.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
JennyMorgan
-
Posts
14,663 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
239
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by JennyMorgan
-
-
Traditionally green is considered an unlucky colour by mariners.
Presumably because it is the colour of a sunken boat!
-
9 minutes ago, marshman said:
Again jumping to a conclusion PW - perhaps they will be able to make temporary repairs?
If they cannot do anything , what was the point of inspecting it the other day?
Can we not just wait and see what happens?
The issue is out in the open, no harm in that.
In the meantime we have no option but to wait and see what happens.
-
So the lease runs for a few more years but in the meantime we are unable to use the moorings, brilliant.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, marshman said:
If as Peter says they have been talking for a couple of years ( have they?)
A very reliable, trustworthy source tells me so.
-
13 hours ago, marshman said:
But people want their boats to be like their houses and you are never going to get that in your average sailing boat!
Some people might!
With the sad reduction in moorings people will have to adapt as what a day out on the river means. For sailing folk it generally means being under way, can't beat it!
-
26 minutes ago, TheQ said:
I recognise those two culprits on the Yeoman!! and the two on the clubhouse roof..
One old and one very old, an ancient marina no less!
-
3 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:
They were going to build it taller, but that's another storey.
Intense groan!
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, SteveO said:
More worryingly, what does the widespread creation of all the "flood relief" channels mean for all the other miles of riverbank that have EA quay heading and where one can moor today? Will the EA walk away from these and will this crisis be repeated time and again?
Potentially the answer is a big, fat YES hence leaving it to the last minute to find an answer is hardly wise. Okay, so negotiations at St Benet's have been going on for a couple of years but nevertheless an answer doesn't appear to have been found and here we are at the last minute.
-
1 minute ago, Londonlad1985 said:
The new mooring attendants could get a smart navy blue uniform with a yellow banded, peaked hat! 😉
Naaa, surely it would have to be a regulation NP style, wide brimmed blue floppy hat, even a macho cowboy hat, complete with yellow band and maybe even a blue flashing light on top.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Cheesey69 said:
. . . . . moorings are getting critical but hey we have a great visitor center . . . . .
The Authority comes over as keen to do what it wants to do but sometimes regretfully rather less keen to do what it has to do.
-
So what is the solution? It's been known for several years that the EA favour a 'soft bank' solution to bank protection on the Broads. The Authority has, in several places, recognised this and has installed pontoon moorings, as it could have at Thurne and potentially do so at St Bennets.
As for rent, especially as the land in question, wet and muddy, has little value in a commercial sense. It's excellent for anglers and bird watchers, that's about it. For the boating community it only has value where mooring facilities are provided, and the EA proposes removing them unless the BA is prepared to take on the responsibility. I don't state that as a fact but it is a probability.
Meanwhile, the landowner's asset is devalued if the EA removes the piling. So how should it be valued? If I were the landlord I would wish to see the rent increase on an annual basis relative to inflation, inflation being based on the BA's perception of inflation, e.g. the annual increase on the tolls. The BA is presumably basing its idea of a fair rent on the cost of taking on the responsibility of the piling. Perhaps the issue should go to arbitration.
So, if the BA takes on the responsibility of the mooring facilities, who should pay for it? The boating industry is dependent on the provision of moorings for its clients, either hirers or purchasers of ex hire craft. Perhaps it is time to increase the hireboat multiplier? Perhaps it is time to introduce a visitor tax? Perhaps a surcharge to use the 24hr moorings, if that surcharge is not paid then the boat wishing to moor will have to go elsewhere. Maybe a predatory car-parking management company could take over the 24hr moorings, heaven forbid? Any other or better ideas?
I don't think it is simply a case of hiking up the tolls. After all a great many of us rarely, and sometimes never, use the 24hr moorings, just as we never use those blessed power plug in things. My view is that those who use these facilities should take on a greater financial responsibility for their use. Unless a business provides 'free car parking' we have to pay to park our cars, why should it be any different for boaters?
