Saily

Forgive me for disagreeing with the esteemed AJB (whom I hold in great respect), but while the bottom of that section (Colt Common to the lock) may well have been dredged recently, there were at least two obstacles with which my 3ft keel collided when we went up there a couple of weeks ago - perhaps tree branches, but big ones if they were....and we were stirring stuff up with the keel in several places even though we were only using a small outboard on near-tickover. I'd never dream of attempting to hoist sail above Colt. And the tree growth along the river behind and upstream of the Norfolk Mead is such that a real slalom is required unless you drop the mast, with one or two badly (loosely) moored long-term boats positioned at the most critical bits which didn't help much... It's still do-able, but getting harder every year because of those over-arching trees. Lori - I suspect the gaps near the Rising Sun are less to do with fees (none that I'm aware of) but I and many friends wouldn't choose to moor directly outside any pub, especially overnight, simply to avoid the possibility of any rowdies (not that I've ever seen any at Colt...) Above Wroxham gets close to the idyll above Beccles in my book - both lovely stretches which would benefit from a little more management (observation, not a dig).

My suggestion about giving up cars was a reaction to the 'don't want the new roads' argument. With one or two notable exceptions, most opposers of roads (or houses, or in fact any new development) are those who already have those things and want to use them (but don't want others to have them as it will spoil the environment), and they're the same folks who sit in jams complaining about too many cars - without seeing the irony. The NDR is coming; it's been decided, so there's no point in arguing the toss, that time is past. This topic was intended as useful to advise about new roadworks relating to the NDR and I think would have been useful for a while, however, the route is readily available online here http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/travel_and_transport/major_projects_and_improvement_plans/norwich/northern_distributor_road/index.htm and from what I've seen, the plan is to start in multiple places at once (the only way they could do it in the time planned, of course). Most of those places which affect existing roads are now clearly visible by the preparatory works in progress, so a quick look at the map will now easily show places which will be held up for the next 18 months or so.... Will be interesting to compare how well they stick to time compared with the Elveden stretch a couple of years ago - this bit is longer with more roundabouts and bridges but still planned for a shorter project - I see the Aviation Museum at the airport is to move - that will be worth watching for any interested folks, given that most of the bigger exhibits flew in and are now fenced off from the airport

Actually, I'm overall in favour of the NDR, for two main reasons: 1. Because it will route lots of traffic around the outside of the city rather than around the notoriously congested ring road, although it would have been much better to have completed the loop, as the gap will be a horrible chore for users and residents alike. 2. Because experience/observation tells me that a lot of the inevitable housing developments will happen INSIDE the new NDR loop and thereby help to protect the green land outside the loop. Of course it won't stop it altogether and the new housing south of Wroxham is horrible sprawl and I don't like it one bit, but I believe the NDR will act as a slow-down on some of it for a while. We all complain about all the new housing developments but they all seem to sell quite quickly so there's obviously a demand. If we old farts don't like it, why do we coo and gurgle over each new grandchild? If we all slowed down the breeding a bit, we wouldn't have such a lot of pressure to build ever more structures. Side-thought: Anybody else getting fed up with all new developments looking like each other (rather like in-town shopping malls - which town am I in? they all look the same) and despite most buyers of these new houses having one or two cars there is serious under-provision of anywhere to keep them resulting in most new estates being jam-packed slums of the future with vehicles abandoned across footpaths and poor access for emergency vehicles and prams/wheelchairs/mobility scooters, not to mention just plain ugly - not somewhere I'd want to live, thanks. What's the difference between urban sprawl and global warming? We COULD do something about the first (but don't want to), while the second will happen anyway (we MIGHT just be making it fractionally worse for a while). Either way it's gonna happen, just like the NDR. Final thought - if we don't want all these new roads, why don't 1 in 3 of us volunteer to give up our cars???? Nah, didn't think you would.

The comparison between water tables and fracking is rather like comparing Hickling Broad to the Atlantic Trench - there's a similar degree of difference in the depth.... And as Marshman suggests, if extraction of gas was going to create a void underground the North Sea would have drained into it by now and we could walk to Holland, as they've been pulling gas out of the Leman Bank and Indefatigable fields since the 1960s. That's the problem with oversimplified graphics on the telly - the scales don't show the relative size of hole against the depth so everyone thinks the ground is going to open up like the surface sink holes in housing estates caused by underground streams or old mine workings. Coal mine tunnels 6 feet across and a couple of hundred yards down can and have destabilised the ground but some drill pipe about 6-8 inches in diameter going down 3/4 mile or more are just so different.

