March 4th - Bow is uncovered -
but City Council announces Stern will be left in the ground

CITY COUNCIL ABANDONS STERN
Building work restarts today 22nd April

!!! 2 DAYS TO GO !!!
BEFORE STERN IS
BURIED FOR EVER

Write a Letter Today

write a letter

See below for layout of the site and details of F.O.N.S. proposal for recovery of the Stern.

Newport City Council announced on the 4th of March 2003 that work has begun to investigate what remains of the bow. The work undertaken by a combined consortium involving the Mary Rose Archaeological Services Ltd and Oxford Archaeology follows a bitter dispute over Newport Council's failure to pay a substantial bill for previous recovery work by Glamorgan and Gwent Archaeological Trust, the former contractors.

Work commenced on Friday 4th March 2003 and a mechanical digger quickly removed the four metres of overlying concrete and earth to expose the bow timbers. These were reported to be in remarkable condition although some damage may have been sustained by the insertion of two concrete piles driven through the area before the presence of the ship was known.

At the same time the council announced that the Stern will not be recovered because of claimed dangers associated with its proximity to the Victorian dock wall. It still claims that the stern timbers may have been lost in antiquity despite public statements by GGAT's archaeologists that there is bound to be timbers remaining. The Friends of the Newport Ship also continue to campaign for the whole ship to be recovered.

The legal disputes with GGAT, administrative delays and a general lack of urgency on the Council's part have reduced the time left to complete the recovery before construction of the new Arts Centre overtakes the site. As a result the Council has imposed a tight deadline of 21st April for MRAS to complete its work.

Safety Concerns or reluctance to pay the cost?

Just like the enveloping Usk river mud, controversy and differences of opinion continues to cloud the issue of the stern. The City council claims that the dangers are too great and that:

The Stern may not be there?

Recovery works could cause the Victorian dock wall to collapse?

The depth of the remaining timbers and restricted access are a problem?

A high tide could affect the weakened Victorian docks wall?

What they have not said is that both GGAT and Mary Rose Archaeological Services have expressed an opinion that the Stern timbers can be safely recovered.

The Friends of the Newport Ship and the parent Save Our Ship campaign group SOS, are fully aware of the potential safety issues associated with recovery of the stern. We do not trivialise the danger to archaeologists and construction workers, and have always had the highest respect for the standards adhered to throughout the project, particularly during the open days last summer when 16000 people visited the excavation site. We fear however, that safety issues are being used as a smokescreen to mask the fact that Newport City Council are again "spoiling the ship for a ha'pporth of tar" - as late the 19th March Newport Council was still asking contractors for the stern to be recovered.

It is understood that Charles Barker, the director of MRAS, originally proposed a 4 week excavation period and required the insertion of sheet piling to prevent collapse of the trench.

This would be necessarily expensive and sceptics have suggested that the cost is a major factor with a project that is known to have already gone considerably over budget. Consequently, given the time constraints imposed and council reluctance to commit to a relatively expensive engineering solution, MRAS have been forced to accept the lesser solution of recovering only the Bow section.

Window of opportunity

There is an engineering solution to recover the stern - Newport are simply not prepared to pay. What is the estimate, and how does it compare to the £50K per week in delays compensation being paid to the construction contractors due to Newports's contractual arrangements with them? Since the grandstand Council announcement of January "...we always were going to recover the bow & stern" what have they been doing? Recovery has been delayed by the Council arguments with GGAT over none payment for previous work. Additionally there has apparently been three weeks of idle time while they conducted new negotiations with Mary Rose/Oxford Archaeology - thereby greatly reducing the window of opportunity.

The Newport mediaeval ship is universally acclaimed as one of the best examples of a ship of this period. Without the Stern we may never know how she was steered. The design of the aft end can only be guessed at and without it an understanding of her lines will be severely hampered. Additionally the loss of the stern will pose problems for the reconstruction and future display of the vessel.

There is a pervasive belief that Newport City Council parochialism disregards the immense contribution that this ship, in its entirety, will contribute to our knowledge of evolutionary ship design and construction and the maritime heritage of South Wales and the Welsh nation. It is an invaluable asset that will prove to be a major part of Newport's international profile and every year will draw thousands of visitors to the city. It is an opportunity that should not be wasted!

The Welsh Assembly gave £3.5m (5.8 million dollars) to Newport City Council for the mediaeval ship project. Surely, with Welsh Assembly agreement, some of this could be redirected to deal with this emergency and recover the stern while there still remains a window of opportunity.

