond are recommended to carry aboard, and to be familiar with, the following publications ready for easy reference:

(i) Hydrographic Office Chart 5011 Symbols and Abbreviations used on Admiralty Charts;

(ii) A Seaman's Guide to The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea;

(iii) Hydrographic Office Chart 2022 (Harbours and Anchorages in the Eastern Solent Area), and 1905 (Southampton water and approaches); and

(iv) Reeds Nautical Almanac.

4.7 It is also worth mentioning a recent incident when the patrol recovered a medium-sized yacht aground at the entrance to the River. When the skipper was asked if he had a recent chart on board he replied "I don't need a chart as I have sailed out of the River for years. I just follow the beacons."

4.8 There are a couple of points worth noting here:

(i) Beacons are well established marks that give an indication of the limits of the channel and allow the navigator to confirm his location on the chart. They do not mark safe water. Safe water must be established by the navigator depending on the state of the tide and the draft of the vessel.

(ii) There is no excuse for navigating without a suitable chart.

4.9 Air Draft: The Harbour Master is frequently asked how much room is available under the A27 road bridge. Displayed on pile Z1 is an air draft gauge, which is an upside down tide gauge that gives a constant reading of the height from the water to the top of the central arch of the bridge.

4.10 Another method of establishing the Safe Overhead Clearance (air draft) available is to check the chart for the Safe Overhead Clearance. The Safe Overhead Clearance above high water, as defined by the responsible authority, is given in magenta where known; otherwise the physical vertical clearance is shown in black as on Admiralty Chart 2022. The clearance available under the A27 road bridge at Hamble Warsash is four metres. To establish the Safe Overhead Clearance available at any given time a set of tide tables is required.

Hamble Warsash Ferry

4.11 It has been suggested that the Hamble Warsash ferry could operate with a yellow flashing light to denote its continuous crossing of the main channel. This would be in contravention of the Collision Regulations (a yellow flashing light denotes a hovercraft) and is thus not recommended.

4.12 The Hamble Warsash Ferry is managed by a commercial operator who must conform to the Maritime and Coastguard Agency licence and the insurance rules. No further added procedures are recommended.

Procedures Governing Fishing in the Main Fairway

4.13 Trawling for oysters in the main fairway is restricted to the six boats licensed by the Harbour Master. These vessels conform to well established procedures following a risk assessment process as required under the Port Marine Safety Code. As no incidents have been reported in the last four years, establishing further procedures is not thought necessary or recommended.

Procedures Governing Control of the College Jetty

4.14 Discussions are required to try and arrange for activities to be programmed within the high tide periods which will allow them to operate outside the main channel, otherwise no further action required other than Notice to River Users 6 of 2006.

Diving Operations

4.15 To enable identification of the dive support vessel a fixed, wooden or metal `Alpha' flag would be a better aid to swift identification by other river users. Some River users have noted that fabric `Alpha' flags cannot be identified in calm wind conditions.

4.16 All other controls and procedures required under the Health and Safety Regulations and the Port Marine Safety Code have been established and are deemed as sufficient (Notice to River Users 9 of 2006 sets out the consent process both for commercial diving and sport diving). No further procedures are recommended. A sample diving request form is shown at Appendix 5. No commercial diving takes place without a licence to dive from the Harbour Master.

Fore and Aft Moorings Close to the Main Channel

4.17 There have been a number of incidents of vessels getting caught in these moorings and becoming a danger to other vessels in the main channel which is especially dangerous at night on busy occasions. For example, a 12 metre cabin cruiser was caught off the Harbour Master's Jetty on returning from Cowes Week fireworks and the resulting confusion and partial blocking of the main channel was extremely dangerous. The incident occurred during a period when an estimated 1,500 boats were transiting the main channel.

4.18 These particular moorings have now been removed but others further upstream remain. Mooring holders should not stretch warps between these buoys as they become a boat trap.

Procedures Governing Dredging

4.19 Controls and procedures established to control the movement of barges and dredging platforms engaged in this activity are deemed as safe and sufficient, and further action is not recommended.

4.20 The Harbour Master will request copies of the dredging companies' risk assessments.

The Use of Tenders and Other Low Freeboard Craft

4.21 Those that use tenders on the River are recommended to conform to the following procedures:

(i) do not overload the tender to the extent that freeboard is inadequate;

(ii) always wear a life jacket or a buoyancy aid;

(iii) always carry a bailer on board;

(iv) show an appropriate light at night; and

(v) have a secondary means of propulsion available (oars).

4.22 The Harbour Patrol has recovered three people from the water this year and other incidents have been reported when those in tenders were put in danger. Many tenders do not show any lights and appear not to understand that they cannot be seen from other vessels.

4.23 People have used tenders for many years in the River and have become accustomed to their ease of use. Sadly, familiarity does breed contempt, and the safety procedures employed (or not) by all who use these small craft should be thoroughly inspected by the user with a view to making them as safe as possible.

Piling Works

4.24 No changes are recommended to the established procedures for operating piling barges. The Harbour Master will request copies of the piling companies' risk assessments.

Dinghy Racing Starts in the Main Channel

4.25 Warsash Sailing Club, which has many dinghy sailors as members, has a weekly programme of racing for its members and other dinghy sailors from the River. The races are started from a position off the Warsash Sailing Club jetty in the main channel. These races are a major feature of the Club's programme and help the Warsash Sailing Club to be a successful dinghy club. The Club's dinghy pound at Lobster Quay holds approximately 100 sailing dinghies. Other boats join from other clubs and also launch from the slipway at Warsash. Approximately 40 to 60 dinghies participate in the racing on a Wednesday and Friday evening at 1830 hours during the dinghy racing season, which is from mid-March to mid-October.

4.26 As this activity takes place in the main channel and at the busiest section of the River, the Harbour Master has introduced a number of procedures to help ensure the safety of this activity. These procedures are:

(i) establishing a Code of Practice for Racing in the River;

(ii) issuing a Notice to River Users detailing timings of the activity and recommended routes to be taken to avoid congestion;

(iii) using Harbour Patrols to police the area and attempt to divert traffic into the secondary channel on the western side of the River; and

(iv) establishing face-to-face contact with the Race Officer before the race, to aid communication.

4.27 The activity has a number of impacts on the Harbour Patrol as it diverts the patrol from other duties. Also, if an incident occurs elsewhere in the River, the patrol may not be available to monitor dinghy racing at the required time.

4.28 Warsash Sailing Club has remarked that; "We will have been an active club in Warsash for 50 years in 2007. The majority of our membership are experienced sailors and are fully aware of the dangers". That statement is understandable for the established membership but there is a constant turnover of membership and new and possibly younger members are

joining all the time. Consideration must be given to the newer types of fast racing dinghies that have been developed in the last six or seven years. A Mirror or Wayfarer is a completely different craft compared with more modern types of high performance dinghies.

4.29 A number of responses from the consultation process mention the concerns of River users about allowing this activity to continue. The Harbour Master does not want to recommend that the activity cease but he is coming under pressure from River users who would like to see it moved to another location where it does not occupy the main channel and the entrance to the River. Many of those making such remarks are not aware of the history or the benefits which it brings to the River and the area as a whole. A young blood shouting at the skipper of a large motor cruiser, "get out of the way, I'm racing" does not help to foster good relationships.

4.30 The whole process takes approximately 40 minutes from launching to the last group of dinghies clearing the start line. Vessels approaching the area could wait for this period before proceeding, which is not unreasonable. There is the option of using the secondary channel for those that do not want to wait and regular users will understand the timings and work around them.

4.31 The Harbour Master has requested that the Sailing Club adopt a number of procedures to enhance safety, which the Sailing Club was more than willing to do. These are:

(i) launch sufficient safety boats to give safety cover to the fleet;

(ii) warn their members of the dangers and ensure they give way to larger vessels that might have difficulty in manoeuvring in a narrow channel with winds affecting their intended course; and

(iii) ensure all competitors wear buoyancy aids or life jackets.

4.32 Further procedures that the Harbour Master would like to see established are:

(i) The Race Officer in the starting box to have a radio tuned to VHF channel 68. This would enable the Race Officer to have contact with the River Patrol and monitor Hamble Radio.

(ii) The Harbour Master believes it would be prudent for Warsash Sailing Club to organise and run an in-house or Club Race Officers course. This would allow the Club to establish a core of trained and competent persons who would be capable of running the racing. It would give confidence to Club members that they are in competent hands and would also help establish agreed procedures between the Harbour Patrol and the Club. The Harbour Master, along with available patrol officers, would be willing to attend such a course, both to listen and learn and also to talk about safety and procedures.

