Jet-skiers test Loch Lomond to the limit

Published on Saturday 2 July 2005 00:49

THE proposal for a 7mph speed limit over almost half of Loch Lomond raises two important questions.

Is it an opportunity missed to return the loch to an area of utter tranquillity, which a total speed limit such as that on Lake Windermere would have done? Or is it a sledgehammer to crack a nut - the nut in question being the problem of jet-skis which are loathed and detested by the majority of loch users?

Hands up - I am an angler and own a powerboat, so I have a foot in both camps.

But it has to be said that speedboats and water skiers cause far fewer problems than jet-skis, since their preference is for open water rather than the shallows that surround the shoreline, which is where the jet-skiers tend to buzz around in an effort to show off to their friends.

There are already by-laws in place that govern the speed of motor craft within 150 metres of many shorelines. The problem is that they are largely ignored by jet-skis and those with control of access to the waterline are unable or unprepared to enforce them.

The patrol boat can't be everywhere, so those who want to enjoy the quietness of the lochside continually have their peace shattered.

Jet-skis on their own can't be banned, since there is a right of navigation on the loch.

And there are millions of pounds worth of motor craft moored at the southern end of the loch. While many are content to tootle round the islands, many more will want to get to the unrestricted water and will flout the 7mph limit to do so.

So unless the area is rigorously policed and an example made of law-breakers, the new rules will be meaningless.

What is most important is conservation. It used to be said that salmon could only be caught in Loch Lomond where the water was no deeper than the leathers of an oar - about seven or eight feet.

With the constant activity around the shoreline and the islands, that is hardly ever true now and fish can be spotted on fish finders 40 or 50ft down. Likewise, bird species that flourished on the islands and shoreline are now sadly absent, so action has to be taken to protect the loch for future generations.

Whether what is proposed by the Park Authority is the correct action is open to question. This is a huge area of water, there to be enjoyed by all as well as protected, and if existing regulations were better enforced, the problems would be much diminished.

The stupidity and carelessness of those who cannot accept rules for what they are, and the laziness or cowardice of those who have the power to restrict access to the water for the law-breakers are the real problem.

Money, of course, talks, and while commercial interests hold sway over conservation concerns, those with the power to make a difference will shy away from biting the bullet. And that is a tragedy.