Opportunities for ongoing research and knowledge about mediaeval ship construction; its international status and the viability of its ultimate reconstruction all hinge on this decision. The evident secrecy and overall lack of transparency on the part of the city authorities regarding all matters to do with the mediaeval ship and the open hostility expressed by many councillors and officers towards the Save Our Ship campaign has led many to believe that the council does not perceive the benefits that will accrue from it. They certainly appear to be less than fully committed to the development of the project - no one believes that a community the size of Newport can afford the cost of undertaking a project of the scale and complexity of the mediaeval ship. Nevertheless Newport council should certainly be leading the campaign to secure the necessary resources from national bodies, charitable foundations and industry.

Unanswered Questions?

Effects of river tides on the excavation?
Conflicting opinions among the experts and significant local knowledge of the site has led many to question the council position and their claims about the engineering feasibility and safety in recovering the stern. Many people recall the construction of the current river wall during the eighties have stated that a steel sheet dam was driven in before the wall was laid - it is likely that this feature lies between the present wall and the old Victorian wall thereby isolating and protecting it from the river. The presence of this dam raises doubts about the council assertion that a high tide will impact "...the porous, weakened structure, like the Victorian docks wall".

Anyway, the river didn't affect the previous ship excavation nor the new display basement. When the display basement was excavated - they simply removed the old wall with a mechanical digger!

It is possible the Stern can be excavated relatively easily by removing the Victorian dock wall with a mechanical digger down to a few inches above the stern with the use of shoring to retain any loose earth while the timbers are uncovered by hand and recorded in situ.
It is feasible that this could be done within two weeks!

top

The viability of excavating the stern?
Up until 19th March Newport Council obviously considered the option of recovering the stern was viable when they wrote a letter to GGAT asking them if they wanted to be involved in lifting the bow and STERN. Turners, the site engineers had excavated a "leader trench" on the line of the previous coffer dam prior to sheet piling being inserted. The point of the leader trench was to ascertain what problems might be encountered when inserting the coffer dam. It was recently suggested that this same trench could be re-excavated to gain access to the stern

How do we know there are any timbers remaining?
Turners excavated the leader trench prior to involvement of the archaeologists and as such may have been in breach of planning conditions. Turners later admitted that the trench had been dug and produced photographs that show the rubble to the rear of an old river wall within the trench. They also claimed not to have seen any timber in the trench. However, during the succeeding GGAT excavations inside the coffer dam, some exposed timbers at the stern end of the ship showed evidence of damage from what could be a mechanical excavator. Other timbers clearly were sliced through by the coffer dam - proving therefore that there MUST be stern timbers still there on the other side of the coffer dam.

How do we know that building of the dock wall destroyed the stern?
The claim that the stern will run into and possibly have been destroyed by the construction of the Victorian dock wall can only be speculation. It is not born out by any declared previous investigation and the known evidence of the 17th century stone slipway uncovered during the recent excavations has shown that this earlier construction was laid over the top of the ship timbers without destroying them. Is it not just as likely that Victorian builders constructed their river wall on top of the superior stone slipway judging it to be an adequate "foundation"? Of course we will never know until a full archaeological investigation is conducted. A desktop survey, while cheap, is not necessarily adequate - we should after all remember that it was a desk top survey that first led the city council to the erroneous view that there would not be any significant remains on the Arts Centre site!

What about the problem of working at such a depth?
Council concerns about the depth of the stern section was not of undue concern to either of the archaeological contractors when they formulated their plans for recovery. The timbers are approximately five metres below ground level. Certainly not exceptional deep in terms of archaeological excavations and the engineering expertise is readily available in the application of shores and sheet piling to prevent disaster. The location of the timbers is bounded on the river side by previous steel piling inserted when the present river wall was constructed. The western side is held by the newly constructed basement wall and a new cofferdam has been inserted a few metres to the north to construct the display basement.

Is there another way to investigate the stern?
Could the site not be investigated by means of an inspection pit sunk by mechanical digger as was done prior to the construction of the new basement display area? This could be done within one day without the need for expensive shuttering.

Before the City Council finally closes the door on this unique opportunity it owes a duty to the citizens of Newport and the wider community for whom this ship represents a major contribution to our knowledge and culture. There remain too many unanswered questions and few people have confidence that Council officials have given adequate consideration to these matters. An evident reluctance on the Council's part to establish a panel of experts to consider the issues and advise on a research and management plan for the ship can only lead to errors of judgement and lost opportunities. It could turn out to be as big a disaster as befell the ship in the first place!

Until this happens we should all continue to question the quality of the "decisions" being made on our behalf - it is not too late to rethink the approach to the Stern.

top

Express your views
Only a few days left to reverse this decision!
Please write

The Friends of the Newport Ship call on all our friends and supporters to write to Newport City Council, to the Wales National Assembly, to Members of Parliament and the National Press urging a review of the decisions taken over this extraordinary national asset.

Other questions that remain unanswered:

What are the specifications of the Mary Rose proposals to recover the stern?

Did MRAS propose the insertion of a new cofferdam to overcome safety concerns?

What was the quoted cost of the proposal?