(iii) The Race Officer to broadcast an `all stations' warning on VHF channel 68 before, during and on completion of the starting sequence.

4.33 As long as Warsash Sailing Club continues to conform to the Code of Practice and adopts the procedures mentioned above, the Harbour Master recommends that the racing be allowed to continue. Should any unforeseen risks occur before the next report is due in 2008 further consultation will take place with the Club. Should the situation prove dangerous and not manageable the Harbour Master must then consider bringing the practice to a halt. Should that occur the matter will be brought to the attention of the Harbour Board immediately.

Movement of Large Craft such as Barges and Piling Platforms

4.34 No change to the current procedures. The Harbour Master will request copies of the companies' risk assessment.

Large Sight-Seeing Vessels Using the River

4.35 It is recommended that in future these large vessels should only be allowed access to the River one at a time when traffic in the River is heavy. It has been suggested that each sight-seeing vessel should be escorted by a patrol boat, but unfortunately patrol boats are not always available for such a task (see Section 5).

4.36 All sight-seeing vessels over 20 metres must call on VHF channel 68 before entering the River, to notify entry and preferred turning location. At this time the duty Harbour Master will decide if the density of traffic will allow safe passage and also establish the turning location. If the river is busy and another similar vessel is in the River, entry will not be permitted until it has departed. Vessels will be allowed to cross/pass (entering and exiting the River) as far upstream as the College jetty. Sight-seeing vessels should not be allowed entry during the following:

(i) dinghy racing starts in the main channel;

(ii) Bursledon Regatta events taking place in the main channel;

(iii) fireworks displays - entry only allowed as far into the River as the College jetty;

(iv) if another similar type vessel is already in the main channel; and

(v) if any large vessel, over 20 metres LOA, is transiting the main fairway.

4.37 The Harbour Master will request copies of the operating companies' risk assessment.

The Use of VHF Channel 68 `Hamble Radio'

4.38 More publicity for the use of this facility is required as skippers, out of habit, tend to remain on VHF channel 12, 16 or 80. The Hamble Radio channel should be monitored by all VHF equipped boats operating in the River. It is a tool for exchanging information that will be of benefit to all River users. Examples of calls that should be made on VHF channel 68 are:

(i) movements of vessels over 20 metres;

(ii) movements of commercial vessels;

(iii) information broadcasts such as weather and safety information;

(iv) information on commercial activity (piling and dredging);

(v) information of dinghy racing starts; and

(vi) information on diving activity.

The Harbour Office is always willing to answer `radio checks' removing some pressure from Solent Coastguard on VHF channel 67.

4.39 A number of river users have suggested that the Harbour Office maintains a listening watch on VHF channel 16, 80 and 68. Unfortunately, equipment and manpower limitations prevent such an option.

The Use of Closed Circuit Television for Vessel Traffic Management

4.40 The system has not been fully functional during March and April 2006 owing to wind damage to a mast and a control unit. This incident reduced the functionality of the system to 33% while repairs were carried out. There has been a good deal of misconception about the purpose and use of the CCTV system established on the River. To help those not familiar with the project and also to remind River users of the reasons behind the installation, the main objectives of the scheme are set out below, to:

(i) enable the Harbour Master to carry out his statutory duties;

(ii) assist in managing the River Hamble safely; and

(iii) promote maritime safety.

4.41 There were other benefits that became apparent, once the system was installed, to:

(i) protect the Harbour Authority's buildings and assets;

(ii) support the police in a bid to deter crime;

(iii) assist in identifying, apprehending and prosecuting offenders;

(iv) increase personal safety and reduce the fear of crime; and

(v) protect members of the public and private property.

4.42 The CCTV system has been a benefit to managing the River. Sample incidents when it is of use are given below:

(i) assist in ensuring the channels at Bursledon and Universal are free from traffic during large vessel movements;

(ii) monitor the movement of large commercial vessels including dredging barges entering and leaving the River;

(iii) identify speeding vessels and tracking them to their moorings to enable follow up action;

(iv) ensure those in tenders and small dinghies are safe;

(v) check on moored craft;

(vi) identify vandals;

(vii) ensure youths on various jetties and pontoons throughout the River do not put themselves or others in danger; and

(viii) help to reduce conflict during dinghy sailing events.

4.43 It is worth remembering that the system was not designed to identify individuals with a view to prosecution. The system was designed and installed as an aid to safer navigation. Enhanced security has been a secondary benefit.

Secondary, Access and Mooring Channels

4.44 At the time of writing, the designation and classification has not yet been agreed by the River Hamble Harbour Management Committee and the Harbour Board for these types of channels. To ensure the advice given by the Harbour Office is consistent and to ensure navigational safety and the Collision Regulations are complied with, the following are the guidelines that the Harbour Master recommends for adoption:

(i) Secondary Channel: A safe channel allowing vessels to manoeuvre in, or route through, an area of water without going into the main channel. Secondary channels should have sufficient depth to allow the passage of vessels of average draft (1.5 metres) with a suitable margin for error; a depth of at least two metres of water at chart datum is reasonable. The channel must have a defined entrance and exit point that is safe and easily identifiable. The channel must deliver traffic to a safe area of navigation and not lead a vessel into difficulty. A secondary channel will normally be parallel with the main channel and should normally have direct access to the main channel at the point of entry and departure. Consideration should be given to the suitability of secondary channels in limited visibility or darkness. Vessels of average size must have sufficient room to pass and manoeuvre safely in a secondary channel.

(ii) Access or Moorings Channel: A channel to allow vessels access to moorings or landing places. Access channels should be limited in length to allow decisions regarding rights of way, passing and manoeuvring to be made by skippers before entering. Entrance and/or exit to access channels may be at the same point.

Speeding RIBs and Sports Boats

4.45 There have been a number of reports regarding speeding vessels travelling at speeds in excess of 20 knots. These incidents normally occur after the patrol has returned to the office or finished for the night. It goes without saying that this practice is extremely dangerous.

4.46 In May of 2005 a very serious incident occurred involving a sports boat travelling at 20 to 30 knots, in the dark. There was a collision when it went out of control and hit a pontoon and pile at G58. The skipper was prosecuted by the Harbour Authority and received a very heavy fine. (Serial 4 of the recommendations also refers to the area of G58.)

4.47 A number of late night patrols have been carried out at various times with only limited success. The ability to conduct out-of-hours patrols depends on manpower availability and the goodwill of staff, see paragraph 5.2 for more information on this matter.

4.48 Apart from proactive patrolling, use of the radar speed gun and education of River users, the only other option available is publicity through the yachting/boating press, yacht clubs and signage. Signs located at every marina or boatyard walkway, every slipway, every yacht club and other locations such as the jetty at The Jolly Sailor would help get the message across. The signs should be simple, with a direct statement of the speed limit. The words `offenders will be prosecuted' would also add weight. Attitudes towards speeding must be changed. Speeding in a crowded harbour such as the River Hamble should be seen as being as serious as driving a car whilst under the influence of drugs or alcohol. It is foolish and very dangerous, and could cost lives.

5. Staffing and Manpower

5.1 Ensuring that sufficient staff are available daily from 0600 hours until 2000 hours, 2200 hours or 2359 hours (the later finishing times are usually at weekends) during the summer is sometimes challenging. The system relies on the goodwill of the staff who have consistently made themselves available to cover during difficult periods. Courses, sickness and holidays sometimes make the roster unworkable with serious knock-on effects. Staff shortages have been responsible for several instances when the Duty Harbour Master has not been able to react to a situation because the correct backup was not available. Not having the required number of trained staff on duty has meant that the Coastguard has been called to cover and react to situations normally dealt with by the Harbour Staff. This has added to the response time and taken Coastguard assets away from other areas.

5.2 Giving the correct amount of dedicated time to the VHF/CCTV, general traffic management, enquiries from the public, mooring holders and on-the-water patrolling is stretching the manpower plan to its limits. Time off for sickness, courses and holidays can impose a significant extra workload on others.

5.3 Portsmouth Harbour runs a volunteer system, but this is not recommended for a harbour such as the Hamble. The Portsmouth system includes training and equipment paid for by a sponsor. Dedicated staff are also required to ensure other matters such as Health and Safety and fitness for the tasks are dealt with. Having a volunteer system on the Hamble run by the Harbour Office would involve a great deal of time, money and effort with minimum benefit. It would take more training, equipment, management and administration than is currently available and funds might be better spent on permanent staffing.

