The New Fence at Westport

[Roberto]

I'm curious what the deal is with the new fence by the car park in Westport. Someone has obviously gone to great lengths to ensure that visitors to the beach not climb over the fence to access the beach through the dunes. Previously, a fence that was probably a meter in height existed. Within the last month someone put up a new fence. Now, a fence that is about 4 feet high, double reinforced with barbed wire, accompanied by a metal entry gate makes absolutely certain that everyone accesses the beach on the same trail. The fence now also includes 3 or 4 garrish signs warning visitors not to climb the fence (you'd have to be pretty brave to do so now).

My first question is why? I don't see any animals that need to be contained there. Some people skipped over the old fence and there were 3 or 4 trails leading to the beach. I don't think these minimal trails posed any threat to habitat or wildlife. It seems like a big waste of money (and from the looks of the fence and gate, it was not cheap). Assuming it was a public entity that put up the fence, it seems like that money could have been better spent elsewhere (perhaps to fix the walkway along Campbeltown Loch or as an investment in education or promoting tourism). What is present now, complete with signs warning not to climb the fence, looks very unwelcoming and, in my opinion, is not the type of move that will foster additional tourism.

If it represents an effort to discourage surfers from visiting, I think it is a misguided step at best.

So, can someone please explain to me why the step was taken, and who did it? Thanks.

[Malky]

Someone mentioned this to me at the College the other day. I can't remember the details though. I'll ask again.

Malky

[Dr Dog]

Would this be the fence to replace the one burned by campers on the beach and which was allegedly valued at £1000 ??

[Roberto]

Is that what happened? Did the entire fence burn? As I recall, the fence consisted of wire supported by wooden posts. It seems hard to believe that all of the wooden posts could have burned as they were a fair distance from one another. Did the campers burn it intentionally? Please give more details. Thanks.

[big tony]

whose this setting up as a fence on my turf?

[Roberto]

One more thing. If the reason for putting up the new fence was the old one was burned down, why did they put up another wood fence? And why so high, with barbed wire and signs warning visitors not to climb it?

[Ranald]

Maybe the owner of the old fence(s) (I'm sure there has been more than one there over time) was fed up having his fence broken by people climbing over it?

What's the fuss? There's still a perfectly accesible gate there and no-one is stopping anyone getting onto the beach as far as I can see

[Malky]

The fence owner replaced it AFAIK, and as Ranald said made it difficult to climb over to prevent damage. There is no problem with access to the beach - folk should just use the gate.

Must admit, as the owner of a lot of fences, I much prefer people to use gates rather than climb over a fence. Some people seem incapable of walking the length of themselves to use a gate though.

Malky

[Roberto]

Here's the fuss. If it is a private land owner who put the fence up, then I can understand. If he or she wants to have a fence there for whatever reason, then that is his or her perogative, even if it does give off an air of a Gestapo prison camp. If, however, it was put up by some governmental agency, then I see it as a huge waste of money that could be spent in far better fashion. That was the point of my initial post, if you read it. Note that in my initial post I posited the question: who erected the new fence? So, can someone please answer that question?

[Right Pongal]

Here's the fuss. If it is a private land owner who put the fence up, then I can understand. If he or she wants to have a fence there for whatever reason, then that is his or her perogative, even if it does give off an air of a Gestapo prison camp. If, however, it was put up by some governmental agency, then I see it as a huge waste of money that could be spent in far better fashion. That was the point of my initial post, if you read it. Note that in my initial post I posited the question: who erected the new fence? So, can someone please answer that question?

Maybe its on a need to know basis, and the likelyhood is that you don't need to know. As we already know, you want to know, but the difference between needing to know and wanting to know are as wide as Machrihanish Bay, even at low tide.

[jimmy]

Agree with Roberto. The fence in question is ugly, unwelcoming and totally unecessary. It's almost saying, we'd prefer you kept out but if you must use our beach....I mean, you can understand this kind of barrier at the drome but westport? I don't know who's responsible, the farmer or argyll & bute council, either way it's disappointing.

[Malky]

..who erected the new fence? So, can someone please answer that question?

The landowner and at his own expense, I'm told. His perogative as you say.

Malky

[SBpete]

Who is responsible if a child looses an eye on the barb wire? Seems a tad excessive.
Also by making all users use the same small entrance, are you not increasing the risk of accidents? People carrying surfboards, windsurfers and kayaks are using the same gate as dog walkers. Could there not a a seperate entrance for water users?

[Beachcomber]

Who is responsible if a child looses an eye on the barb wire? Seems a tad excessive.
Also by making all users use the same small entrance, are you not increasing the risk of accidents? People carrying surfboards, windsurfers and kayaks are using the same gate as dog walkers. Could there not a a seperate entrance for water users?

Would these same water users have been prepared to contribute towards the cost of installing a separate gate?

I doubt it, somehow.

Seems like everyone wants something for nothing these days.

[bubbly jock]

Who is responsible if a child looses an eye on the barb wire?

Is it possible that vandals have prompted this action taken by the land owner? I don't think he should go to any more expense to accomodate a load of surfers who contribute nothing but hassle to his daily life and if the guardians of the brat who wants to climb the fence keep the little sprog under control then it will grow up with two eyes.

bubbly