Very kind, JA Tides are looking quite favourable but I'll have to monitor work issues, so if we get a chance we'd love to be there. Busy RCC boats are often engaged racing and that's not high on our priority list but it's a good excuse for a South trip which is always fun, and getting a mixture of boat types has to be good for spectators and participants alike, seeing how the other half lives and all that..... Don't save us a place just in case - we wouldn't want to block/waste it - but we're not that big that we can't take a chance on squeezing in somewhere close-ish Feels like August is a long way away at present, but I'm sure it'll whizz round soon enough - have a great event regardless

Bit of both really.... We weren't old enough to qualify for the sadly-defunct VWBA, but it always looked like a good showcase for the best of Broads boating, and at a lovely venue. We're plywood and built between 2001 and 2004, (so we escaped the self-policing ) and certainly a Broads Cruiser (as defined by the River Cruiser Class anyways), and can also boast some real tree-wood (mast, spars, tiller, rudder and myriad little bits of toe rail etc), but based in Ludham... and (confession time) - have flappy saily things too... so a round trip to Beccles isn't something we would realistically undertake in less than 3-4 days, even with perfect tides and weather (it's fun, not a race) If we can find a hole in the diary we'd like to join in but it's dependent upon tide times and availability of leave from work, so I thought I'd check eligibility first

Does a wooden boat have to meet any age criteria to join in? and does the wood have to be tree-wood, or does plywood count? Just asking....

We've done it a couple of times with the (non-local) grandkids. Must say the folks do a nice trip for 5-7 year-olds, especially when Santa drops onto the roof whilst underway (I don't know how he gets permission from Norwich Airport to fly so low so close to the airport). The crew lay on gentle entertainment and our little ones enjoyed it very much. Grandpa got the chance to go on top and I enjoyed the fresh air and break, but if it wasn't for the little ones I wouldn't bother (but we are admittedly spoiled, living here and having our own boat)

Thanks for that last post, Robin - you've just redeemed yourself in the eyes of this reader For a while you had me thinking these were serious proposals, which although I knew they would never come about in my lifetime at least gave me an opportunity to express an opinion, and I did! (and it seems many others hold similar views to mine) Now you've explained the background to your thinking I understand your approach much better, and as others have said, it's been an interesting exercise in the quiet season - good thread Good to know you like it the way it is - let's use appropriate tech toys, but keep a careful eye that they're not employed for their own sake.... Merry Christmas

Aaaah, I see..... that's much more detailed, so makes it much easier to react to..... after due consideration (at least 10 seconds) No Thanks; over my dead body. If I had Centre Parcs on my doorstep (which is basically what you've described) I'd move.... But content, knowing it's much less likely than sea level rises and just spotted " I'm an idealist. I don't know where I'm going, but I'm on my way. ", so now I know were you're going wrong Innit great we're all different?

Don't want to wet-blanket these proposals (no harm in looking at every idea), but let's be realistic... " These charges would help subsidise the moorings facilities – they would be a minimum of electric hook up, water and refuse collection along with WiFi but at larger moorings perhaps showers and toilets too." In practical terms, which will come first , Robin? At present there are insufficient funds to provide enough of even the most basic of moorings to the level many people are seeking - I don't see you being able to pay for the upgrades you suggest from income taken from the hi-tech readers you describe, as folks simply won't pay up front for what's not yet available - there's enough fuss made every year over the existing service provided (or not) from the tolls. e.g. the sheer cost of running power and water to (let us say - Thurne moorings recently lost) to drive the hookups, and hosepipes, let alone shower cubicles - we can't even have basic waste disposal maintained in existing villages like South Walsham, far less along the riverbanks, far less these ideal facilities. By how much would tolls have to rise to reinstate what was there only 10 years ago, let alone 21st century toys? Business will only fund stuff if there's a return for them (which could of course be measured in goodwill, I accept), but I hardly think any business (or group of businesses) is likely to fork out the 100's of thousands it would cost for goodwill from beneficiaries. On a personal note, if this level of cash became available by some miracle, I'd far rather see it put to dredging and bankside tree clearance before the system clogs up, instead of yet more facilities

I have sometimes wondered what it would be like, having a sailing ground such as depicted on Strowager's map above - saw something similar (maybe the same map?) when I first visited WRC maybe 30-35 years ago, and wondered how deep the waters might be at the foot of Beccles' Scores... Oh for the opportunity to visit in a time machine (but then coming back, ;cos the dentistry was a bit fierce thenabouts, I think....) If nothing else we'd be spared the revolving arguments about Potter Bridge....

Quite so.... I thought that's what I said....? "...just in time to have them washed away by the rising sea levels........ " full circle indeed - I wonder which way the Thurne will flow next time around.....

Oh yes, one other thing we wouldn't need.... Unelected quangos running the place. Although I'm not convinced some folks might still make a case for keeping them anyway, and since they're unelected, who would/could stop them?