5.4 From comments made to members of staff, many mooring holders would like to see a reduction in staff with the associated reduction in costs. However, they still demand patrols to halt speeding vessels and reduce wash, enforce the bye-laws, react to incidents and the provision of the many other services provided by these patrols.

5.5 It is recommended that staffing should be the subject of a separate report, to be written by the Marine Director.

6. Impact Assessments

6.1 This report provides a position statement only, therefore an impact assessment, in terms of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act, has not been undertaken.

Recommendation

That the River Hamble Harbour Management Committee recommends to the River Hamble Harbour Board that the Harbour Master be authorised to carry out procedures and actions as detailed in the report and at Appendix 6 of the report.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers
The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.
NB the list excludes:
1.	Published works.
2.	Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE	LOCATION
a. Department of Transport - Port Marine Safety Code. b. International Maritime Organisation - Collision Regulations (Colregs) c. Hydrographic Office - Chart 2022 d. Reeds Nautical Almanac	Harbour Office, Warsash

923/TC

APPENDIX 1

1. Consultation with Stakeholders and River Users

Consultation and the Port Marine Safety Code

1.1 The following is an extract from the Port Marine Safety Code:

"A safety management system is only effective if the authority responsible takes active measures to involve and secure the commitment of all concerned. This applies both to the formal assessment, and to the subsequent operation of the management system. Not all will be the authority's employees. Harbour authorities should proceed in full consultation with all interests, and their published policies should cover these interests' involvement in safety management. Harbour authorities should consult as appropriate among those likely to be involved in or affected by the safety management system they adopt. This opportunity should be taken to develop a consensus about safe navigation in the harbour. Parties include the authority's Assistant Harbour Masters and his navigation staff - including commercial operators, mooring holders, berth holders, masters and owners and other port users as far as possible."

1.2 To conform to the Port Marine Safety Code recommendations the Harbour Master has consulted and asked for comments from; all commercial users, Marina and Boatyard operators, masters and owners of vessels over 19 metres moored on the River, Royal Yachting Association, commercial operators from outside the River who visit the River, Secretaries of all yacht clubs, sailing associations, Berth Holders and Mooring Holders Associations and the 605 Crown Estate mooring holders.

1.3 A total of 705 people and organisations were written to requesting they contact the Harbour Master should they have any ideas, suggestions or concerns regarding navigational safety.

1.4 Stakeholders were given approximately four weeks to reply and on the closing date a total of 50 letters and emails had been received by the Harbour Master from a total of 605 letters sent out. Additional letters or emails received will be included in this report until shortly before publication. To reduce the cost of administration and conserve harbour staff time, individual replies have not been sent because the report and its recommendations cover all points raised.

1.5 Comments received from stakeholders by letter, email, telephone and visits to the Harbour Office are recorded below under relevant headings. Comments have been extracted from the text of letters and emails as written.

2. Use of NtRU 4 of 2006

2.1 Sensible control of larger vessels, piling barges, dredgers etc making passage up and down is a necessity and not just a `nice to have'! There can be no doubt that the amount of traffic will grow over the years to come, thus control will become of greater importance as this occurs.

2.2 Endorse your comments but thought that this was already covered by previous NtRUs and part of the bye laws. Not that I want to increase Big Brother attitude but what are the penalties for non-conformance? Warning and then what, a fine?

2.3 This seems eminently sensible to me.

2.4 If river users are to be encouraged to keep a listening watch on Ch 68, perhaps notice of other movements or events could also be given.

2.5 Sensible system in place.

3. The Use of VHF Channel 68 `Hamble Radio'

3.1 Publicise more, it is not yet well known or used. Low power to be used or it will be heard on the IoW.

3.2 If possible HA needs 3 stations - 68 - 80 - 16 to listen and make calls on. Needs to be more of a radio station - weather - events - safety features to be broadcast regularly on 68 and 80.

3.3 HA to listen on 68 and 80 - recognise that most, if not all users only listen out on 80 and 16 can't be bothered to listen out on 68.

3.4 I would be prepared to listen out.

3.5 Racing yacht crews are frequently pre-occupied with sail stowage as they return up river - so unless the skipper can work the radio ?

3.6 It seems sensible to promote a listening watch in the river and encourage organisations to use it for advisory messages.

3.7 I always find Ch 68 to work fine, prompt and helpful replies.

4. Procedures Governing Fishing in the Main Fairway

4.1 Clearly fishing in the main fairway is problematic during busy periods.

4.2 Limited to south of college jetty - must not impede vessels entering or leaving river.

4.3 I am against banning it outright but would suggest this could be allowed during quiet periods.

4.4 This has never been a problem.

4.5 I cannot remember any accidents but with increased traffic they are a danger to themselves.

4.6 Fishing (by boats) in the fairway better if not allowed at weekends, or in the dark. If regards 'anglers' on the shore or pontoons etc, yachts should do their best to avoid damaging tackle, and keep well clear wherever possible. The river is for all of us.

4.7 Given the number of boats involved and that they mostly seem to operate during the winter I cannot see any reason for objecting.

4.8 I believe only bottom drag fishing for shell fish is allowed in the river approaches. A flashing amber light on active vessels could be a helpful warning to other vessels. Permitting trawl net fishing in the approaches would present greater problems.

4.9 I cannot recall this ever being a problem.

4.10 I do not feel that fishing should be allowed in the fairway particularly at peak times. Any dredging for oysters should only be in an up or downstream direction and fishing vessels should make more use of sound signals to signify changes in direction.

4.11 Not a very good idea.

5. Procedures Governing Control Of The College Jetty

5.1 The gear and boats on the end spoil the view but operations do not appear to inconvenience other river users.

5.2 Must not impede inward or outward traffic - however essential part of College training - strict safety procedures must be adhered to - HA to be notified when activities taking place - with careful planning activities could be limited to HW and therefore not have to use main channel.

5.3 I cannot ever recall this being a problem.

5.4 This has never been a problem.

6. Operation of the Hamble Warsash Ferry

6.1 No concerns - vessels should aid its crossing but collision regulations apply.

6.2 To be encouraged to expand if possible.

6.3 Quite happy with how they operate.

6.4 Always well handled and never been a problem.

6.5 An amber flashing light would help to indicate that these craft track across the main fairway.

6.6 No problem.

6.7 I think the Hamble - Warsash ferry offers a good service and I am sure their activity adds to the safety of the river at quiet times of the week or when the weather is inclement and small tenders venture out.

6.8 Excellent and safe.

7. Diving Operations

7.1 No particular difficulty with this activity under proper controls.

7.2 Must conform to legislation and safety procedures within marinas and be discouraged from operations elsewhere except for pile and mooring maintenance works where safety vessel must be supplied and broadcast on VHF 68 and 80 to be announced regularly every 15 minutes to make river users aware of risks to divers.

7.3 Many people do not know the significance of the `swallow tail' flag. They should be able to show a large clearly marked notice.

7.4 Following an experience last season may I suggest that any craft supporting diving on the river be instructed to fly a metal or timber version of the A signal, tied in such a manor that passing traffic can see it from afar.

7.5 No problem.

7.6 Where such operations are being carried out they should be advised on VHF as commercial vessels do. Craft should display the relevant flag of sufficient size to be easily seen from distance.

7.7 Diving. Commercial divers answer to the Health and Safety executive, and work to codes of practice. Amateurs should be free to practice their sport unhindered by regulation.

7.8 Diving operations, I sometimes think health and safety requirements go too far, when it's just cutting a rope off a prop.

8. Fore and Aft Moorings Close to the Main Channel

8.1 Should all be pontooned.

8.2 Pontoons and chains should be annually inspected - proper mooring cleats to be fitted to pontoons - no storage boxes on pontoons.

8.3 Only reposition if a major hazard.

8.4 Some of these moorings do drift, or are forced out, by the tide into the main channel. This is dangerous and these should be moved away from the main channel.

8.5 Some fore and aft moorings seem very close to the main channel.

8.6 They should go as they are dangerous especially to those not familiar with the River.

8.7 The traffic will just about accept the present state of affairs, but it should be watched.

8.8 The proposal to remove the line of mid-stream moorings from Warsash Hard to north of Stone Pier Yard is completely wrong. They are vital to keep the main channel traffic away from tenders and sailing dinghies, many containing children, that launch at Warsash and use this channel. If there is a problem with people snagging the moorings then pontoons should be used on all of these mid-stream moorings with appropriate gaps to let vessels regain the channel. In view of the recent approval of long pontoons elsewhere on the river this must be acceptable.