Is there an easy answer? Probably not.
Has this issue been well handled? You decide!
-
1
-
-
There are often quite a few sailing boats at Horning.
-
22 minutes ago, vanessan said:
This sounds horribly like it could go the same way as the Thurne Mouth moorings. We can but hope things will be sorted out satisfactorily.
I rather fear that you are right. I also fear that this won't be the last such potential mooring loss. I do wonder if the Authority engages suitably qualified agents to deal with such matters or whether they deal with it in-house. If I understand matters correctly Thurne Mouth was also down to other, rather unfortunate factors.
We mustn't forget that the Environment Agency and the landowner also both share a great deal of responsibility for this particular, unhappy situation.
-
1
-
-
When the 1970's film was being made I was working at a sailing school in Bosham near Chichester. One morning I arrived to find a clinker built dinghy parked outside the office. Once in the office I found that my services were required, me being a Broads sailor and that the Broads was still a home to lug rigged dinghies. The young actor who played 'John' was a Bosham lad and I had the pleasure of showing him, and a producer, how to rig and sail a lug dinghy.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, marshman said:
OK I agree - but would you have been very happy for a special levy on tolls for an unknown amount at some stage in the future?? Methinks not!!
The Authority has long built up reserves, thankfully, witness Covid 19 for example. What I suggested is that this present situation was inevitable, wholly predictable. Yes, an avaricious landlord is involved but it does seem as if negotiations were left to what is seemingly the last moment. Money was ringfenced for the Acle Debacle, the end of this lease was at least predictable.
-
It is a situation that could and should have been acknowledged and allowed for years ago, indeed when details and plans for the Broads Flood Alleviation were drawn up. Funds could also have been ring fenced for the predictable situation that we now find ourselves.
-
21 minutes ago, Bytheriver said:
Here is the link https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/about-us/committees/broads-authority/broads-authority-19-march-2021
The papers are available & the meeting link will be available tomorrow - they are often a bit late starting so just keep refreshing page Start time 10am & there are usually around 20 people looking on.
Undoubtedly Dr Teflon will once again talk himself out of yet another pulk hole!
-
1 minute ago, NeilB said:
This does'nt sound good, has'nt something like this hapened before resulting in the loss of moorings?
It has indeed, regretfully.
This situation can not have just come out of the blue so why the obvious reluctance to release the information? For the barrier to be erected this morning suggests that management at Yare House was well aware of what was developing so why withhold that information from Tom when he first questioned it? What was there to hide? All in all a worrying development.
-
Thank you, once again, Tom.
I note the worrying sentence:
"It is also not possible to start work until the Authority’s lease of the site is renewed"
That statement infers that the lease might not be renewed. Indeed reading the full statement it becomes clear that the present shuttering is redundant other than for mooring thus the EA might indeed remove the timber quay heading.
-
Apparently there is a BA member's meeting tomorrow, hopefully all will be revealed in the Officer's reports.
To worry or not to worry, that is the question!
-
I don't miss TV whilst afloat but I would miss the radio, I do enjoy music on occasion, at a sociable volume.
-
3
-
-
This was St Benet's this morning. Has anyone seen any relevant notices to mariners or whatever?
-
Judging by the number of prophylactics that used to wash up on slipways around Oulton Broad, back in the day, holiday makers found plenty to occupy themselves with on a Broads holiday! That was in the days before both pump-out toilets and TVs.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, marshman said:
If I recall PW, all the repairs were done a couple of years ago or more! Perhaps it just shows how long ago you came "north" ???
I tend to turn right at Thurne, thus avoiding the joys of Wroxham. 'Tis two summers since I last went North. Hickling or Wroxham, that's a hard one to answer!!
My question re repairs was based on off my understanding of officer reports in BA agenda papers.
Fishing At St Benet's Abbey.
in Fishing on The Broads
Posted
The lease runs until 2027. The shuttering is thought to have plenty of life, apparently it is only the whales & capping that needs attention.