Seil Chat

.
According to today's Oban Times an 'amateur survey' by FLAG (Luing's Fixed Link Action Group) has determined that a causeway across Cuan Sound would be cheaper than upgrading the ferry. The OT's conclusion is that this is now 'likely'

The upside is obviously greatly enhanced access for Luing residents, with all that implies - but is it good news for everyone? Here's a few potential downsides posted to kick off a discussion:

~ Possible loss of a unique marine environment - true or false?
~ Local fishing fleet has much longer journey to fishing grounds - will this have an economic impact?
~ Increased distance for lifeboat to travel in the event of an emergency in the local area East of Seil and Luing - is this significant or not?
~ Changes in water circulation in Seil and Clachan Sounds with possible effects on water quality / shellfish farming - anyone know if this is likely?
~ Increased storm surge effect in Balvicar in southerly gales/spring tides with increased risk of flooding - just made this one up, but who knows . . .
~ Popular route for yachtsmen closed (not expecting much sympathy here )
~ Massive increase in traffic on Seil likely - has the cost of upgrading the road been taken into account?

In the Outer Hebrides causeways have long been a fact of life. I think it is very likely to happen if no serious ecological, cost or safety issues come up.

How about a causeway with a swing or lifting bridge in the middle to allow tidal flow, yachts, lifeboat to pass throught and still let Luing remain a true island?

Pentlandpirate wrote:How about a causeway with a swing or lifting bridge in the middle to allow tidal flow, yachts, lifeboat to pass throught and still let Luing remain a true island?

A truly inspired idea. The ferrymen can man the bridge so no jobs are lost.

Well perhaps there would only be the need of two men on 4 day on 4 day off shifts, put a barrage across with vertical axis turbines and a lift bridge in middle, create energy while we are improving the infastructure, and drop reporter from Oban times and the idiot seal hunger strike plonker into the blades to test strength.

The Causway Proposal

Three points to ponder about a causeway
The devastating effect on tides and wild life, The loss of the wonderful island Culture of Luing and the end of a world class sea route which has provided safety for thousands of years
1. The effect of tides has been well described by David Foster in the Oban times of this week, and little needs to be added but note That the likelihood of Flooding in Balvicar would be particularly high during Southerly gales and a rising spring tide. Providing the causeway had significant bridge sections the effect on tides would be reduced . The detrimental effect to wild life might also be reduced and if there is sufficient head room, small boats such as Sea kayaks could pass through. But be clear a solid causeway would have serious implications
2. Have the Islanders of Luing considered how the existence of a fixed link will change their strong sense of community. Luing people have an admirable track record for resourcefulness and solving their own problems as the need vanishes, so will the unique qualities.
3. The destruction of an ancient navigable passage is a more serious issue than just upsetting one or two yachtsmen. The Cuan Sound has been used for “innocent passage” for thousands of years. Some historians argue that Brendan the voyager who sailed to America in the 6th Centaury would have passed through the sound. In the summer months there are days when more people pass through the sound in one day than live on the Island. The Cuan Sound is one of the finest sea passages in Scotland and is unique by world standards. The closure of this National asset to make life a bit easier for the 140 people of Luing will deprive generations of people of a most wonderful experience. It is not just a few disgruntled yachtsman but thousands who pass through the Cuan sound year by year. Add to that the loss to future generations.

The safety issue is also very real
Boats of all kinds that need to travel south in adverse conditions take the sheltered route from the Sound of Mull. While large commercial vessels will take the sound of Luing, small vessels chose the Cuan sound. In a northerly gale they can quickly be in sheltered water with a choice of 8 anchorages. With a causeway closing the sound they will have to take the sound of Luing which with the tide changes will be much less safe.
This may no longer be safe for small vessels if the Cuan sound is closed off. Loch Craignish will be the first port of refuge and mean a further 12 miles, always assuming that they are able to pass safely through the Dorus More.
Of course it is the sailors and fishermen of Balvicar who will be worst affected. They will have 10 miles to travel instead of three . In the case of a northerly gale, the process of “beating to windward would increase the distance to 16 miles or more. Fuel consumption would also be increased and some vessels might not be able to do it.
Of course there will always be some benefits. But to who?
The Clachan sound might become a popular place for south coast yachtsman to keep their boats. The many tourist who come to Seil would now drive round Luing before leaving the area. Those who chose to live on Luing because of its quiet island life will no doubt move elsewhere and leave their houses as holiday homes. Is that really what we all want?

I thought it was to be a "fixed link" ie the the jury is out on what kind of structure it would be......

The council seem to be very keen on a causeway as they think it will be a cheap option.

Once someone has done some real sums and someone else who knows what they are doing has explained the hydrographic implications I expect they will drop the idea quickly enough.

Seil Blubber wrote:The council seem to be very keen on a causeway as they think it will be a cheap option.

Once someone has done some real sums and someone else who knows what they are doing has explained the hydrographic implications I expect they will drop the idea quickly enough.

yes , I think that's how things will go --- causeway isn't nearly as daft as the tunnel idea though ---- if the funds were there a high bridge is the best solution.
So what will next proposal be? cable car?

So what will next proposal be? cable car?

