JennyMorgan

There we go again! A broad is a broad, not a ahem lake and a dyke is a dyke and not a blessed dike. Dictionaries and computers aren't always right

Wheird wud! Blast, bor, wot else cud yew corl a dydle, thas wot it is? Joking aside a few 'swipes' with a 'dydle' every time a boat owner visits his dyke and over a summer it's surprising just how much spoil can be shifted. Every dyke owner should have one!

Not a problem, Alan, the dike might be closed but no mention of the dyke so that'll probably be open

Anyone got a 'dydle' that they can lend our JanetAnne? I have a vague feeling that it is, or was, 3'6" at low water on such as Catfield and 6' for the rivers.

Got a quant!

Hi Hy, granted an excellent facility for mooring, I use it myself. However I have been told and I have seen, countless times, sailing boats come round that corner and they meet a backing wind off the trees plus, if it's a foul tide, they then loose all momentum, inevitably drifting into the bank, or moored boats, and there is nothing, other than fend off, that they can do about it and it's through no fault of their own. It's even happened to me!! Great moorings, just a pity that they weren't immediately downstream of the Tea Gardens.

Regarding those blessed pontoons, why oh why were they placed where they were? For various reasons that particular length of river is home to probably the most fickle winds on the Waveney. Doesn't matter which way you are sailing then it is almost guaranteed that you'll encounter difficult winds and reducing the river width at that particular point was a great deal less than helpful. Did the Authority ask the sailing community that sails there? I don't believe that they did.

I have sat it on BA meetings where any excuse for not dredging has been greeted with absolute glee, I kid you not. I'm quite certain that they have a breeding room for lesser spotted, three spined, double breasted newts or whatever for strategic placement. Regarding that 'vision' for Hicking, does it allow for varying winds and subsequent drift of sediment? I don't know why I'm asking because I know darn well that it doesn't! A lot of John's letter makes sense but does it allow for rainfall? If we take the Waveney as an example then there is in excess of one thousand square miles of land sopping up the rainfall, much of which will eventually find its way into the rivers as it finally heads towards the sea. However it can often lay in the system for several days before reaching the sea, held back by adverse winds or incoming salt water tides and surges. The Authority has an unfortunate reliance on its own computer models, dictates from Natural England and a regrettable tendency to ignore local knowledge and observations.

Actually, Bill, unlike many I quite like the bloke. We generally agree to disagree on many topics whilst agreeing on others. Rather than hate him I actually look forward to and enjoy our occasional meetings. I also respect his ability and obvious intellect. No, I'm not going soft, but I rather wish that he were on our side, that he worked with and for the people of The Broads. That he has been here for twelve or so years then one might have hoped that he had earned wider respect and gained the trust and confidence of a greater proportion of the Broads community. Hate, no, I reserve that accolade for the likes of Hitler & Co.

I have read and digested Vaughan's very relevant posting, in principle quite right. It is the lack of empathy towards the Broads and its culture that worries me. There is clear evidence that the Authority wishes that the Broads should loose it's unique identity with their constant reference to lakes rather than Broads and, if you should visit Thorpe House, the equally constant references to The Park, once again, rather than the Broads. The Broads is peculiar, unique, that should be our USP, unique selling point, the Broads has its identity, and its not that we are a magical water-land or a mythical national park, the Broads is The Broads, our heritage, not just one myopic man's personal career path.

Or spending OUR tolls on the navigation, as is clearly required by the Broads Act. Un-muddying expenditure and accounts would also be very acceptable.

I never ceased to be amazed by just how many boats I see in storage at Brooms. I was told, when Martin Broom was still there, that there was rarely less than 40 boats up for sale at any one time. Regarding fuel sales, some empty tanks take a great deal of filling, they are not all like me, 'just five litres of petrol please!'

Me, impertinent, never! Bare in mind that JP & myself have been on talking terms for many years and that he is of an age when he could quite legitimately do so. A reasonable question in my opinion & one I was often asked of myself at a similar age. P.S. I was invited to ask any question that I wished and it is one being asked along the rhond.

I did recently ask the Doctor that question regarding retirement face to face, don't recollect the exact answer but something on the lines that he felt that he still has work to do. Exactly as Alan has suggested, a civil response whilst retaining control. I doubt that the NBF would want to frighten the good Doctor away by allowing or even encouraging a hard hitting dialogue and who can blame them. Bringing JP onboard is something of a feather in their cap. Personally I rather suspect it will be something of a non event designed to keep the apple cart on an even keel. The gentleman in question is an articulate, highly intelligent man, a past master at digging himself out of a hole, sometimes quite deep, so I hold no great hope of this being anything other than a very civil p.r. exercise.

