Paladin

I can personally recommend Dominic Buckley http://www.eastangliayachtsurveys.co.uk/index.html

Godwin's Law is still alive and kicking

Trying to save money by not having a regular survey could be a false econony. I had a pre-purchase survey done on my boat. Nothing major found. Five years later, the insurance survey found the grub screws holding the cutlass bearing in position had disappeared, the cutlass bearing was loose and resting on the back of the propellor and there was evidence of galvanic corrosion on the plate holding the lower pintle bush. The survey (+ lift in and out) was substantially less than £500, and was very thorough. I attribute the galvanic corrosion to the fairly recent introduction at my moorings of shore power, to which I connected my boat. I've since fitted a galvanic isolator, which, I'm told, is now a compulsory fit for all new 240v systems. However, I've also found that Saga will insure a boat that is less than 31 years old, without a survey, and they will not, thereafter, ask for one while you remain with them.

Thank you for that. Perhaps you're being a bit generous. I don't think there's more than a total of 8 feet overhang, which would, using that formula, put the hull speed at around 7mph. Which would probably account for the bow wave and wash.

Which would be how fast?

We ALL know the Broads are not a National Park and, because the Sandford Principle cannot be applied to the Broads, they never can be without a change in primary legislation, despite anyone's ambitions. So it's hardly likely to happen by stealth or by the continued incorrect assignation of the term. But a very laudable topic has been hijacked for no good reason (IMO). Please do 'rest your case'.

"Who can be nominated? We are looking for potential winners of all ages, abilities and backgrounds – you just need to be an active volunteer in one of our 15 UK National Parks (Brecon Beacons; Broads; Cairngorms; Dartmoor; Exmoor; Lake District; Loch Lomond and the Trossachs; New Forest; Northumberland; North York Moors; Peak District; Pembrokeshire Coast; Snowdonia; South Downs; Yorkshire Dales)."

First of all, the link in the first post no longer works, as the Broads Authority has a new web site. This link should work. To answer Viking23's question. The BA only installs charging posts on their own 24 hour moorings. In the case of those above PH Bridge, these moorings are Deep Dyke, Deep Go Dyke, White Slea, West Somerton and Catfield Staithe. Of these, only Catfield Staithe has an electricity supply anywhere near, and there is only room for 3 boats. You might try asking the BA if they would install one at Catfield Staithe. The owners with moorings there might well monopolise it, though (I don't know if the private moorings have any such facility at present). I doubt very much whether it would be economically viable, or even possible, to run a supply to the other 24 hr moorings, given the expense and need to get landowner permissions. Have you thought of getting a solar panel?

It seems that everyone is relying on the BroadsBlog for their information, which is a very potted version of what is available on the National Parks web site. The attached document may help to clarify the purpose of, and criteria for, the award. UK-National-Parks-Volunteer-Awards-General-Info-2014-Draft2.doc

JM, you rather confirm the points I was making. "In politics, a defector is a person who gives up allegiance to one state in exchange for allegiance to another, in a way which is considered illegitimate by the first state. More broadly, it involves abandoning a person, cause or doctrine to which one is bound by some tie, as of allegiance or duty. This term is also applied, often pejoratively, to anyone who switches loyalty to another religion, sports team, political party, or other rival faction. In that sense, the defector is often considered a traitor by their original side." (source: Wikipedia). Leaving one forum for another cannot accurately be described as 'defection'. That action just doesn't fit the definition in any way. Pedant I may be (well, yes, I am), but I simply see the use of that term as an effort to somehow glorify the act. 'Wow, look at me everyone - I've d-e-f-e-c-t-ed'. Cobblers, I say, you've simply exercised a right of choice. Big deal - not. I haven't personalised my comments regarding a falling-out, but, if the cap fits...you know the rest. As a contributor, valued or otherwise, to both forums, I take exception to being dragged into a dispute, not of my making or even, to some extent, my comprehension. Nor do I do triumphalism. It was my vain hope that members disillusioned elsewhere might just join here and enrich the content, without drama. Some have and some haven't. I'll leave the reader to decide whether that is a pertinent reference or not.

It seems that I am alone in regarding all this talk of ‘defectors’ to be rather sad. I joined NBN before I joined NBF, and post on whichever one presents me with a topic to which I wish to contribute. However, if I choose not to post, for whatever reason (as with a dissimilar forum on which I no longer post), I don’t regard that as defecting, or deserting, or transferring allegiance, or any other emotive term. I am simply exercising my right of choice. I regard the fact that some new members have only joined a forum because they have fallen out elsewhere to be something of a ‘damned with faint praise’ situation. I joined NBN because it attracted me (as did NBF), not because I didn’t fit in somewhere else. I really hope that these new members do contribute positively to this, or any other, forum they choose to join and don’t simply live in the past.

Ho, hum. My point was that the script that was being read to me referred to the Broads having 'the status of a National Park', not that it WAS a National Park. My response to the surveyor did include an explanation of the Sandford Principle, in order to clarify my response. If anyone bothers to look through the National Parks web site, they will see, in the explanation of 'When were the National Parks designated', the following entry "1989 - The Broads given equivalent status to a National Park". This means that the Broads are eligible for substantial Government funding. While the BA remains a harbour authority, and unless the primary legislation is amended, the Sandford Principle simply cannot be applied, a situation which prevents full National Park status being achieved, regardless of the ambitions of the CEO. Not worth knocking any paint off the ceiling, IMO.

