Jump to content

rightsaidfred

Full Members
  • Content Count

    776
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

rightsaidfred last won the day on March 7

rightsaidfred had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

937 Excellent

About rightsaidfred

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,117 profile views
  1. Looking at all the comments regarding visitor centres especially the one from Tom at the BA there seems to be a question of interpretation and reasoning that's confusing the issue. The Hoveton office and the ones that were at Potter Heigham and Ranworth were not really Visitor centres but more information (Tourist) centres with a minimal benefit to the actual Broads, from my experience the majority of people using them were land based looking for places of interest that are mostly outside the Broads area and information that is normally available elsewhere, the exception being those taking the boat trip to Coltishall, their mane benefit to the boating community being the sale of Electricity cards and short term tolls etc. the true visitor centre at Ranworth is and always has been the NWT. I don't have any experience of the centre at Whitlingham but would imagine that was largely specific to that area, I am all in favour of education especially the young but this is and has always been accommodated for with field trips by school parties which in my opinion is far more beneficial and educational that sitting in some form of a classroom. Fred
  2. The 100lb plus catches of Bream in the upper Thurne area have always been quite common the only reason they are not made so often now is the lack of boats able to access the area, locals who keep their boats up there still get large nets of fish but tend not to broadcast it. Fred
  3. I have caught them in Norwich and at Somerleyton but never in the North and I would have thought the upper Ant and the Bure down to Horning ideal. Fred
  4. There are catfish both north and south if you know where to look but not in great numbers, there are certainly more carp than people realise after all the Monks kept them at St. Bennets centuries ago, what is a little surprising is that Chub are not more widespread. Fred
  5. JM very well put an excellent representation of the experience of many of us, all species both decline and prosper at times something nature is very good at controlling till man interferes and upsets the balance. As for the fishing the populations are as good now on the broads as they have ever been, just because you cant catch them dosn`t mean they are not there, water conditions play a big factor in their feeding habits with all the current rainfall washing contaminants into the rivers having some effect, not wishing to teach anyone to suck eggs but angling is a skill that requires different approaches under differing circumstances, if all you had to do was chuck a bait in the river it would soon get boring. Fred
  6. Sorry link not working here but works if you paste it into browser. Fred
  7. Hi BB don't know if this helps http://www.broadlandmemories.co.uk/documents/maps/maps69_colt_wrox_hov.pdf Fred
  8. That site has been for sale for a number of years not sure of the current position. Fred
  9. That could well help if it is available, it may also help if rather than concentrating on the bridge construction we also take into account that while not quite so obvious the average clearance at Wroxham has also reduced over time, as I don't have the necessary knowledge I ask again is anyone aware of similar changes to the Yarmouth or Southern bridges or the Breydon mudflats? if there hasn't been that in itself indicates a problem with water levels on the Bure being held back. Fred
  10. I don't think anyone denies climate change exists but many understand that it has always existed and always will and is part of the natural evolution of the planet and not something we have just invented over the last few decades, I don't dismiss or disregard the information in Grendels charts or Poppys link but it does seem somewhat misleading when they both state an increase in sea levels of approx. 4" when one is based on 120 yrs and the other 30 yrs. I refer back to my previous question that if sea levels are responsible why is it only the Bure bridges that seem to be affected and not Breydon or the Yarmouth and Southern bridges or am I wrong and someone can tell me they are all affected in the same way, I will also confirm Buffalo Bills memories that back in the 60s and 70s both side arches at Potter were level whereas there is now a distinct difference between the two suggesting that even if the bridge hasn't sunk it has at least tilted. Fred
  11. If that's the reason why has there been no noticeable difference with the exposure of the mud flats on Breydon or the costal beaches at low tide and has there been a corresponding change with clearance levels with the Yarmouth and southern bridges to that at Potter and Wroxham, serious question as I don't know from my own experience, I am aware of the changes to the northern system but havn`t noticed the same changes elsewhere. Fred
  12. Sorry I cant agree with that last bit given how much of the area would remain unnavigable anyway, while I regret not being able to access that part of the system even though I have a boat that was designed to and used to go through regularly I am realistic enough to know that nothing is likely to change soon, that doesn't mean it shouldn't if ways could be found to reinstate the original clearances, while the hump may have always existed and there may be some justification for keeping it there is no disputing that the Yarmouth area in general has silted up quite considerably in recent years, I have also noticed both at Potter and Horning the increase in the number of times there can be quite a strong flood with no following ebb tide. Fred
  13. Although I am no fan of theirs to be fair to Barnes they have always offered visitor moorings subject to space prior to this requirement at a reasonable fee, where this requirement under DP16 is really quite ludicrous is that any operator concerned can easily get round it by making the charge so exorbitant no one will want to stop there, Herbert Woods seem to be going that way now with the way they have jacked their mooring fees up to private boats. Fred
  14. ECIPA is perfectly correct while the provision of public moorings is required under DP16 planning consent as a commercial yard they are not enforceable as free moorings and the proprietors are at liberty to set what ever charge they see fit. Fred
  15. While we all have our views based on our individual experiences I dont see many 25lb plus pike caught by inexperienced anglers thats not to say they dont have some impact, I have seen part eaten carcasses of some very big fish. Fred
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.