Campbeltown Pontoons

[Nick]

You have to obtain a consent from (and pay rent to) the Crown Estate. They have the power to remove unauthorised moorings if you don't but the Scottish coast sprawls over many remote miles.

I doubt the owners would have any difficulty getting permission from the Crown Estate to put in several visitors moorings, which they would then charge £10 a night for.

I am moderately apalled by the attitude of people who don't see any reason why they should pay a pound to use a landing facility supplied, with water on tap. I am nearly as appalled by those so curmudgeonly as to make a point of staggering ashore over rocks and seaweed simply to avoid paying the pound.

You are pretty much anchoring in the Lodge's front garden in this situation, and I fel this makes you a visitor on their turf. The inhabitants want to enjoy a relaxed and peaceful relationships with yachting visitors and provide a variety of services (pontoon, water, showers, toilets, provisions and friendly chat) - but feel they are being a wee bit exploited at the moment. Being an idiot I can understand this.

I suggest most of the posters on this thread simply avoid Acarseid Mor. Kathy and I enjoyed our visit and felt it was £2 well spent.

[Mark]

You have to obtain a consent from (and pay rent to) the Crown Estate. They have the power to remove unauthorised moorings if you don't but the Scottish coast sprawls over many remote miles.

I doubt the owners would have any difficulty getting permission from the Crown Estate to put in several visitors moorings, which they would then charge £10 a night for.

I am moderately apalled by the attitude of people who don't see any reason why they should pay a pound to use a landing facility supplied, with water on tap. I am nearly as appalled by those so curmudgeonly as to make a point of staggering ashore over rocks and seaweed simply to avoid paying the pound.

You are pretty much anchoring in the Lodge's front garden in this situation, and I fel this makes you a visitor on their turf. The inhabitants want to enjoy a relaxed and peaceful relationships with yachting visitors and provide a variety of services (pontoon, water, showers, toilets, provisions and friendly chat) - but feel they are being a wee bit exploited at the moment. Being an idiot I can understand this.

I suggest most of the posters on this thread simply avoid Acarseid Mor. Kathy and I enjoyed our visit and felt it was £2 well spent.

Emotive language misrepresenting people's views. A post well worthy of the lounge.

[Telo]

Nick, I think you misunderstand. Nobody in here, but nobody, is justifying accepting a service and not paying for it. People should pay their way, end of, but the issue became "hot" because plenty of boats anchor in Acarseid Mhor without using any services - so why should they pay? The issue is the apparent threat to fill in an anchorage with moorings as a deliberate act of retaliation against people who haven't paid for services.

What posters object to is that those who don't use facilities should lose access to a perfectly good anchorage.

Nick, I think twice in this thread, I have cast doubt on whether the owner of Rona has been quoted correctly. Whether the quote is accurate or not is down to you, but, either way, you have set the hare running by quoting what may, or may not, have been a deliberate threat to an anchorage, or, perhaps, merely an ironic remark made in a private converstion. If the latter, it should not have been quoted imho. There has never been a problem raised about Rona in this forum, at least not until this thread and the alleged comments quoted by you.

[Mark]

Nick, I think twice in this thread, I have cast doubt on whether the owner of Rona has been quoted correctly. Whether the quote is accurate or not is down to you, but, either way, you have set the hare running by quoting what may, or may not, have been a deliberate threat to an anchorage, or, perhaps, merely an ironic remark made in a private converstion. If the latter, it should not have been quoted imho. There has never been a problem raised about Rona in this forum, at least not until this thread and the alleged comments quoted by you.

They seemed really nice to me. Not likely candidates to be despotic Eco blackmailers.

And Nick's post here suggests he's quite capable of completely misinterpreting things people say.

[Arghiro]

Nick, I think twice in this thread, I have cast doubt on whether the owner of Rona has been quoted correctly. Whether the quote is accurate or not is down to you, but, either way, you have set the hare running by quoting what may, or may not, have been a deliberate threat to an anchorage, or, perhaps, merely an ironic remark made in a private converstion. If the latter, it should not have been quoted imho. There has never been a problem raised about Rona in this forum, at least not until this thread and the alleged comments quoted by you.

They seemed really nice to me. Not likely candidates to be despotic Eco blackmailers.

And Nick's post here suggests he's quite capable of completely misinterpreting things people say.

Wot? Our Nick being controversial & provocative in a post? Surely not?

[Booby Trapper]

Wot? Our Nick being controversial & provocative in a post? Surely not?

Maybe one of the moderators should ban him for a bit

[Nick]

Wot? Our Nick being controversial & provocative in a post? Surely not?

Maybe one of the moderators should ban him for a bit

Yes . . . sadly tho' I have a spare set of keys . . . .

[Telo]

Maybe one of the moderators should ban him for a bit

Yeah. I was wondering if he has been hacking into our mobile phones.......

[claymore]

Personally, I think this is an outrage.
I go onto a thread about Campbeltown and end up on Rona.

A long time ago, before the days of Dear Heart, I once ended up on Rhona. It was in Ambleside and was very pleasant.
However - this fond mammary does not reduce in any way my sense of outrage.

[Clyde_Wanderer]

Personally, I think this is an outrage.
I go onto a thread about Campbeltown and end up on Rona.

A long time ago, before the days of Dear Heart, I once ended up on Rhona. It was in Ambleside and was very pleasant.
However - this fond mammary does not reduce in any way my sense of outrage.

Does your dear heart know you once messed about with Rhona? was she comfortable to be on assuming you were in north to south position!

[sahona]

When I spoke to the manager on Rona (Bill?) a few seasons ago, he was moaning about the Crown Office questioning the existing mooring - which I think is linked to the anchor system for the pontoon and so 'protecting' a foul area-.
He inferred that they were against any moorings and indeed wanted to protect the existing anchorage.
Maybe that's changed lately though.

[ubergeekian]

I am moderately apalled by the attitude of people who don't see any reason why they should pay a pound to use a landing facility supplied, with water on tap. I am nearly as appalled by those so curmudgeonly as to make a point of staggering ashore over rocks and seaweed simply to avoid paying the pound.

I am equally unimpressed by those who install a few basic facilities and then consider themselves to have moral and legal rights to money from any passing yachtsmen, whether they need, want or use what's provided.

[Arghiro]

I am moderately apalled by the attitude of people who don't see any reason why they should pay a pound to use a landing facility supplied, with water on tap. I am nearly as appalled by those so curmudgeonly as to make a point of staggering ashore over rocks and seaweed simply to avoid paying the pound.

I am equally unimpressed by those who install a few basic facilities and then consider themselves to have moral and legal rights to money from any passing yachtsmen, whether they need, want or use what's provided.

To be fair, you're probably quite safe if you are passing, it's only those that stop who may be at risk.

[ubergeekian]

I am moderately apalled by the attitude of people who don't see any reason why they should pay a pound to use a landing facility supplied, with water on tap. I am nearly as appalled by those so curmudgeonly as to make a point of staggering ashore over rocks and seaweed simply to avoid paying the pound.

I am equally unimpressed by those who install a few basic facilities and then consider themselves to have moral and legal rights to money from any passing yachtsmen, whether they need, want or use what's provided.

To be fair, you're probably quite safe if you are passing, it's only those that stop who may be at risk.

I wouldn't be too sure about that. They seem to want their quid from those who walk straight past the water tap.

[Nick]

I wouldn't be too sure about that. They seem to want their quid from those who walk straight past the water tap.

If you walk past the water tap then you have come ashore via the pontoon and therefore owe £1. Of course, if you can't afford it then you are free to scramble up the seaweed-covered rocks to save a pound.