8.9 Does not appear to cause a problem.

8.10 The moorings close to the main channel should be removed as they are a danger.

8.11 The practice of stretching lines between mooring buoys should not be allowed.

8.12 Vessels can pass by very close, but neither my boat or my neighbour has been struck by passing vessels - only by those manoeuvring.

8.13 The mooring in the area of the Warsash jetties should be removed as they do far more harm than good. Dinghies jump out into the main channel from behind them and manoeuvring onto the jetties is difficult.

8.14 Fore and aft moorings near the main channel. It used to be a requirement that lines were weighted so as to sink, and common sense said you didn't pass between two mooring buoys, but we do seem to have more floating lines, and more unobservant sailors these days. Maybe the end buoys should be larger and brighter, and a NTRU educate the sailors. Best of course if there is a pontoon between the ends. We should try to avoid removing these moorings, over recent years a number have gone, and this reduces the number of cheaper public moorings available.

9. Procedures Governing Dredging and Piling Works

9.1 No problem.

10. Use of Tenders and Other Low Freeboard Craft

10.1 Dinghies with low freeboards to be encouraged to use secondary channels establish what is considered to be secondary channels - encourage by education the wearing of lifejackets, correct lights and high visibility clothing.

10.2 Consider making inboard buoyancy a requirement for use in the River.

10.3 This looks like an attempt to infer risk by the use of the words low freeboard, tenders, canoes and small sailing craft are quite safe as long as they are not forced to share the main channel with much larger vessels.

10.4 Are sometimes in danger from speeding craft and should be encouraged to use the inside passage where possible.

10.5 The presence of `low freeboard tenders' and sailing dinghies are a feature of the river. If handled with care they are no threat to other river users and are not in danger from other craft that are handled with consideration and good seamanship.

10.6 Tenders in main fairway and channels are a danger.

10.7 Statistics show that most drowning take place whilst transiting in a dinghy or tender.

10.8 The wearing of life jackets should be river authority policy if not compulsory, as they are in Ireland.

10.9 Navigate with care - no undue restrictions

10.10 All marina mooring users are made aware of the river regulations, ideally signing a document provided by each marina operator. Thereafter, come down really hard on those people who continue to motor at excess speed or create excess wash.

10.11 Introduce a lower speed limit for planing craft with inefficient hulls in displacement mode to reduce wash from such vessels.

10.12 Wash, people will always overlook tenders, and they may be less than completely sober: in smooth water idiots mostly go unpunished, but with the addition of a heavy or speedy craft disregarding the legal speed limit this can be lethally dangerous. Of late, the worst offenders seem to be a new generation of very large RIB. Perhaps this might fit in with the use of CCTV. The Harbour Board's launches are efficient, but can't be everywhere.

10.13 Large numbers of members use such vessels on a regular basis. Everyone is familiar with the Peyton cartoon in the Members Bar and even more familiar with weather and tides. Possibly shouldn't say this but the safety record speaks for itself.

10.14 There has been a noticeable increase in the numbers of large motor yachts and they seem to regard the 6 knot limit as a minimum making things very uncomfortable to those in tenders.

10.15 I have seen one tender nearly swamped by a large motor cruiser.

10.16 Many RIBs are now big displacement craft but seem to assume that they should be considered as rubber dinghies as regards to wash making. There is an increasing number of fast small craft - usually RIBs - at night and often with no lights; a very obvious hazard, as regards small rowing tenders. I regularly use mine to cross the fairway to my berth. Whilst there is the odd exception, I find commendable consideration shown by the majority of craft.

10.17 While I accept that you and your staff may be concerned about this problem it must be remembered that river users have a duty of care to themselves and their passengers/crew in the first instance. You and your staff cannot be everywhere at once and could only be expected to advise on an as and when basis. In my opinion the River Management Board and all staff cannot be held accountable for people who behave irresponsibly.

10.18 Accidents waiting to happen in many cases. I sometimes shudder to see people in tiny tenders on the river by day and by night, often without any lights, usually without any buoyancy aids, seemingly oblivious to their own precarious safety. I would promote a safety awareness campaign in this respect.

10.19 You proposed to the Harbour Board (without consulting us) the removal of the moorings which define the starboard side of the main channel and the port side of the secondary channel, on the grounds that boats accessing the Warsash Marine fuelling berth have in the past become entangled with the moorings. You intend replacing them with two port(sic)hand buoys. We would suggest that your objective and the maintenance of the channel would be better achieved by a line of pontoons which could be marked with a starboard hand light.

10.20 Having been in the river for nearly thirty seasons and used a small tender to reach my boat I have not really experienced any truly worrying problems.

10.21 Tenders. We have all used them and many still do. They give yachtsmen the freedom to access their boats at unsocial hours. Occasionally there are accidents, but most of these would be prevented if all the pile moorings were allowed pontoons. The recent prohibition of new pontoons does nothing to increase safety. If people want to take risks they should be allowed to do so.

10.22 Should only be allowed to cross directly across the main channel.

10.23 I travel from Swanwick Marina to the J piles in a small tender and RIBs and speedboats exceeding the speed limit could easily swamp the tender. Children in sailing dinghies stand no chance. This is a lunatic minority element that ignores any rules of the sea, any form of authority, and any sense of decency. A Radar gun is the answer, with big, publicised fines.

11. Dinghy Racing Starts in the Main Channel and Dinghy Sailing

11.1 OK during the week - broadcast every 15 minutes on 68 and 80 from 30 minutes before start and course to first mark and say up to 30 minutes after start.

11.2 Only on a Wednesday evening when traffic is light. Please remember this is a river that is famous for sailing. Hampshire County Council claim to support the sport of sailing.

11.3 Dinghy racing in the main channel should be stopped as it is not compatible with the main channel of such a busy harbour.

11.4 Starts sometimes do have to take place in the main channel but it is important to point out that common sense must rule both racers and others who cannot always stand on their rights.

11.5 The placing of a long line of pontoons between Hamble and Warsash has unacceptably narrowed the main navigation channel. Again safety has been compromised. Dinghy sailing, which has been enjoyed in this region for many years, can no longer be the pleasure it once was. The folly of placing these pontoons where they are should be recognised. They should be removed and the main fairway restored to a safe width commensurate with the increased traffic.

11.6 I have a number of problems with this. Racing dinghy sailors seem to think that `steam always gives way to sail' regardless, and often ignore vessels navigating in the channel. I think the meaning of this collision regulation is that sailing vessels navigating a consistent course should be avoided by power driven vessels, and not that dinghies should be entitled to tack and weave about more or less at random and expect power driven vessels to anticipate their manoeuvres and dodge round them. I have been involved in a situation where a dinghy race started from the side of a channel and the fleet immediately tacked across the channel. I could not go ahead or astern without the risk of hitting a boat, and so I took all way off, thinking that if I were hit by a dinghy my case would be stronger if I were stationery. The committee boat just started the race without first ascertaining that the channel was clear. When I blew 6 blasts on the horn, I was shouted at and told "we're racing".

11.7 With increase traffic and size of boats, it might be useful to give any vessel navigating in the channel right of way over those crossing, as this would emphasise to dinghy sailors the risks they are taking by assuming right of way and that larger vessels can in fact avoid them.

11.8 Only club organised dinghy sailing in the river and not at peak periods.

11.9 Starts and finishes should be outside the main fairway.

11.10 Where else can they start ?

11.11 The western secondary channel has been obstructed for the last twenty years, with consideration on both sides, the matter should be contained. The dinghies are, by definition, extremely nimble and adept at getting out of trouble.

11.12 The River Hamble is primarily a sailing centre with a long history of dinghy racing. Again, I would suggest that the safety record is extremely good. Sailing activity in general and dinghy racing in particular are obviously part of the attraction of the area. Banning starts in the river would cause an awful lot of unhappiness.

11.13 I must say that it is my view that this is not compatible with the situation within the Hamble. Warsash Sailing Club say that on some occasions children should be protected with a line of moorings and on other occasions allow the same child to tack around in the main channel dodging 40 foot cabin cruisers.

11.14 This is a danger, multiple craft tacking or bunching under spinnaker create an obvious hazard, especially at weekends.

11.15 Dinghies racing in the main fairway and channels cause unacceptable dangers.

11.16 On countless occasions - like others - I have towed dinghies in after the wind has failed during the ebb. Done willingly enough but it again raises the question of suitability of the river for large racing dinghy fleets.