I wonder if the planners might claim that the use has been abandoned, as they did at Jenners.

Apparently 1.5m. No mention of an agent nor can i find one.

Lou, whilst I agree with you in principle do you really think that the moderators over there would allow some of the questions that really need to be asked? Last time I did log in to ask one simple yet vitally relevant question, when is Dr Packman going to retire? That was a waste of effort!

Problem is, John. that the reciprocal mooring agreement between hire yards is no longer efficient. Clive & Co have over 700 boats that go out seeking moorings, that they would be able to find 700 reciprocal moorings is unlikely. Then we have several hundred private boats seeking moorings and to which nothing like the hire fleet's reciprocal agreement exists. Effectively every private boat needs two moorings, one to go from and one to go to. To a large extent the same applies to Richardson's extensive fleet. Private boats largely appear to be either unable or unwilling to lend out their mooring spot whilst they are away. Unfortunately it seems that we need more not less moorings in this day and age. Cost savings by reducing moorings? Let's not kid ourselves, there is tolls income to pay for moorings, as many as we need, unfortunately about 50% of the toll has been hived off for non related overheads, like promoting his national park ambitions.

Even a simple task can be beyond the capability of the Broads Authority. In my garden I have three relatively large oak trees, all of which have wrung branches and broken boughs resting in the crooks of other branches, waiting to fall, so it was time to call in the tree surgeons, I don't do heights! That was back in May & the company concerned insisted that it inform the BA and apply to do the work. For my sins I live in a conservation area, grrrrrr, so apply they did. The company phoned up last Monday to tell me that they still hadn't heard from the planning department. So I phoned the BA, errr, it's still under consideration, I'll speak to my colleague and call you back. Call me back a rather embarrassed colleague did, to tell me that the application had been overlooked, that the Authority had taken more than six weeks to process the application thus I automatically had consent for the work. Wish now that had applied to built a condominium! I ask you, an underworked, over staffed department and they managed to overlook an application that they insist had to be made! Should I have confidence in a quango that can't even manage a simple thing like consider a request to work on a tree?

There is a case of acute myopia at Thorpe House. Those in high places seeing only what they want to see. I won't live to see the Broads being returned to the good folk of Broadland but I firmly believe that my daughters and grandchildren will. I might be sat in a pub, as I was at lunch time today, a discussion at a nearby table made it abundantly clear that those sat around it considered that the BA's upper echelons are not respected and that things are not as they should be. No, I did not join in! However, where moorings are concerned I don't entirely blame the Authority for the rash of 'private' notices springing up across the system. No question that some people buying a Broadside property are only too keen to mark their territory and I do know for a fact that one or two owners have been questioned by the BA on this issue in regard to safety. People do sometimes have very pressings needs to moor up. Indeed one landowner on the Lower Bure had put fences along his waterfront, rightly, in my opinion, the BA insisted on these being removed. Iain, no magic wand and until there is a rethink by DEFRA and the BA I doubt that there will be. However, anno domini is on our side.

I read in the local rag that the marina at St Olaves is for sale. Another one for Tingdene perhaps? It's never been the prettiest of marinas but it is well placed for both the Waveney & the Yare.

Agreed but I find it both cynical and objectionable when businesses take a ride on the 'save a tree' hand cart, projecting themselves as saviours of the planet when it reality their sole motive is the bottom line, and I don't mean the waterline!.

Thank you, Robin, my thoughts exactly, it is just about money. I have been at meetings and this fact has been made abundantly clear. For example one yard owner bragged on just how much he saved by not hauling his fleet out annually and anti-fouling them, no mention whatsoever of the environmental issues. Not only that but he also bragged about the probable increase in fuel sales, fuel that he supplies, due to his boats having foul bottoms. There is an incredible amount of hypocrisy over 'green' in businesses, not just on the Broads. The driving force is profit, let's not kid ourselves otherwise. Re the BA and Green, in fairness Thorpe House has quite good credentials in this regard and the bike park is well used. Granted that SOB is far from green however the new river launches are reasonably green to operate. I'm quite sure that the BA could do better but I do acknowledge that their green credentials are generally pretty good. What I do see as highly questionable is their obvious support for this deeply flawed Green Tourism Scheme.

Pesky One, tis good to read that contraception is still a consideration in your life. Amazing what can be achieved with a block & tackle! For some of us it is nothing more than a distant memory!

Ian, it takes around twenty four hours to smoke a bloater so however long did it take you to smoke a camel?