Snail Sanctuary

This initiative from the Hounslow Chronicle is doubtless a worthwhile one, the paper has been overhauling in quality, the once excellent Brentford, Chiswick and Isleworth Times.

As always, however, when anyone can contribute a viewpoint, the public should be made aware of the degree of authority behind any statement of alleged facts, when such are tendered. This blog is a welcome addition to the variety lying behind Brentford's boating heritage. I should clarify further, that no criticism is intended in this response to the blog's comments, of anyone bringing forward individual understandings of situations. It is almost impossible for most to penetrate the often arcane and jealously guarded province of maritime law and history. When that involves Brentford, be prepared to stand back and be braced for the inevitable backlash of argumentation, owing its life to the exceptionally idiosyncratic nature of this very special place.

The comments made thus far in this interesting word-picture of a newcomer to Brentford's boating scene, betrays both the very welcome freshness and delight in the scene, with an inevitably incomplete and mildly confused appreciation of the background.

I hope that the following commentary on the above article will be welcomed by the author, perhaps more than the possibly bewildered readership.

I was not quite sure at first reading, whether the article was intended as the anthropomorphically painted viewpoint of an hairy-lipped snail. On second reflection I've thought probably not. Why are you allowed to live for free? Well basically the answer is that the island's owners do not see any advantage - at a stage when they are attempting to prep the Council and the Secretary of State's Inspector into the Brentford Area Action Plan - in removing you for now. They are faced with the planning reality, that the only extant permissible use of the island is as a boatyard. However they would rather make more money than they possibly could with such a use, so they are trying to see how far they can push the planning 'envelope' before succumbing to the inevitable.

Meantime, it is interesting that they have begun what hopefully is more than a token gesture of marketing the site for operation as a boatyard. Leaflets advertising the opportunity have been prepared by Beckett Rankine, the Consulting Marine Engineers for the developers.

“ Boats are allowed to moor for free on parts of the canal system for up to two weeks before having to move on� - this is not an accurate representation of an oft heated debate. All boats on the canals run by BW, pay an exorbitant licence fee. That sum includes payment for the right to moor alongside the towpath for up to two weeks in any one “section� before moving to the next. Nothing “free� about it. If you are prepared to be a “Continuous Cruiser�, then you won't have to bear the cost of an home mooring that you might or might not use – but you are still paying for far more than you will ever be able to use.

“Why is Brentford a haven for free living?� It isn't. It was so, up until around 1990 so far as the canal system was concerned, whereas the PLA, for the Thames, had begun flexing its muscles a few years earlier. The fact that some boats have got away with being where they are for sometime, has nothing to do with any rights to free mooring.

“These can stay for free as that part of the river belongs to the crown and is out of the jurisdiction of the Port of London Authority (the organisation that charges to stay on the tidal Thames)�. Incorrect. The argument was offered in defence against an action by the PLA, and the action was withdrawn, but the fact remains that the PLA do have the right to control the use of Crown property.

“A canny boatman noticed this about 15 years ago and fought and won an extended legal battle for his right to moor for free�. Again incorrect. No legal battles have been won, except to the admittedly useful extent of having the prosecuting party withdraw their claims. That is a tactic employed in the face of a realisation that an uncomfortable precedent might be set, if the issues were allowed to proceed to Court. Without an hearing, no judgement is made, and so in this case, none have been.

The silly thing is though, that while the PLA have the Parliament bestowed right to control use of the Crown's riverbed and foreshore, that is immaterial to whether they had any standing in the matter of bringing action against boats moored to the Waterman's Park piles.

What is undeniable, is that the PLA authorised riverworks for the safe mooring of vessels along the Waterman's Park frontage, and that the 'River Works Licence' for those was many years ago transferred to Hounslow Council, who continue to pay the annual fee for that licence. So in effect, the fees for all the boats moored there are being paid, it's just that it is the Council who is paying them to the PLA, while the boats are not being asked to pay to the Council. At the same time, the Council don't want to go to the trouble and expense of clearing both good and derelict boats away, on the grounds that more boats would only come along!

That is a ludicrous situation, though there is a rationale behind it no matter how much, in my view, it is mistaken. The Council don't want to 'legitimise' the boats moored there while they try to get private operators to bid for the job of turning the frontage into a properly run enterprise. So much better I've always said, to recognise that most of the boats are fully prepared to pay their way if only they were allowed to.

As to the snails, they have played an enormously important part in fending off unwelcome alternative development, and fully half of the island will remain as an ecological sanctuary, but developers have ways of working around these issues. Just look at the Ferry Quays housing development – the owners of Lot's Ait - they took over an area of snail habitat, on the basis that they would build a new habiat for them. They did so, at a cost of some £35,000, but tragically this was no more to the taste of the snails than the human habitations are for some of us.

The author wishes to thank Nigel Moore for what sounds like a highly well informed and authoritative piece.

I appreciate any feedback, especially if it is offering highly constructive information.

I would like to be able to say that my knowledge about Brentford and boating in general is based on well researched fact, but unfortunately, in some ways, my ideas of what is true, especially in respect to the complicated laws that surround boats and this area of the river and canal system, are based nearly solely on word of mouth. Although I have tried to unearth solid authoritative texts about the area, it has been only by talking that I have learned about the boats here.

So, thank you Nigel and I'd appreciate any further comments if they continue to put education at the top of the agenda.

Good on you!

hi mate its ashley here wots going on i can solv your problom i got a brige ai bring it down 2mors ok later

I don't think Nigel has got it quite rigth there. Go and talk to Caie on the Royal Barge just downstream who will enlighten you. The PLA do not have a case, that is why they are so slow (although usually with them this is for other reasons). I'd be interested to see any evidence of the council paying the PLA, if they are they should stop.