11.17 The `Foxer Gang ` from HRSC and Optimists from RSnYC can use the large area of water on the western side at high tides stand and well clear of the fairway - no problem.

11.18 This practice is just silly as it is in a main channel used by large craft and will cause an accident one day.

11.19 This can be inconvenient but it doesn't happen very often. What is more worrying is the placing of a start line from Hamble Point Buoy across the entrance to the river, especially when 707s are racing.

11.20 Very dangerous.

11.21 I support the continuation of this tradition, important to the two Clubs involved, in conjunction with safety protocols to be agreed with the Harbour Master. Perhaps advance radio notice could be given at intervals on Ch 68 prior to starts, and large vessels invited to delay their manoeuvres in the areas concerned until clear.

11.22 The only problem I have is the use of the main fairway for dinghy racing.

11.23 Passage of dinghies in the main channel cause a problem.

11.24 Dinghies can cause some consternation as they tack around at the start of a race but I feel that this difficulty is best dealt with by agreement with the sailing clubs. However, large cruiser races that finish in the River with a spinnaker run are to be discouraged !!

11.25 Some people are in a River in the 1920s, or think they are. They should wake up and be aware of the dangers that confront them. Dinghy racing in the main channel is dangerous and should be halted.

11.26 The dinghy racing clubs have been in existence for many years, and pre date the rise in river population. It is a safe but not hazard free pursuit, and that is its attraction. It takes place to a schedule. I have noticed conflict on occasion, but that has been due to a "might is right" attitude on the part of some yachtsmen. If it is felt that there has to be any form of official regulation, then it should be the publication of the race start times, with a notice to river users that they should give precedence to the dinghy sailors at these times. Both WSC and HRSC, the dinghy sailing clubs, take a very responsible attitude to safety, and with qualified race officers for the major events. They should be the ones to be left in charge. The official harbour safety policy should delegate safety concerns to the organising clubs. There is the proviso that large commercial shipping should not be permitted to move in the river while racing is in progress.

11.27 Where possible outside the main channel BUT should not be stopped.

11.28 Dinghy starts in the main channel - every effort should be made to allow these to continue, long standing established practice should not be sacrificed in the name of progress (development and bigger boats).

11.29 The Club takes the safety of its members very seriously indeed. Our dinghy racing guidelines were in place many years before the Port Marine Safety Code appeared and we run courses for members, first aid etc, on a continuous basis. The prime function of the lovely building being built next to your office is to serve as a training centre. From this you can conclude that we prefer the RYA's belief that education is better than regulation.

11.30 Dinghy starts should not be in the main channel and especially at such a busy place as Warsash.

12. Movement of Large Craft such as Barges and Piling Platforms

12.1 Movement of any craft that is cumbersome or difficult to control should be confined to daylight hours and times of minimum use by other river users.

12.2 Vessels over 40 m in length should have right of way in the River due to restricted ability to manoeuvre.

12.3 When vessels announce departure from dredge area other craft not necessarily aware of movements, suggest an all ships broadcast.

12.4 Passing points for larger vessels needed, need to establish agreed areas, suggest off Warsash College, Port Hamble and Mercury Marina.

12.5 Small craft should not be under sail when ahead of commercial vessels who are restricted in their ability to manoeuvre.

12.6 During strong winds, channels should be kept clear during navigation of large commercial craft.

12.7 Not operate at peak periods.

12.8 Leisure cruisers, training and private large craft on prior notification and consent on channel 68.

12.9 Cause no problem.

13. Use of the Fuelling and Bunkering Barges

13.1 There can be an accumulation of several vessels loitering off the fuel barges, presenting a hazard. No easy answer to this . There is not, to my knowledge, an acceptable signal `I am under command but not under way'.

13.2 A holding pontoon at Port Hamble would be a benefit.

13.3 Fuelling procedures and the training of operators

13.4 Notice to explain procedures displayed on pumps.

13.5 Their would be fewer delays if the operators handed wireless credit card terminal to the skipper for payment, rather than having to use the wired ones in the office.

13.6 Large queues at the fuel berth at Port Hamble at the weekends become dangerous.

13.7 To many boats at Port Hamble for fuel at the weekends.

13.8 Fuel at Port Hamble is a problem sometimes because of the number of vessels waiting.

13.9 There is sometimes congestion particularly on a Saturday and Sunday morning. The main risk area is at Port Hamble where waiting craft occupy the main fairway.

13.10 Fuelling and bunkering barges, at peak times, helmsmen are (understandably) more concerned with someone else jumping the queue, than looking where they are going, make sure they stay out of the main channel, with maximum available room to circulate whilst waiting.

14. Knowledge of Any Incidents or Near Misses

14.1 Vessels leaving marinas or pontoon complexes at a fair speed without anticipating other vessels in the fairway. Three such incidents for me and one of them a sail training yacht.

14.2 Incidents, I think only more major incidents, where serious damage or injury are involved, or failure to exchange details, need reporting, unless someone is perhaps seen acting recklessly, thankfully the rule to report everything (almost down to a sneeze) was withdrawn, commonsense prevailed for once.

15. Current Navigation Marks and Lights

15.1 Is Bursledon Bend clear enough marked and lit on the approach ?

15.2 Not aware of any problems apart from background lighting.

15.3 Navigation marks and lights ok.

15.4 The entrance to the main channel at Warsash is very confusing and difficult to pick out especially at night.

15.5 Vessels going down stream have difficulty in picking up, the main channel at Mercury Marina. This occurs especially when skippers are unfamiliar with the river and in distinguishing the main fairway and secondary channels. They tend to come round the bend to the north of Mercury Marina and proceed quite close to the marina. They see the red painted pile or at night the red flashing light quite late and the may hesitate before choosing between the main fairway and the secondary channel. I would suggest a port hand buoy be installed at the beginning of the reach and a starboard light on the first pile after the row of swinging moorings on the opposite side of the river.

15.6 G pile south of Mercury red paint.

15.7 Better prioritisation, and hence indication, of the main channel from secondary channels and access channels. These are not well understood even by experienced river users and frequently lead to misunderstandings, on and off the water.

15.8 The area in and around Warsash Jetty is confusing with mid-stream moorings blocking the approach both to the Warsash Jetty and the fuel jetty.

16. Large `Tourist' Type Vessels Using the River

16.1 Tourist vessels to be encouraged - but again warnings every 5 minutes on 68 and 80 during passage of river.

16.2 I have no particular problem with this type of vessel as long as they are properly navigated and can turn efficiently with appropriate steering aids and present no risk to other vessels.

16.3 To my knowledge, they respect the speed limit and other river users. They have, over the years, become much larger, and it seems that there are more of them. Perhaps the limit has been reached.

16.4 Large craft do use the river at times and we all have to realise they must have right of way.

16.5 I know they call up for clearance to come into the river but I think that most of us would be happier without them. If I was responsible for safety on the river I would not allow them in.

16.6 I have witnessed one incident where a sailing dinghy capsized in their path. The skipper made the correct sound signals for full astern but the vessel behind him could not see past his bulk and there was some drama and confusion.

16.7 I have no problem with this commercial activity always providing the said vessel comply with collision regulations.

16.8 These should be controlled more strictly especially at peak times when they turn in the River and can cause some problems for following yachts. Presumably under NtRU 4 they will have to announce their intentions on VHF in future, always assuming we can hear them when they do !

16.9 These sometimes seemed to me as posing a real challenge to other river users, particularly in windy conditions to small craft, many of which do not carry radios. I would not like to see them banned, but I would like to see some way whereby they could make their intentions more clear than is currently the case.

16.10 I feel that their use of a recreational facility is unacceptable and it is only a matter of time for there to be an accident if they continue to virtually block the fairway.

17. The Use of CCTV for Vessel Traffic Management

17.1 I would scrap the cameras you already have. Complete and absolute waste of time and money.

17.2 CCTV is a good tool to have on such a busy Harbour/River.

17.3 Improve coverage - essential part of PMSC.

17.4 If you got it use it.

17.5 The use of CCTV is a must these days. Many boats still exceed the speed limit.

17.6 I would like to see the proof that CCTV is an effective management tool. It appears we are the greatest user of CCTV in Europe; this worries me.

17.7 The use of CCTV for vessel traffic management - this looks like an attempt to justify what appears to have been a waste of our money.

17.8 CCTV - I am sure you don't want me to repeat my views on this topic.

18. The Problem of Wash

18.1 Wash created by too great a speed of some boats between Hamble Spit buoy and the first pile marking the entrance to the River channel. Other boats can be thrown around excessively. More control appears to be needed.

