Wednesday 18 January 2012
Channel 4
UK visitors will probably be aware of the channel 4 'Ident' - that is their identity clip - or 'logo' which is shown inbetween prorams. In the past it has traditionally been made up from buildings, structures etc. The new 'ident' - out soon was recently filmed at Dungeness. We were asked not to photograph what they were filming as they wanted to keep it a secret until they finally broadcast it. Look forward to seeing 'us' on the box in the future!
New Visitors
Interesting to note that out of 560 visitors this month so far we have for the first time individuals from Latvia, Poland, Costa Rica, India and the Ukraine taking a look at the site!
The new web site, arriving shortly, should make it easier to 'Contact Us' so look forward to receiving more comments.
The new web site, arriving shortly, should make it easier to 'Contact Us' so look forward to receiving more comments.
Ticking Off
An overseas 'fan' took me to task over last item 'Lifes a Beach' for being biased and controversial.
I said you should have seen the draft!!
No the point is being controversial stimulates argument and or discussion!
The main point I make is, having been here for past 42 years I don't want the place spoilt or indeed under water - well not during the time I have left on this earth and if shifting a few tons of shingle is the current answer then, subject to a good alternative, it is something we have to put up with.
We had the same works carried out up to 7 years ago and as it is only a five day a week operation it will not affect the majority of those against as they only come down at weekends. Out of the 90 odd shacks here less than half are inhabited full time. The loudest voices seem to come from those who don't live here!
Energies should be directed at getting a long term solution for the protection of Dungeness.
Dungeness needs protecting and preserving. That is why, until a better long term solution is found I am not against the proposed beach movement. Saying I am not against it does not imply I am for it - but if needs must.....!!!!
So I shall remain an independent voice and be controversial.
I said you should have seen the draft!!
No the point is being controversial stimulates argument and or discussion!
The main point I make is, having been here for past 42 years I don't want the place spoilt or indeed under water - well not during the time I have left on this earth and if shifting a few tons of shingle is the current answer then, subject to a good alternative, it is something we have to put up with.
We had the same works carried out up to 7 years ago and as it is only a five day a week operation it will not affect the majority of those against as they only come down at weekends. Out of the 90 odd shacks here less than half are inhabited full time. The loudest voices seem to come from those who don't live here!
Energies should be directed at getting a long term solution for the protection of Dungeness.
Dungeness needs protecting and preserving. That is why, until a better long term solution is found I am not against the proposed beach movement. Saying I am not against it does not imply I am for it - but if needs must.....!!!!
So I shall remain an independent voice and be controversial.
Monday 16 January 2012
£1.25 million to spare?
If you have a spare few million there is a complex of properties that could come your way. Cannot be marketed in traditional way but details can be made available to highly vetted individuals. Most suitable as a second home for MP's with plenty of room for mistresses or indeed as a 'get away from it all' abode for the would be hermit yet within One and 1/2 hours of the Londinium - new HST only 35 minutes from Ashford.
You know how to contact me
Discretion assured
You know how to contact me
Discretion assured
NEW WEBSITE SOON
This, must say popular, website was offered to the local Residents Association (for free) as it had been muted they wanted to create an 'offical' Dungeness site. I felt that, with the monies available in their 'kitty', great improvents could have been made. However the offer was rejected - well not actually rejected - ignored. So at great expense, to this hard up retired old person, I have commissioned a new site and sod the expense. If the dog has to go hungry so be it. The new 'fresh' site is looking good and should be 'up' in the next week to ten days. Saddened at having to take my life savings to pay for his lavish lifestyle the web designer has inserted a 'Donate' button (for free!!!!) should any reader take pity!
This 'Paypal' link will hopefully serve as an easy method of payment for any purchases of Dungeness memorabilia that may be offered by local artists etc.
This 'Paypal' link will hopefully serve as an easy method of payment for any purchases of Dungeness memorabilia that may be offered by local artists etc.
RNLI
Royal National Lifeboat Institution - Dungeness
Rather than type up a precis of the recent, quite heroic, rescue of a distressed sailing vessel by the Dungeness Lifeboat crew, we have reproduced, with the full permission of 'The |Looker', their front page of Issue 35. further coverage is given on the Dungeness Lifeboat Website - see links
Rather than type up a precis of the recent, quite heroic, rescue of a distressed sailing vessel by the Dungeness Lifeboat crew, we have reproduced, with the full permission of 'The |Looker', their front page of Issue 35. further coverage is given on the Dungeness Lifeboat Website - see links
Lifes a Beach!!
Well, to some, the proposed re-instatement of beach movement seems to be the end of civilisation as we know it.