Is the Council faced with new compensation payments if recovery runs beyond 21 April?

What was GGAT's advice for the safe recovery of the Stern section?

What is the archaeological and "structural engineering analysis" that informed the decision?

What is the evidence that the river will affect the excavation that differs from the previous digs?

How was it possible to dig the new display basement without the river also affecting it?

The new display basement is thought to be too small for the existing ship - even without the addition of the bow and stern. Is the City Council trying to avoid embrassment over this unfortunate mistake?

Did the Council consult with CADW and the Welsh Assembly before deciding not to excavate the stern?

Does the Council intend to appoint an advisory board of experts to oversee management of the project?

To help Save Our Stern - Please write a letter and feel free to include any of the questions or points mentioned above.

Please click on one of the following links:
For a pdf version of the sample letter below please click here
To download a list of names and addresses for MPs, Wales Assembly, Newport City Council click here
To read more about the Council dispute with GGAT click here
To read GGAT press statement about the Stern click here
To read The Friends of the Newport Ship Press statement click here
To read The Friends of the Newport Ship letter to Sir Harry Jones, Leader of Newport City Council click here

!!! WRITE A LETTER TODAY !!!

If you wish to support our cause and have maximum impact write to the key decision makers and influencers listed below:

Newport City Council
Harry.Jones@newport.gov.uk (Leader of the Council - 'owner' of the Arts Centre project)
Iain.Varah@newport.gov.uk ( Head of Leisure, Officer in charge of the Ship)

Building Contractors-WD Turners/Willmott Dixon
brian.drysdale@willmottdixon.co.uk

Wales National Assembly
Rhodri.Morgan@wales.gov.uk (First Minister)
Jenny.Randerson@wales.gov.uk (Minister responsible for ship project)
Rosemary.Butler@Wales.gov.uk (Newport West AM - instrumental in gaining £3.5m funds)
peter.harding@wales.gsi.gov.uk (Assembly officer responsible for the ship funding)

CADW (Welsh Heritage lead body - offered early advice and funding)
Richard.Avent@Wales.gsi.gov.uk

SAMPLE LETTER

Copy and paste or download a .pdf version below

(Your Address)

(Name & address of the person you write to)

Dear (insert the name of the person you write to)

Newport's Mediaeval Ship - Recovery of the Stern

I am writing to express my continuing concern over the Newport Mediaeval ship and the regrettable decision to not recover the Stern section.

This ship is a remarkable find that, following restoration, will prove to be a significant feature of Newport and Wales' maritime heritage and will attract visitors from all over Britain and the world. It will raise Newport's international profile and help consolidate its status as a city.

Newport City Council has only recently announced in the Press that the Bow and Stern will be recovered. However I understand that this decision has now been reversed. I find this somewhat surprising given the significance of the stern timbers to an understanding of the overall design and construction of the ship and its steering mechanism.

The opportunity to preserve such a complete and unique example of a ship of this period should not be squandered. Newport City Council has done well to advance the project so far but I fear that the far greater benefits to be gained in terms of the advancement of knowledge, our maritime heritage, international prestige and the economic benefits that will undoubtedly accrue through tourism will be greatly diminished by this decision.

As I understand it the Council has yet to appoint a panel of expert advisors to prepare and oversee a research and project management plan and I am concerned to know on what basis the archaeological and "structural engineering analysis" was made?

My understanding is that the problems cited by the Council are not unusual in archaeological terms and there is engineering expertise readily available to overcome them at a reasonable cost and in the time available. Does the Council and the Wales National Assembly intend to seek another opinion?

I appeal to Newport City Council and the other public and governmental bodies involved to reconsider the tragic decision taken on this extraordinary national asset. In doing so I am confident Newport will earn the gratitude and admiration of the whole nation and that of future generations.

Yours sincerely,

(signature)

(Type your Name)

(Date)

Please feel free to amend the letter as you see fit.
Add your own views, insert other important questions as suggested above. Tailor the letter accordingly with respect to the person or organisation to whom you are writing.

This is a critical time as building works in the stern area are due to resume in the the next few days - please pen a letter immediately.
If possible also send a surface mail letter as we know these are more likely to elicit a non-standard response.

There are only 2 days to
Save Our Stern
Please Act Now!

Download the letter and addresses below

Do it today

Why not encourage your personal contacts to also send an E-mail to one or more on the list? The more correspondence we can generate in the next few days the greater the pressure and the more likely it is that the council will eventually submit to public opinion.

Letter & Address lists are in Adobe Acrobat .pdf format. Click on logo to download a free copy of ACROBAT READER.

March 4th - Bow is uncovered - but City Council announces Stern will be left in the ground

CITY COUNCIL ABANDONS STERN Building work restarts today 22nd April !!! 2 DAYS TO GO !!! BEFORE STERN IS BURIED FOR EVER **Write a Letter Today**