18.2 Although improvements have been noted over recent months there continues to be a problem with some boat owners, the worst culprits are the owners of small planning hulls which move along the river followed by a tidal wave! In one incident this resulted in my dinghy breaking loose and having to be recovered by another vessel.  It is also sad to see that the other main culprits tend to be the "professional" users ie yard launches and taxi boats. Surely these users should be taken to task by the harbour masters staff.

18.3 The entrance to the River is a particular hazardous zone under any conditions, but there is common practice with power boat owners that makes the situation really dangerous. Almost without exception the second they leave the 6 knot zone they pour on the power leaving small craft to survive their wake, the same happens on their return when entering the 6 knot zone. The channel in this area is still very restrictive with shallow water either side and vessels are still very close proximity; last summer we rescued a small speed boat who had been swamped by a departing boat. What is required is the introduction of a controlled zone to wider deeper water or the introduction of a transition zone, say 10 knots.

18.4 I was woken at midnight by the sound of an approaching powerboat, putting my head through the hatch, I was horrified to see an unlit RIB flying up the river at top speed towing a water-skier!

18.5 Between the last J pile and Swanwick Bend is an accident waiting to happen, speedboats and RIBs travel here between 10 to 40 knots, as they see this 100 yards of water as a place where there are no mooring holders to shout at them. This happens in winter, summer, day - and (unbelievably) night. Some come from the slip nearby, others visit the Jolly Sailor and others presumably travel upriver from other slips/moorings(see paragraph 10 tenders).

19. Secondary Channels and Their Use

19.1 The secondary channels allow smaller, slower craft, sailing dinghies, rowers, canoeists to avoid the increasingly busy, and sometimes congested main channel. I think it is a great pity that small recreational craft should be forced off the river.

19.2 My over riding concern regarding safety on the river is the closing down of secondary channels where they are in the way of commercial and YC development. This situation is further aggravated by larger numbers of bigger craft using the Hamble for short and long stay use.

19.3 Two other very similar comments to that of the one above.

19.4 There should be no closure of secondary channels at this outlet of a busy river (Warsash) They are essential on safety grounds. Indeed Stone Pier Yard already extends beyond the line of Warsash Sailing Club dinghy launching pontoon and the secondary channel is already further cluttered by vessels berthing for charter and fuel.

19.5 You do not, in your list of issues, mention secondary channels in general.  You will know, I am sure, that the club regards the maintenance of secondary channels as of the greatest importance in relation to safety.  We should like to raise the particular issue of the secondary channel used by dinghies launching from Lobster Quay and also from the hard at Warsash.

19.6 Please do not remove the secondary channels as these provide a safe passage for the smaller vessels.

19.7 Preservation of the river is very important and the availability of space to sail or motor should not be lost. Once permission is given to allow pontooning that water is lost for ever, but consideration must be given for the proper development of supporting commercial services or the river will die. The difficulty lies in arriving at the correct balance and this is best achieved by setting aside areas not recommended for development.

20. Indications of Satisfaction with the Harbour Authority

20.1 May I thank your team for their help and for a successful year in 2006.

20.2 I am surprised that with the heavy amount of traffic on the River there are not more accidents, so you must be doing it right.

20.3 I would like to congratulate your staff and the way the Hamble Harbour Authority manage the river on behalf of the users. It was not until I moved from the Crableck piles to the A piles 2 years ago did I realise (a) how lucky we were and (b) what a busy job your staff have controlling the river.

20.4 Many thanks for the service you provide.

20.5 You and your staff do a very difficult job, you do it very successfully and with professionalism. Thank you for all your help in the last two years..

Indications of Dissatisfaction with the Harbour Authority

20.6 My comments are not a criticism of the harbour office efforts but suggestion and support that may be of value to improve safety on the river.

20.7 You do not understand that dinghy sailing is more important than many other activities, you appear to support other activities before dinghy sailing.

21. Comments on Possible Future Trends

21.1 There is obvious tendency for craft on the river to be larger with increase affluence. The development at Universal, that has a primary purpose to attract greater number of 20 metre plus vessels is an obvious demonstration of this fact and a sign of the problems faced by the Harbour Board. I am sure that the Hamble is an open port that cannot legally deny entry to larger vessels capable of navigating safely within the river. I suggest that this right of entry should not be confused with a right of permanent mooring. The Harbour Board needs to debate the future character of the Hamble. I believe that the presence of an unreasonable large number of big vessels poses a threat to smaller craft, and reduces the enjoyment of a large number of River users. This is a matter that the Board should address. My concern in this matter must be considered in parallel with my concern for the secondary channels, the more large vessels dominate the fairways, however well handled the greater the need for continuous secondary channels. I stress the word continuous because for one development proposal, the Harbour Office thought it appropriate for dinghies and tenders to criss-cross the main channel to move upstream.

21.2 Boats get ever larger, and some now only marginally under safe control in adverse or CQR conditions, hence my principle of being opposed to any further structures encroaching on navigable water.

21.3 There has to be an awful lot of spare cash around to maintain the Hamble `fleet' at its present level. Fuel prices are high and likely to go higher but is anyone's guess as to how long this will effect the motor cruiser market. The Hamble is also subject to an ever increasing amount of `environmental' legislation - you will be aware that there is a directive in the pipe line on water purity which a civil engineer friend described as worse than a nightmare.

22. Miscellaneous Comments

22.1 In general the Harbour exists because of water sports, and the harbour authority is the servant of the water sports participants. Any regulation tends to cause resentment, and safety regulation should always be delegated wherever possible. It is only where there is conflict between river users that the Harbour Authority should regulate.

There was a recent liability case that reached the House of Lords, and in a ringing judgment their lordships made it clear that councils are not responsible for the risks that people voluntarily accept. There is no need to plaster the coastline with notices or over regulate.

Arthur Ransome put it best in Swallows and Amazons: "Better drowned than duffers. If not duffers won't drown".

22.2 Entry in an out of marinas (Port Hamble). I have often had to take avoiding action where vessels are not aware of others passage along channel.

22.3 In conclusion I think there is little wrong with the current regulations and any additional points should largely be advice - however this will be preaching largely to the converted - i.e. any incidents are related to lack of knowledge of boats/seamanship in general and compared to Lymington we have an easy time ( My first experience of Lymington was finishing a race with 50 boats in the river plus two IOW ferries - we are nowhere close!)

APPENDIX 2

23 March 2006

Dear

Navigational Safety Survey

Consultation with River Users

The River Hamble Harbour Authority employs a risk based Safety Management System (SMS) conforming to the Port Marine Safety Code (PMSC).   I am currently updating the information base regarding navigational safety procedures for the fairway and main channels of the River Hamble.   I would be grateful for any comments you may have regarding the current situation and how possible future trends may affect them.   The possible trend of larger vessel becoming more frequent visitors to the River may necessitate changes to the current SMS procedures.

 

I will shortly be completing a report to the River Hamble Harbour Board on this matter and I would be grateful for any comments you may have.

 

Perhaps you may wish to comment on the following subjects:

 

NtRU 4 of 2006 (see enclosed)

Procedures governing fishing in the main fairway

Procedures governing control of the College Jetty

Operation of the Hamble Warsash Ferry

Diving Operations

Fore and Aft moorings close to the main channel

Procedures governing dredging and piling works

Use of tenders and other low freeboard craft

Dinghy racing starts in the main channel

Movement of large craft such as barges and piling platforms

Use of the fuelling and bunkering barges

Knowledge of any incidents or near misses (specific information about the incident to enable the Authority to investigate further would be required)

Current navigation marks and lights

Large tourist type vessels using the River

The use of VHF channel 68 ` Hamble Radio'

The use of CCTV for vessel traffic management

 

I would welcome your thoughts on the above or any other areas of concern that you might have concerning navigational safety in the fairway or channels.   I will be completing my report to the Harbour Board at the end of April therefore any comments you may wish to make should be with me by 21 April.   Should you wish to talk about these subjects either on the water or we could arrange a meeting at another location.

Thank you in advance for your help with this very important matter.