Just insulate it well so that you have a cheap option of dangling the cable car from the existing electricity pylons

Closing off Cuan Sound is nonsensical for reasons already mentioned and what about the possible effects on the coastal erosion at Ellenabeich and Easdale Island?

Yup, and what'll happen to the Clachan sound and Corryvreckan???

Marine Scotland’s view of coastal developments (Marine Scotland is the lead marine management organisation in Scotland - they will implement the Marine (Scotland) Bill passed earlier this month).

The marine and coastal waters around Scotland are vitally important to the sustainable future of the country. Our coasts and seas provide food from fisheries, energy and mineral resources, routes and harbours for shipping, tourism and recreational opportunities and sites of cultural and historical interest, which meet many of our economic and social needs particularly in remote rural areas. At the same time, they contain distinctive and important habitats and support a diverse range of species which we need to protect, conserve and enhance. The Scottish Government, therefore, is committed to ensuring the sustainable use of our coasts and seas and the resources that they contain..

Certainly highlights the conflicts about the Cuan Sound. If a fixed link is justified at all, it must be a high-level bridge. The negative impacts of a causeway are huge.

If no-one else will then I shall welcome the four new members.
WELCOME oldgit, lifeattheedge, barky, and Watchman.
All joined within the last 48 hours and all four have made one post so far; strong opposition to the causeway.
Good on you; I agree with you on that and on your suggestion for a high bridge.
Happy posting.
Don't worry when others disagree with you; sometimes quite forcefully.
Don't be rude or the Mod will be displeased.
And
Most important
Don't take the rest of us for fools.

Think I was once a member on here a while back -- decided to have another look mainly due to the luing causeway & raera wind farm issues currently going on.

Now a fixed link to Luing has been wanted by many for a long time (lack of it made relatives of mine leave Luing in the '60s) & a bridge/causeway etc might just persuade me to have a look & see what's on the island - have sailed round it but never been on it.

Waiting for a bridge to Luing could well be a longer wait than for an Oban by-pass ... but some thing has to done sometime soon as the restrictions set by the current ferry to islanders needs some sort of fix

Welcome to our new members.

If I was at all suspicious I might have something to say about this forum being hijacked by single issue group with an agenda - just as well I'm not that cynical.

Tunnel not as daft as it sounds - cost a few quid though - non starter

High bridge - the sensible option - not that expensive as its not a huge span.

Causeway - It ain't going to happen - the council don't have the bottle or the cash.

Ferry - Antiquated and perpetually mismanaged - hardly an argument for maintaining the status quo - taxpayers money continually down the drain

Suggesting that keeping Luing as some quaint backwater - a community museum of Highland life is patronising in the extreme - what sort of argument is that?

Any of you newbieslive/work on Seil?

Loved the letter in last week's Oban Times - well put and totally accurate. It's worrying that a causeway is even being considered. I agree that the only realistic positive options for change are a high bridge or a tunnel. But please tell me - surely the folk who chose to live on Luing knew it was an island and actually preferred that kind of opt-out peaceful lifestyle?

Eric the Viking wrote:Welcome to our new members.
If I was at all suspicious I might have something to say about this forum being hijacked by single issue group with an agenda - just as well I'm not that cynical.

Hmmmmm. Just as well I'm not that cynical too Eric. Otherwise I might have got into trouble with MacB for making a posting suggesting there's a bit of multiple personality creation going on. Luckily I'm not that cynical so I didn't. However I do anticipate a member only poll on this subject to be posted soon.

Sniffer Shanks (often wrong, not by choice)

Eric the Viking’s and Longshank’s fears of forum highjacking by a single issue group could be justified. There is no conspiracy but the oldgit should come clean. I have followed the Seil Chat for several years with much interest and amusement but, as a non-resident, would not normally presume to take part. But there are issues sometimes that compel you to speak out. I am a part-retired sheep farmer / agricultural lecturer from Ayrshire who keeps an old boat at Seil. I have sailed your beautiful coast for 35 years but have never defecated in the Clachan Sound. I do spend a couple months around Seil each summer (no – I am not constipated) and I guess do contribute a few thousand pounds to the local economy each year.

My objection to the possible causeway is not particularly because I would not personally be able to use the Cuan Sound. I don’t really going anywhere anyway these days so an extra 12 miles does not matter. If I wanted to go to Mull quickly, I would go by car. It’s partly because of the environmental and tidal issues and the problems it would cause to local fishermen and to lifeboat coverage. But also it’s because I think that closing the Cuan would jeopardise your coast’s reputation as a World Class cruising area. What would be the next step – close the Crinan Canal because it’s too expensive to run? It would be like building a motorway across the Old Course at St Andrews.

Enough of the rant – I promise not to interfere further.

.
Welcome indeed to our four new members. If the subject in hand has brought new blood to the forum then great - discussing important local issues was the primary reason for setting it up in the first place.

I am not sure what Longshanks and Eric are getting at about single issue groups - most threads tend to revolve around a single issue, and naturally not everyone is interested in every topic. And - while it is not always possible to be certain I can state categorically that at least three of these are new posters. There is no reason to suppose that the fourth is a duplicate identity either, as many of us will sometimes post from the same IP address if we share the same broadband provider.

Please don't let yourselves be intimidated by any other poster here - feel free to post whatever and whenever you wish.

A low level swing bridge would suffice......