LLOYD’S List describes its handling as “a showcase for other shipowners.” Local residents call it “the dumping of rusting hulks in our beautiful loch.” Whatever it is, the fact remains that ‘it’ is a raft of six ships, moored in Loch Striven, going nowhere fast - and the community is unhappy.
So unhappy, in fact, that over 40 people (a considerable total given the rural setting) signed a petition calling upon South Cowal Community Council to hold a public meeting. Residents wanted the opportunity to meet with representatives of the companies who they feel have imposed a situation on them with no consultation and no consideration of the impact.
A public meeting they got - but the two companies at the centre of the controversy, Clydeport and Maersk, did not turn up.
Although Maersk had intended to send representatives, the company sent its apologies at the last minute, saying that severe weather prevented them from disembarking from the raft - a statement met with wry smiles from locals who had driven past a ‘wonderfully calm’ Loch Striven on their way to the meeting.
Those who attended were left in the capable hands of chair Tony Miles, MP Alan Reid, Argyll and Bute Council leader Dick Walsh and council officers who have been involved with some of the issues that have arisen since the ships arrived in the loch last June.
Cllr Walsh pointed out that in common with the community, the local authority itself had had no consultation, communication or conversation with Clydeport about laying up redundant commercial ships in Loch Striven.
“We have no say in whether they’re there or not,” he said. “We have attempted to negotiate with Clydeport on several occasions, inviting them to come to closed business day meetings where the issue could be discussed fully, but there was no response.
“We were far from happy and pressed them further, but to no avail.
“We received numerous complaints from the community, but the only area where the council could become involved was in terms of noise concerns.”
He handed over to area environmental health officer Jo Rains, who advised: “When complaints first came in, we monitored the situation and identified a low frequency peak.
“We served an enforcement notice, but Clydeport said it would appeal and it was eventually passed to Maersk, which accepted responsibility and took some action to address the noise.
“We now need to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures, and this will take place shortly.”
The cavalier attitude of Clydeport throughout the whole affair is another point of concern for the local community, and this was echoed by MP Alan Reid, who was next to speak.
He outlined Clydeport’s history, pointing out that it was in fact a limited company acting as a statutory body in its role as harbour authority.
He read out a response he had received from the port authority’s MD, Margaret MacKay, last summer, which rather querulously stated that the company was spending an  “inordinate amount of time dealing with all the correspondence”, “going over the same points each time” and concluding: “if it would be possible in future that a co-ordinated response was given by MSPs and MPs as opposed to separate emails and letters from each individual.”
An appeal from Mr Reid to Scottish transport minister Stewart Stevenson brought little comfort. Mr Stevenson stated that he had no locus to intervene in Clydeport’s statutory role as harbour authority, adding: “I am confident that this matter is being handled in a sympathetic way.”
The meeting was then opened up to comments from the public, and the first remarks from Toward resident Ted Carey were unequivocal.
“Someone is making money from dumping rusting hulks in our beautiful loch,” he said. “They’re making a profit at the expense of our environment. We get rubbish, they get the benefits.
“We need to push the Scottish government to legislate to take the power away from these two companies - how many more rusting hulks will we get?”
Another resident, Bill Ferguson, queried what infrastructure was in place to cope in the event of a major emergency on the raft.
“Cowal couldn’t supply enough tenders to deal with a fire on the raft,” he said. “Who pays for any emergency plan to deal with Loch Striven?”
Council officers advised that the local authority’s existing major incident plan would come into play, but said that no specific detail for the Loch Striven raft was incorporated.
Ian Smith of Glenstriven estate pointed out: “There is also a business going on down here, and it is a shame to see it ruined by these great big ships.
“People come here to feel that they are out in the wilds, but as they are travelling here, it’s like driving through a commercial port. It has great potential to hurt our business.”
This point was expanded by Bill Ferguson, who asked about the effects of noise pollution on migratory fish, and whether the discovery of dead porpoises on the Striven shores recently may be linked to this also. “We’re seeing a massive decline, particularly in sea trout and even seals. Fishermen are going to go elsewhere,” he warned.
Questions about Clydeport’s accountability and sense of social responsibility were also asked. Cllr Walsh said: “It is an unacceptable situation, especially for our MP to receive a response that implies that dealing with queries is an inconvenience to them. Their attitude is totally unacceptable.
“A major development usually means some benefit to the local community affected by it - but not in this case.”
Summing up, chair Tony Miles said: “Questions need to be asked of the Scottish government about  Clydeport’s fitness to operate and its need for jurisdiction over Loch Striven.
“It’s clear that the consensus of the meeting is to ask the Scottish government whether it is prepared to legislate to deal with this.”
The last word went to Ted Carey, who replied: “Tell them it’s democracy in action.”
Commenting after the meeting, Alan Reid told the Standard: "When I read out the letter I'd received from Clydeport, the meeting was horrified at the arrogant way in which Clydeport dismissed their genuine concerns.
“Stewart Stevenson’s response also shows how out of touch he is with happenings in Loch Striven.
"I fully support the unanimous decision of the meeting to ask the Scottish government and parliament to remove Loch Striven from Clydeport's jurisdiction. A quiet loch like Loch Striven should never have been handed over to an insensitive company like Clydeport.”
Meanwhile, Clydeport, as it has done for so long, remains silent. The Standard asked the company why it had chosen not to meet with Argyll and Bute Council, whether it intended to hold discussions with the local authority in future, and also asked for more information about any future plans for the ships in Loch Striven.
The email containing our questions was not acknowledged and repeated calls to Clydeport’s PR representative went unanswered, despite indications of the level of local ill-feeling towards the port authority over its handling of the Loch Striven situation.

< Prev		Next >