 

Yours sincerely

Tony Clatworthy

Harbour Master

Distribution List

600 CE Mooring Holders

Secretary:

RSnYC

RAFYC

HRSC

WSC

Association of Hamble River Yacht Clubs

Marina and Commercial Operators Association

HYS

MDL central

RHMHA

Berth Holders Association

RYA

BMF

HPM MDL

PH MDL

Mercury MDL

Universal

Swanwick

RK Marine

Stone Pier Yard

Elephant Boatyard

Cabin Boatyard

Deacons Boatyard

Riverside Boatyard

Eastlands Marina

Southampton and Solent University Water Sports centre

Warsash Maritime College

Hamble Life Boat

Coastguard

Fishermen

Diving Companies

Hamble Parish Council

Commercial Contractors

APPENDIX 3

Incidents recorded from 1 April 2005 until 1 April 2006

The incidents recorded below are representative of similar incidents that highlight situations and may have a bearing on navigational safety.

Serial	Date	Incident	Incident and Any Recommendations	Police or Coastguard involvement
01	2 May	Collision	Collision with pontoon mooring by speeding sports boat Court action by Harbour Authority (Possible changes to lights/buoyage)	Court action
02	30 May	Fire on shore	Action by patrol staff in reporting and assisting at fire location.	Police and Fire Service
03	30 May	Speeding PWC	2 PWC exceeding 40 knots not able to apprehend offenders	Police
04	2 June	Speeding sports boat	Sports boat speeding in Upper Hamble. Not caught by patrol.
05	10 June	Fire aboard cabin cruiser	Passengers evacuated by Patrol boat. Vessel towed to HMJ Warsash. 6 Passengers including a very young child and pregnant woman.	Coastguard, Lifeboat, Helicopter and Fire and Rescue Services attended
06	19 June	Tender Capsize	Tender from WSC rowed out into path of yacht which then collided capsizing the tender and throwing the occupant into the water. Elderly man with no lifejacket.
07	19 June	Man overboard and Grounding	Yacht aground on Hamble Spit - Man in water - recovered to HMJ Warsash - first aid given and Ambulance called - man recovered to hospital	Coastguard called Ambulance called
08	19 June	RIB out of control 3 men in water	8 metre RIB with a 200 HP engine experienced a failure of the steering gear while travelling at over 20 knots. 3 men thrown into water and RIB continued to circle location at high speed. No life jackets worn.	Coastguard and lifeboat called
09	29 June	Boat caught on mooring	42 foot cabin cruiser caught on fore and aft mooring off HMJ Warsash during vessels returning from fleet revue and fireworks. (0130hrs) (possible change to lights and buoyage)

Serial	Date		Incident	Incident and Any Recommendations	Police or Coastguard involvement
10	5 July		Fuel spill	Fuel spill from vessel a Fawley Pier. Tide and actions taken by BP averted spill entering river.	Coastguard
11	18 July		Speeding Vessel	Sports boat reported as exceeding the speed limit and acting dangerously at Hamble Jetty. Patrol attended but vessel had departed.	Police
12	23 July	Rescue		Five youths found drifting in upper Hamble after stern fell away from sports boat losing engine overboard. No life Jackets.
13	6 Aug	Drunken person		MV Princess Caroline, a coded passenger vessel, landed a drunken person at HMJ who was to drunk to stay aboard.
14	14 Aug	Dinghy crew injured		Crew of dinghy recovered to HMJ with injuries to head. Paramedics attended	Coastguard and Ambulance
15	6 Sep	Fire aboard vessel		Fire aboard small cabin cruiser in marina. Vessel lifted out and fire extinguished. Not reported to Harbour Authority. (Investigate reporting procedures)	Fire Service and Coastguard
16	15 Oct	Thefts		3 small yachts broken into and various items stolen	Police.
17	6 Oct	Near miss		Small tender observed rowing across the main fairway and was involved in a near miss with a passing yacht. No life jackets worn.
18	3 Nov	Dismasted Vessel		Vessel dismasted at its moorings during strong winds. Patrol secured vessel and equipment.
19	3 Nov	Vessel adrift		36 foot yacht adrift after moorings parted on visitors pontoon. Patrol secured vessel.
20	7 Nov	Fuel spill		Fuel spill from dredger action taken by Harbour Authority	Coastguard Environment agency
21	11 Nov	Collision		Yacht involved in a collision with a vessel being towed.
22	13 Nov	Vessel adrift		30 foot yacht adrift after moorings parted. Recovered and secured by patrol.

Serial	Date	Incident	Incident and Any Recommendations	Police or Coastguard involvement
23	14 Nov	Rogue EPIRB	A rogue EPIRB reported as transmitting in the River. Traced and secured.	OFCOM Coastguard
24	3 Dec	Gales	Following very high winds 4 yachts found requiring attention to their moorings by the patrol and a number of moorings reported as being dragged.
25	28 Dec	Sunken Vessel	Tug sunk at its moorings. Harbour Authority carried out fuel containment action. Vessel recovered.	Environment Agency Coastguard
26	10 Feb	Sinking Vessel	8 metre sailing vessel found sinking at its moorings. Patrol pumped out and secured vessel.
26	13 Mar	Fuel Spill	Fuel reported in River. Broken up by patrol. Source not identified.	Coastguard
27	15 Mar	Fuel Spill	Fuel reported in River. Broken up by patrol. Source not identified.	Coastguard
28	18 Mar	Man in Water	Man found in water after falling from dinghy. Rescued by patrol. No life jacket worn.

Recommended Actions

Serial 01

Collision

A number of other River users have reported difficulty in identifying the channel at this location.

Serial 02, 05and 15

Fire

All patrol staff fire trained, correct equipment carried on Patrol Boats. First Aid training for all staff.

Serials 06, 07, 08, 12, 17 and 28

Not wearing Life Jackets

On a number of occasions the Harbour Authority has rescued people from the water who have not been wearing life jackets. On all occasions those rescued have been extremely lucky. More publicity is required to make River users more aware of dangers.

Serials 06 and 17

Tenders

On a number of occasions Harbour Authority staff have witnessed near misses involving yachts and cruisers just missing or avoiding small tenders. It has also been noted that small tenders have been overloaded with people and equipment and crews not wearing life jackets. Tenders also travel on the wrong side of the channel causing confrontation with oncoming vessels. More publicity required to make river users more aware of dangers.

Serial 09

Collision with moorings

On a number of occasions vessels have been caught on the moorings off the Harbour Master's Jetty at Warsash. Vessels caught on these moorings are a danger to others especially during the recovery phase and even more so at night with a high volume of traffic in the main channel. These moorings are being removed.

Serials 05, 07, 08, 09, 10, 12, 13, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27.

Staff Training

Correct staff training in first aid, fire fighting, fuel spills, responding to incidents and good general seamanship have ensured a fast and safe response to many incidents. Training should be well funded and appropriate.

APPENDIX 4

Risk Assessments

Update for 2006

1. Overall Judgment and Categorisation

1.1 The following is a list of the Risk Assessments completed within the Port Marine safety Code Safety Management system which are in the process of undergoing a 12 monthly review. During the revue an overall judgment of each risk assessment will be completed and the credibility of each risk assessment determined by assigning one of the following categories.

Inadequate	there are important aspects of credibility that do not seem to be satisfied
Indeterminable	it is not possible to make an overall judgment of credibility
Reduced	there are some aspects of credibility that are not fully satisfied
Incomplete	there are aspects that contribute to credibility that are unknown
Temporary	there are aspects contributing to credibility that might not exist in the future
contingent	there are aspects of credibility that depend on how things turn out
high	there is little of significance to detract from the assessment's credibility

1.2 To help overcome a subjective approach to risk assessments a process of benchmarking has been put in place by the Harbour Master, this is a part of that process.

1.3 The following table sets out the categorisation of each risk assessment and also list the date required for a reassessment of the complete risk. The process has also been used to identify areas not yet risk assessed, these assessments should be completed and added to the SMS as soon as practically possible.

1.4 The risk assessments have been divided into two categorises:

1.5 Operation of the Harbour and the effects from risks that might impact upon the users and members of the public.

1.6 General Health and Safety of Harbour Authority staff during normal work and also when reacting to incidents on the water or using Harbour Authority equipment. These are not produced in this report.

Risk Assessments for the operation of the Harbour that might impact upon the users and members of the public

Serial	Title	Date of Origination	Date of Reassessment if required	Date of re-assessment when completed and comments	Categorisation of Risk Assessment	Grounds
01	Control and Coordination of Rescue services	22/12/02	05/04/07	05/04/06 Confirmed with all other agencies as normal working practices	High	All Blue Light services now agreed
02	Vessels returning from Cowes Fireworks	29/07/02	05/04/07	05/04/06 No change required but will be subject of confirmation on briefing prior to the event to take in any changes at that time	High	Proven
03	Tenders departing upstream from the area of Hamble Jetty	15/05/00	05/04/07	05/04/06 No change required	Reduced	Many users may disagree with risk assessment. Confirmation of findings required, this has been achieved with serial 13.
04	Navigation of tenders through RSnYC channel	15/05/00	05/04/07	05/04/06 New risk assessment required if new works proceed in 2006.	High	Even though some users disagree with the assessment the HM remains confident of original RA.

