JennyMorgan

This one goes rather beyond a disused telephone box in a remote Norfolk village. The BAs problem with Lana is that she's not one of the Executive's approved, helpful group of people. No one is directly elected to the Broads Authority - yet it is 50% public funded by river tolls. Policy clearly emanates from unelected staff and is nodded through by Authority members that the staff largely control and even take a hand in their selection. Two Authority members have been removed by direct action by officers (one of those was an elected District Council nominee and vice chairman) and this looks very like a third attempt. Who is running this organisation and for whose benefit, as if we don't know? It is time that toll payers elected a suitable proportion of members. We would then have an opportunity to vote out those that we disagree with. It is not right that this unaccountable body rolls on with officer lead policies, and 'approved' committee members.

Jon C, all fair comment , but equally the planning officer, whether a he or a she, could have given the nod and approved this minimal change of use. Surely common sense has some say in this? As Vaughan has commented, phone boxes have long been used to dispense information.

Lana is an elected member of the BA planning committee, she has not been chosen by the senior executive. The Authority has, once again, made a fool of itself & Lana has questioned this, as is her duty to those who elected her. She is therefore not supporting without question the executive and officers, she has therefor sinned and the un-elected quango wants rid of her. Control freekery of the worst kind, it's opposing democracy and, in this case, common sense. In this case the parish council wishes to keep its iconic, red phone box and to that end has found a reasonable and sensible use for it rather than loose it. An officer at the BA has used his 'delegated powers' to oppose that use.

When honesty, logic and common sense walk out the door, when democracy is under threat: http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/broads_authority_accused_of_doing_dirty_laundry_in_public_in_row_over_village_phone_box_1_4609682

I wouldn't recommend tying a hook at this stage! With my clumsy fingers I haven't tied anything smaller than a size ten in many a long year. Quality tied hooks from such as Drennan won't let you down and don't cost a fortune. I recommend a 20, Timbo recommends an 18, Maurice a 16, Maybe a 20 is small as maybe a 16 is big, reckon Timbo & the law of averages has it! If a rod is the choice for the boy then take a peep at the John Wilson 'Prime' range of rods. I now have three 10 footers for my grandchildren and as 'guest' rods. Shop around, they can be quite cheap and they aren't bad, indeed I use one as a knock-about rod on a kayak.

Surely not from the ship of that name? Whatever, an excellent heirloom. Just curious, Old Wusser, is there a story about that boatyard?

Sound recommendation, in my opinion, but a famous match-angler, Ivan Marks, suggested in his book that a size twenty could land anything that he was likely to catch. Last year I had three bream over eleven pounds, all on size twenties so maybe he's right. If I use a size ten, traditional bream size, I probably won't catch any obliging small roach. If I use a twenty I will catch two inch long roach and, who knows, maybe another ten pound plus bream. What I'm really saying is that a size 20 is pretty much a universal hook. important for folk who just want to catch and don't worry about how big or small. I agree with Timbo that an 18 is to be recommended but I have noticed that an 18 is too big for really small fish like minnows and sticklebacks, for example, perhaps the difference between a blank or a smiling youngster.

Great advice here: http://www.enjoythebroads.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/broads-angle-1.pdf

In Angling Times last week: Question, Do I need a pole to fish on the Broads? Answer, There's absolutely no need to take expensive kit with you. The Broads are full of small fish, and very often a £5.00 'whip' that you can buy from the tackle shop will do you proud. Broadland rivers flow, so the idea is to fish with big pole floats and feed positively with a ball of groundbait with each cast. This makes a 4m whip ideal, especially when fishing from the boat as this will put you a few meters further out into the river than if you were sat on the bank. Use a 'flick tip' rather than elasticating the whip, and don't skimp on line, a four pound line to a three pound hook length with size 16 or 18 hook isn't going to be too heavy. This may not make a great deal of sense to an absolute beginner but go into a local tackleshop with an idea of what you want and ask, I'm sure that someone in there will explain. I think that the above is sound advice. By the way, PLEASE don't pick up fish with a towel, unless you want to kill them. A towel, especially a dry one, will remove the protective slime off a fish, that slime helps keep the fish healthy. Handle fish with wet hands, easy. Personally I use barbless hooks, easy to remove from the fish for one thing. Please take a disgorger, you may not know how to use it but any nearby angler will show you how to use it. Also take a plummet so you know how deep the water is. Don't just fish the rivers, the Broads themselves can be excellent, especially around the margins. Good luck

