Wingnut Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 In the article "Lifebelts needed at Ackers Pit". Clerk Peter Briggs says they will be "considered" in the future. Sorry lad, but "considered" isn't good enough. In view of the recent tragedy at Appleton Reservoir, LIFEBELTS SHOULD BE A MUST HAVE ON ANY WATER. Maybe we should lobby our local M.P.'s to ensure that lifebelts are in place. Ackers is only a shallow water, until you get to the 4 foot of silt that is still in there. And in parts, the banks are still too high in my opinion. We must all do our part in ensuring the safety of children and others to the best of our ability. Let us have no, aahh but, yeah but, no but, discussions about it. Do you want to be sat at home thinking if only I had tried to do something about it? I don't. It will be too late after the event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Sid Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 i agree that considered is not good enough. there is the problem that they do tend to get misused as did the ones along sankey valley. it was not uncommon to find them floating all over the canal and may be the reason for that statement. better to have them and them be misused than not have them and have to tell some family why their relative could not be saved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 How about a huge fence all round the site, with warning signs - at great expense to rate payers? Fact is: youngsters are generally not "risk aware" and will do these things regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 In the article "Lifebelts needed at Ackers Pit". Clerk Peter Briggs says they will be "considered" in the future. Sorry lad, but "considered" isn't good enough. In view of the recent tragedy at Appleton Reservoir, LIFEBELTS SHOULD BE A MUST HAVE ON ANY WATER. Maybe we should lobby our local M.P.'s to ensure that lifebelts are in place. Ackers is only a shallow water, until you get to the 4 foot of silt that is still in there. And in parts, the banks are still too high in my opinion. We must all do our part in ensuring the safety of children and others to the best of our ability. Let us have no, aahh but, yeah but, no but, discussions about it. Do you want to be sat at home thinking if only I had tried to do something about it? I don't. It will be too late after the event. Can you put a link to the original story - not showing up in the last month!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 A sign may be better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted June 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 www.warrington-worldwide.co.uk/articles/3904/1/Lifebelts-needed-at-pond/Page1.html There you go mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted June 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 There was a lifebelt at Ackers Pit years ago. I suppose it was the morons that pinched it. Still no reason not to put another one or two in its place though. I'm only surprised that in this day and age of Health and Safety Standards, that lifebelts haven't been in place sooner. Correct me if I am wrong. But even more so now that Ackers is being portrayed as some kind of picnic site. Picnic sites, water, kids. Not a very good mix if there are no or very few safety standards to go by. Also, Coun Sonia Boggan said that the Pit now looks beautiful after the work had been done on it. And I suppose there will be butterflies and birds fluttering about over everybodys head. Pity she forgot to mention or didn't even see the broken glass still lying about which the water has now hidden. Broken glass, cut feet, rat urine, (Weil's Disease) not a very good combination at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 I'm sure the old life belt was still there just before Ackers closed for it's refurb.... it was mounted on a wooden board. Anyway that aside I do agree ACKERS NEEDS A LIFEBELT !! Infact it need two... one at each side. If the Parish Council wont supply them then maybe Warrington Anglers will.... after all the WA have responsibility for the water As it's now 8 months on since the PC said they would 'consider' it in the future then I presume they either forgot about it or as no-one has fallen in so far it is has been deemed unnecessary Lifebelts are not expensive and here is a link if any Parish Councillors or the WAA are reading !! http://www.rescueandrecovery.co.uk/24-inch-lifebuoy.html Infact, if any of you are good at woodwork and can make some sort of a frame to hang it on... I'll buy a ?27 lifebelt and put it there myself if THEY don't get one in the next month ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 Perhaps outraged parishoners should attend te next parish council meeting and express their concern. Is SHARC still going???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 What There are Sharks in Ackers Pit.... No point in lifebelts then Is it really a case for 'outraged parishoner' input or just simple case of common sense Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingnut Posted June 5, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 I'm sure Peter isn't thinking that I am an outraged parishoner. I just think that some people have become complacent about safety when it comes to making Ackers a beauty/picnic spot. cosmetically it looks good. And that is my point. It has only had a superficial makeover. Nobody seems to know or have any idea about the ecology of the water for a start. It hasn't even been de-silted properly, which was the main problem in the first place. So then the decision seemed to have been made, I know, let's chop some trees down and make grassy banks. That will keep the peasents quiet. Yeah Right. Did they ever look into what they proposed to do properly? I don't think so. Recently there has been concern shown over the blue green alge (Cyanobacteria) that has appeared. Well you had better keep your dogs out of it for a start. It is also harmful to humans. areator pumps are okay short term, they are not a cure, and they have to be manned 24/7. Tubes of barley straw placed around the waters edge (Some of us will remember them from a couple of years ago in Ackers). is one of the best cures for blue green algea which starves the water of oxygen. The problem is that the barley straw should be in place now to give it time to break down and for the bacteria to do its work. So yep, that's another Health and Safety issue that went unnoticed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byrdy Posted June 5, 2009 Report Share Posted June 5, 2009 maybe Warrington Anglers will.... after all the WA have responsibility for the water Wrong!,Warrington Anglers own the fishing rights for the water,nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted June 6, 2009 Report Share Posted June 6, 2009 What There are Sharks in Ackers Pit.... No point in lifebelts then Is it really a case for 'outraged parishoner' input or just simple case of common sense Peter My point, Dismayed, is that to get people's attention, you have to attend these meetings and register your concerns. Quite often, once is not enough. Priorities are changing by the hour, and what is important now, will be at the bottom of the pile before dinner. Therefore it is important to let the powers that be, know that the natives are restless and will not go away until the issue is sorted. I thought that you had something to do with SHARC????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Posted June 15, 2009 Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 Wingnut, you are correct, it has only had a superficial makeover and it hasn't been de-silted properly. Also the silt that was removed from the pit hasn't all been removed from the site and will gradually be washed back into the pit. The trees weren't cut down merely to make grassy banks but because in places silt had been stacked up around the trunks effectively killing them off. The seed banks were destroyed during the de-silting process and should have been restored straight away, but weren't. etc. etc. etc. All in all a waste of time and waste of public money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sha Posted June 15, 2009 Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 Going along very nicely thankyou Peter! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.