Serial	Title	Date of Origination	Date of re-assessment if required	Date of reassessment and comments when completed	Categorisation of Risk Assessment		Grounds
05	Generic RA for scrubbing piles	07/02/02	05/04/07	04/04/06 No change		High	Confidence from engineers report
06	Fireworks Display on the water	09/07/01	05/04/07	05/04/06 no change but updated as each application is received		High	Proven
07	Landing/working on a private pontoon	31/03/01	05/04/07	05/04/06 No change	High		Proven
08	First Aid Cover Required for office and patrols	07/07/01	05/04/07	05/04/06 No change	High		Proven
09	Area of Navigation from College Jetty to Stone Pier Yard	05/06/04	Not required	05/04/06 To be updated on completion of new buoyage and removal of moorings	High		Proven
10	Warsash Spring Series	31/01/03	Written by WSC	Advice only	High		Proven
11	Water taxi and Ferry operation	05/05/04	Not required	Written on behalf of HCC prior to insurance assessment	High		Proven
12	Use of HA Yard	29/01/04	Not required	Yard no longer used for storage	High		Proven

Serial	Title	Date of Origination		Date of re-assessment if required	Date of reassessment and comments when completed	Categorisation of Risk Assessment		Grounds
13	Navigation area Hamble Jetty to Port Hamble	02/12/04		05/04/07	Requires update if proposed works proceed.	High		Proven Worth noting that some users will disagree with assessment
14a	Organised racing in the River		05/04/07		This is covered within the code of practice
14b	Launching dinghies from Lobster Quay	15/06/05	05/04/07			High		Proven
14c	Fishing boats trawling in the River	11/01/06	05/04/07			High		Proven
14d	Fishing from public jetties	To be completed	05/04/07
14e	Speeding RIBs during none patrol periods	To be completed	05/04/07
14f	ERT Project	13/09/04	05/04/07		Kept as reference only
14g	Ownership of risks at Lobster Quay	13/05/05	05/04/07		Issue of NtRU to help establish ownership of risks		High	Proven
15	A27 road bridge	04/07/05	05/04/07		A27 road bridge Risk to navigation from jumping, stone throwing and swimmers		High	Proven
16	Loch Lomond RIBs and Sports boats on the Hamble	23/12/05	05/04/07		Review of general risks posed by various leisure activities involving RIBs and Sports Boats within the River Hamble		High	Proven Risk assessment completed following RIB accident on Lock Lomond and MAIB advice.
17	Dangers caused by oyster dredging in the main channel and the moorings	10/01/06	05/04/07		Assessment of risks		High	Proven

APPENDIX 5

RIVER HAMBLE HARBOUR AUTHORITY

DIVING REQUEST

Request No...............

Request to carry out diving operations within the limits of Hamble Harbour.

Location of diving operations......................................Vessel................................

Time of diving operations: From..........................To...............................

Diving contractor............................................................................................

Address.............................................................................................

Tele No.................... Facsimile No(to which form is to be returned)...........................

Diving Supervisors Name.................................................................................

Diving site tel. No...................................VHF call sign.......................................

Description of work to be carried out.....................................................................

.........................................................................Client..............................

GENERAL CONDITIONS AND PRECAUTIONS TO BE OBSERVED

1. Diving operations shall be in accordance with the Diving at Work regulations 1997 and the appropriate approved code of practice.

2. At all times during the operation an "A" Flag shall be displayed.

3. The diving team shall consist of at least 4 persons namely, Diving Supervisor, Diver, Standby Diver and Tender/boatman(boatman not required if working within a marina)

4. The Diving Supervisor shall inform the Harbour Master immediately before a diver enters the water and on suspension/completion of diving operations.

5. The Diving supervisor will comply with all instructions issued by the Harbour Master.

6. The Diving supervisor shall monitor VHF channel 68 at all times.

7. Has a diving project plan been prepared and is there a copy on site? yesno

8. Have steps been taken to eliminate hazards to divers from propellers, inlets outlets etc. yesno

I declare that all the aforementioned requirements have been satisfied, precautions have been taken and that safety arrangements will be maintained for the duration of the diving operation, and will not operate outside the stated area and time.

Signed by Diving Supervisor............................................................date...............

NOTE: NO DIVING OPERATIONS ARE TO BE CARRIED OUT PRIOR TO PERMISSION BEING GRANTED

Forward to:

Harbour Master River Hamble Tel: 01489 576387

Shore Road,

Warsash SO31 9FR Facsimile:01489 576387

KNOWN VESSEL MOVEMENTS OR RESTRICTIONS:.........................................................

....................................................................................................................................

For internal use	Date time request received:
Subject to the information stated in this request being and remaining complete and accurate and to strict adherence to the general conditions and precautions specified above. permission granted. ............................................... (RHHA authorised person) Date.................Time..................		PERMISSION REFUSED (RHHA authorised person) Date................Time...................

APPENDIX 6

Reference	Priority	Action	Cost
Paras 3.2-3.4	High	To help reduce speeding and wash infringement all mooring holders, whether in marinas, boatyards or midstream should be given a leaflet with details of the speed and wash limits in the River and details of other sources of information such as Notices to River Users.	Cost of the leaflet estimated at £500
Paras 4.25- 4.33	High	Warsash Sailing Club continue to start dinghy races in the main channel at Warsash providing the Club conforms to the Code of Practice and adopts the following procedures: a. All Race Officers to undergo an RYA/Club race officer training course. b. The Race Officer to liaise with the Duty Harbour Master and obtain clearance prior to the race proceeding. c. The Race Officer and the Duty Harbour Master be in radio contact. All those competing in racing to have undergone a briefing on possible confrontation situations and not to stand on regardless, endangering themselves and others.	Nil cost
Paras 3.17-3.19	High	The Harbour Master to change the light on G68 pile from a red flash every 4 seconds to a red flashing light and establish a starboard hand light on the H50 pile. The light on H50 to be partially obscured so it is not seen until the vessel has cleared the beacon on the bend.	£600 initially and then every 5 to 6 years the lights would require replacing at £600
Paras 3.22-3.28	High	The Harbour Master to establish a port hand top mark on the Swanwick beacon. Change the characteristic of the light from a red flash every 4 seconds to a quick flashing light.	Approximate cost of £300every 6 to 7 years £300
Para 3.16	High	The Fl. R. 4s. on pile C15 be replaced.	£300
Section 4	High	The Harbour Master should negotiate with fuel barge operators to establish a quicker procedure for paying for fuel. Operators should investigate the possibility of establishing a waiting pontoon to be available on busy weekends.	Nil cost
Para 4.15	High	The Harbour Master is to instruct all commercial diving companies operating in the Hamble to show rigid `A' flags.	Nil cost
Para 4.35	High	Large sight-seeing vessels be given restricted access to the River and only one vessel at a time be allowed to enter the River during busy periods.	Nil cost
Para 5.5	High	The Marine Director to investigate the staffing levels and bring forward recommendations to the River Hamble Harbour Board.	To be established following the report.
Para 3.5	Med	The Harbour Master should continue efforts to reduce the light pollution around the leading lights at Warsash.	Nil
Para 3.3	Med	The Harbour Master to produce an information leaflet, (possibly in conjunction with paragraph 1 above) to inform those that operate tenders to be aware of the dangers, observe the correct navigation rules and show lights at night.	Included in cost for first action
Para 3.8	Med	Establish a fourth buoy, No. 17, off Stone Pier Yard.	At an estimated cost of £2,000
Para 3.25	Low	The temporary pontoon in Cabin Boatyard should remain in place under the original conditions.	Nil cost
Para 3.33	Low	The Harbour Master should not establish any beacons, piles or a buoyage system in the upper Hamble.	Nil cost
Para 3.15	Low	The Harbour Master should investigate a more suitable location for the XOD fleet, nearer the river entrance but still giving the facilities of manoeuvrability and shelter found at the current location.	Nil cost
3.12	Low	Further investigate a suitable relocation for Hamble lifeboat.	Nil cost
4.14	Low	In partnership with the College, establish safer routines for training operations, possibly restricting operations to high tides which would allow them safer manoeuvring outside the main channel during busy periods.	Nil cost