My survey lady (presumably reading from the same script as all the other surveyors) referred to the Broads having "the status of a National Park", not that the Broads was a National Park. That is a perfectly correct statement to make. Perhaps there has been some misunderstanding or mishearing here.

The number of moorings hasn't decreased, only the cost to the toll payer. The BA are actually increasing the number of their moorings.

Dajen, the BA held a Moorings Workshop Meeting at the end of July. This is not open to the public, but includes various 'stakeholders'. Who knows, other 24 hour moorings might be in the frame for handing back to their owners. Two of the moorings at Irstead Shoals and a section of the mooring at Ludham Bridge have already been dealt with in this manner recently.

Manko, tongue-in-cheek or not, you clearly know nothing about me. I do not 'spy' with a camera. I am open about all my photographic expeditions, wherever they may be. If someone is interested enough to ask me what I am doing, I am very pleased to explain. They would probably regret having asked, though, as my wife says I can talk for England. As it happens, I have been out of the county for the past week, but you may recall there was a discussion about these moorings on NBF quite recently, during which I posted photos I had taken on 13 July 2014 (Dinghy Only signs). That was the last time I visited Thorpe Green. I did try to get a meal in The Buck on that day, but was told they didn't have a chef. Have you thought that, if the 'spy' wasn't working for the BA or the TC, he might just be an avid collector of boat photos, who doesn't like being quizzed or, as you put it, 'challenged'. If the person was taking photos from a public place, of boats in a public place, being 'challenged' might well have put his back up. (I actually have a large collection of Hampton Safari photographs, left over from when I owned one.) If the BA intends not renewing the lease in 2017, the TC has got plenty of time to sort out bye laws of its own, provided it gets its collective finger out. BroadScot, it is interesting that you mention your visits to Thorpe Green in association with Hearts. Perhaps that is the problem. It's 12 years since Heart Cruisers closed down. Fewer boats visiting the Green, now the BA is obviously looking at value for the toll payers pound.

As Strowager has pointed out, in rural areas of Norfolk, it doesn't matter who the ISP is, speeds cannot exceed the line capacity. Fibre optic cable is very gradually being introduced, but, as I live 3 miles from the exchange, which still uses copper cable, the best speed I can get (with BT) is around 3.6 - 4 Mbps, which is twice what I ever achieved with VirginMedia. The chances of Virgin bringing cable out into the 'sticks' are less than nil.

Loss or damage to property is expressly excluded from the duty of care owed by an occupier by the Occupiers Liability Act 1984, which also says that: "An occupier of premises owes a duty to another (not being his visitor)...if — (a)he is aware of the danger or has reasonable grounds to believe that it exists; (b)he knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that the other is in the vicinity of the danger concerned or that he may come into the vicinity of the danger (in either case, whether the other has lawful authority for being in that vicinity or not); and ( c)the risk is one against which, in all the circumstances of the case, he may reasonably be expected to offer the other some protection." In the case of uneven ground, mole holes, unsafe banks, the protection offered might be in the form of notices warning of the dangers. Or it might simply be easier to erect No Mooring notices. You will note that the duty of care even extends to trespassers.

The broadband/telephone market has shrunk considerably over the years, as the big fish swallowed up the minnows. But you pay your money and take your choice. Talk Talk, the most complained of provider, has hiked its line rental by 6.6% and its TV package by 19%. In this case, BT seems to be playing catch-up.

Joe Friday was one of my childhood heros

Of the 8 contributors to that thread, only 2 were critical of the BA (usual suspects?). For anyone interested, the planning application, subject of that thread, can be found here. We seem to forget that there is no right to moor on private land. Whether the land in question is owned by the BA or someone else is immaterial. I don't know why the owner has decided to prohibit mooring, but tacitly permitting mooring imposes a duty of care on the owner. The risk of being sued these days is so great that it surprises me that we are still provided with so many informal moorings.

But at least the local economy has benefited "The pay machines have also been targeted by thieves and vandals, taking up to £3,000 in cash."

Manko, to answer your previous question, the 'official' explanation, given when it first occurred, for the use of the word 'official' was that "Actually it's an experiment to see if the word effects google rankings, so nothing sinister." And that cropped up 3 years ago, so it's all a bit stale now.

I actually belong to other forums (not boating related) on which such posts are moderated. I have no problem with other forums being mentioned as in 'I saw this posted on XYZ forum' and a link to the post. I find that sort of constructive posting to be very useful, although some forums don't even allow that kind of a mention. Forum-bashing, on the other hand, is simply negative, as is liveaboard-bashing.

I do so hate it when one forum (on whatever subject) criticises another forum. Why does this happen? Jealousy? Spite? If you don't like how a forum, any forum, works, don't visit it or post on it. That the various forums still exist shows that there are some people who like that particular format and what it has to offer. The forums that don't attract posters disappear. There are a couple nearby I can think of. Being asked not to go down the 'anti-liveaboard' route, then blatantly criticising another forum, out-of-the-blue, smacks of hypocrisy to me. I just don't like it.