And sometimes quite strange underwear from under the bunks, some garments being rather less clean than others. Those that were complete with 'skid marks' being greatly prized and paraded for all to see by some of the more coarse members of staff! A collection of such garments would be found on a workshop wall in most Broads hire yards, . Another reason for single bunks was that it was a darn sight easier to cram singles into a hull when building it than it was doubles. An eight berther of singles was a smaller boat than an eight of four doubles so cost was a factor, both for hirer and builder.

Perhaps the single bunks were to prevent hanky-panky, nudge- nudge, yer know wot I mean, Jon!

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/the_saga_of_bins_on_the_broads_that_s_raising_concerns_about_tourism_and_the_environment_1_4608361

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/the_saga_of_bins_on_the_broads_that_s_raising_concerns_about_tourism_and_the_environment_1_4608361

Re railways, typed in Whitlingham railway and this popped up: As did this one:

Vaughan, rest assured that that name is not owned by anyone else, surprisingly perhaps. Can't remember which way round now but Broads Authority.com and Broads Authority.net, one was owned, one was not, well, it is now! Re the railways, perhaps you can find the pictures you want via google and then just use links?

The Beaulieu River, I remember it well. Used to regularly take youth groups up there on a 44 footer, under sail. Lovely place, good memories. By the time the youngsters had tacked all the way up the river they had very definitely mastered sail handling!

Plagiarism, possibly; copyright, unlikely. Would the BA risk the legal route? I doubt it. Would they have a case? Maybe but I sincerely doubt it. Got to say that on both of the bigger Broads forums there a small number of folk, two in particular that write in a similar style, that seem intent on devaluing well meaning folk's comment who genuinely believe that they have a wholly justifiable grievance, or grievances, against what they sincerely believe to be a deeply flawed institution.

Ron, I'm 9/10ths with you on that one.

That she was on Lake Lothing, when I photographed her, I wonder if she is or was doing a round the island (Lothingland) trip? For example Gt Yarmouth to Gt Yarmouth via St Olaves and Lowestoft.

This pretty little 'puffer' went through Mutford Lock at Oulton Broad this afternoon. Who wrote that the Broads is lock free? What is it about steam that makes such boats almost as attractive as sailing boats? Something fascinating and very acceptable about steam driven boats, apart from sooty deposits on white sails.

Don't worry, Fred, the originator of this new blog has taken legal advice. Personally I see the use of actual names by the contributors lifts it above the efforts of the Broads National Pike, albeit I believe that the BNPike, like Private Eye, makes valid comment.

Ron, I mentioned rather than singled out Richardsons because in the past Clive Richardson has expressed his opinion on this debatable topic on this forum. In the past many yards did make a stand against loutish behaviour. Hoseasons are remarkably and surprisingly accurate in their customer classification, they were well ahead of the likes of Google in this respect. Regrettably some of the big yards just wanted bums on seats and did not support that stance.

Keith, perhaps it was written by Sue, I was under the impression it was by one of the other named contributors. Fred, infringement of copyright, how so? In reality the Authority is not above branding with someone else's name so perhaps the originator of this new, informative blog is having a gentle, tongue in cheek nod to that fact, An intention to deceive? How so? The names of the contributors are clearly there for all to see, you might recognise several of them!.

Time to insist on the BA meeting its obligation.

Navigable as was navigable when the original Broads Act was enacted. If you were able to get out of Catfield Dyke in 1986 but can't in 2016 then the Authority is duty bound to remedy that.