The problem we have at Dungeness is that the area is designated a 'flood area' and needs protection. We have two nuclear power stations - one closed but still one hundred years of radiation to care for. It is inconceivable that any government will allow Dungeness to flood. It just will not happen. There are measures in place - and more afoot - to prevent flooding. One part of the flood protection measures involves the replacing of beach that has been washed around from the West to the East side of the Power Stations. If successful in their operations EDF (the French owned - we Brits own nothing - power suppliers) will ensure we hermits who reside here will be safe for at least another 150 years. However there are many who want to prevent the movement of this beach. There is evidently a petition of over 1500 names supporting the 'let Dungeness sink' brigade. Over 1500! There are only 40 families who live here permantly. The others are outsiders - one assumes the the same tribe that is against development of the airport or a third nuclear power station. Read 'lovedungeness' website for the full emotional rejection of the beach moving proposals.
Personally I do not know what all the fuss is about. Up to six years ago the transporting, by lorry, of beach and during the winter months was carried out with barely a comment. Yes they are very large dumper truck lorries but never proved a danger or threat and were only operational during winter months and Monday to Friday - so even the 'weekend shack owners' were never here to witness the goimngs on.
BUT now there is uproar!
The greatest area of concern would seem to be the 'destruction of this area of natural beauty etc etc. The noise the pollution of lorries trundling around. The loss of revenue to the hard pressed community by preventing quote tens of thousands of visiting fishermen to the area unquote. What a load of cods wallop (pun intended). .
I missed the recent local meeting so spoke directly to both EDF and the Environment Agency for their comments on points I wished to raise. First I wanted to know what was significantly different to the proposed movement of beach now compared with the past. NONE! So what is the problem? Health and Safety have got involved and the immediate vicinity around the extraction and lorry loading area will be 'fenced off '. However reading all the local anti press would have one believe the whole area will be sealed off thus depriving the 'tens of thousands' of visiting fishermen their 'right' to come to Dungeness and leave their garbage behind. As if they help the local economy. They come, they fish they leave. and lesave rubbish - which has to be picked up, at a cost, by our local beach cleaner commisar.
EDF have stated at none of the meetings they have attended did any of the majority anti brigade make any suggestions as to alternative methods to assist in the flood prevention programme. If the area were allowed to flood there would be no Dungeness. So those against the proposals would seem to have a death (by drowning one assumes) wish.
I had thought perhaps dredging and pumping beach ashore from the sea bed off the point might be an option (as it has been along the coast at Sandgate). EDF states for the relatively small amount of beach required it is too expensive and that movement by lorries and all terrain vehicles is the most cost effective method.
EDF have forwarded the FAQ's regarding the situation and both pages are reproduced in full - hopefully in close proximity to this article.
The problem we have at Dungeness is that the area is designated a 'flood area' and needs protection. We have two nuclear power stations - one closed but still one hundred years of radiation to care for. It is inconceivable that any government will allow Dungeness to flood. It just will not happen. There are measures in place - and more afoot - to prevent flooding. One part of the flood protection measures involves the replacing of beach that has been washed around from the West to the East side of the Power Stations. If successful in their operations EDF (the French owned - we Brits own nothing - power suppliers) will ensure we hermits who reside here will be safe for at least another 150 years. However there are many who want to prevent the movement of this beach. There is evidently a petition of over 1500 names supporting the 'let Dungeness sink' brigade. Over 1500! There are only 40 families who live here permantly. The others are outsiders - one assumes the the same tribe that is against development of the airport or a third nuclear power station. Read 'lovedungeness' website for the full emotional rejection of the beach moving proposals.
Personally I do not know what all the fuss is about. Up to six years ago the transporting, by lorry, of beach and during the winter months was carried out with barely a comment. Yes they are very large dumper truck lorries but never proved a danger or threat and were only operational during winter months and Monday to Friday - so even the 'weekend shack owners' were never here to witness the goimngs on.
BUT now there is uproar!
The greatest area of concern would seem to be the 'destruction of this area of natural beauty etc etc. The noise the pollution of lorries trundling around. The loss of revenue to the hard pressed community by preventing quote tens of thousands of visiting fishermen to the area unquote. What a load of cods wallop (pun intended). .
I missed the recent local meeting so spoke directly to both EDF and the Environment Agency for their comments on points I wished to raise. First I wanted to know what was significantly different to the proposed movement of beach now compared with the past. NONE! So what is the problem? Health and Safety have got involved and the immediate vicinity around the extraction and lorry loading area will be 'fenced off '. However reading all the local anti press would have one believe the whole area will be sealed off thus depriving the 'tens of thousands' of visiting fishermen their 'right' to come to Dungeness and leave their garbage behind. As if they help the local economy. They come, they fish they leave. and lesave rubbish - which has to be picked up, at a cost, by our local beach cleaner commisar.
EDF have stated at none of the meetings they have attended did any of the majority anti brigade make any suggestions as to alternative methods to assist in the flood prevention programme. If the area were allowed to flood there would be no Dungeness. So those against the proposals would seem to have a death (by drowning one assumes) wish.
I had thought perhaps dredging and pumping beach ashore from the sea bed off the point might be an option (as it has been along the coast at Sandgate). EDF states for the relatively small amount of beach required it is too expensive and that movement by lorries and all terrain vehicles is the most cost effective method.
EDF have forwarded the FAQ's regarding the situation and both pages are reproduced in full - hopefully in close proximity to this article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
