Jump to content


Full Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


kingfisher666 last won the day on September 21 2018

kingfisher666 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

373 Excellent

About kingfisher666

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    East Anglia
  • Interests
    Natural History particularly Bird Watching, History of East Anglia, Listening to Music and Playing Guitar, Camping, Walking, Photography, Sketching, Fishing and lots of other things too numerous to mention. Jack of many things, master of none...

Recent Profile Visitors

482 profile views
  1. kingfisher666

    Royal Tartan Interior Plan

    I really have to admire all you 'classic broads cruiser' restorers, out there. I would have taken one look, shook my head and walked away, totally unable to see a boat among the firewood...
  2. kingfisher666

    The Response From Ba.

    T'was ever thus, in most walks of life... I've had drawings from Engineering graduates, that were unnessecarily complex or 'over engineered'. You go 'up stairs' and explain to the highly paid 'engineer' how to simplify and improve their 'idea' and in the process save a lot of work, problems and money. Sometimes, actually knowing how to do a job, is often better than having a piece of paper that says you know how to do that job...
  3. kingfisher666

    The Response From Ba.

    Perhaps we could ask the 'Blofeld Family' how they did it?... They managed to squeeze 5 million out of the National lottery, for the renovation of their private broad on which they don't allow navigation and very limited public access. Surely a broad that is open to the public, with very few limitations, would stand a good chance of funding, wouldn't it?. Then of course, you would have to seek permission from 'English Nature' to dredge in what is a very fragile area, re: prymnesium, iron ochre, nature habitat. Would that permission be given, I'd be very doubtful...
  4. kingfisher666

    The Response From Ba.

    I always thought it was only our friends from 'across the pond' who spent to much time thinking up conspiracy theories, seems like it's contagious...
  5. kingfisher666

    Broads Toll 2019

    There will come a time, probably not in my lifetime (I'm 64), when 'hydrocarbons' for pleasure use will have to cease anyway. I read somewhere that there is around 50 years worth of oil left, at current production levels. So, it may not only be 'emissions' which prompt the further squeeze on oil usage, but the fact that we've almost used all the stuff up. If oil doesn't become so heavily taxed (not that it isn't already) that it effectively stops 'pleasure use', we might well find it is either rationed or banned for 'unnecessary' usage. In the history of the Norfolk Broads, the use of oil powered boats, may well be remembered as the time, sandwiched between sail power and battery power or perhaps even... Sail power again.
  6. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    Regarding RSPB Sutton Fen, I don't think there are "lots of straight lined drainage ditches" that I can see. As I'm sure you know, all fen requires scrub clearance to prevent woodland carr encroachment, the clearing of drains and fen ponds is also neccesary to prevent their complete silting up. Catfield Fen, which has been owned by the 'Butterfly Conservation' since 1992 is a mix of reedbeds, fen and carr woodland and is managed in conjunction with the RSPB. This management includes traditional reed & sedge cutting, scrub clearance and dyke and pond clearing. All fen and reedbeds requires management, if not it would cease to be fen and would revert over time through carr and eventually become woodland.
  7. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    My comment regarding 'Sutton Fen' was a little 'tongue in cheek', as the sale price (I didn't realise the purchase price was for the whole farm) seemed a lot for what was unproductive fen, from a farming point of view. I do however, realise how important both Sutton & Catfield Fens are, both from a conservation & scientific viewpoint, as they are both pristine examples of untouched fenland, which is why the area has extremely limited public access.
  8. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    £1.5 million, for what is basically unproductive fen, nice work if you can get it...
  9. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    I don't really know what more I can say, I've tried to answer your comments as best I can. Though I'm a member of both NWT & RSPB, I don't speak for them, but only comment from what I believe to be fact. Regarding your second comment, re: the Bible. I'm an atheist, so certainly won't disagree with you there...
  10. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    Well, according to John Blackburn the warden at NWT Hickling Broad, when they did a lot of reworking of the drainage at the Hickling Broad reserve in 2013/14, everything they did had to be passed by the B.A., but 'Natural England' have the final say. Apparently, all spoil from Hickling Broad dredging has to be used in the re-creation of islands or banks, which previously existed on Hickling Broad, but had washed away over time. He's a very approachable man, if you're local, you should have a chat with him. He's very knowledgeable and would certainly be able to answer your questions re: Hickling/dredging etc. much better than I ever could.
  11. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    The NWT yes, but I know the RSPB have no reserves on the upper Thurne. The NWT, though they now own large areas surrounding Hickling, which was previously owned by the Buxton Estate, have no say whatsoever on the dredging of Hickling Broad. As I said previously, only 'Natural England' a government agency, can give permission regarding the dredging and deposition of spoil on Hickling Broad.
  12. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    Foxes have also been shot on 'Strumpshaw Fen' too, although the fen is managed by the RSPB, it is owned by the Strumpshaw Hall Estate, the surrounding area is run as 'a shoot' by the Hall Estate and they reserve the right to control the fox population, even on the parts of the estate managed by the RSPB. Perhaps a similar situation exists at Sutton & Fen, which I believe is A closed reserve, with only very limited access to the public.
  13. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    Poppy... I think you may be getting confused with 'Natural England' which I believe is a government agency. Only they give the permission for dredging and say where the spoil from Hickling Broad has to go. The RSPB has no management in the Upper Thurne and Norfolk Wildlife Trust who recently purchased a large area around Hickling Broad and also Manages Martham/Somerton Broad, but has little or no say in the dredging or spoil deposition of the Upper Thurne broads.
  14. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    I've read a few times on this forum the 'anti RSPB/NWT' comments regarding navigation. I did once ask, where is the justification for this and didn't get an answer. I'm a member of both organisations and have been for many years. I recieve newsletters/magazines etc. from both, but have never read anything which remotely mentions the closure of any navigation on the Norfolk Broads... I'm quite prepared to accept that it is possible I may have missed such an article or anouncement, so if anyone can point me in the right direction, then please do... From my point of view, the Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Suffolk Wildlife Trust and R.S.P.B. have done nothing but good, where they manage areas of the Norfolk & Suffolk Broads. Clearing vegetation to prevent marshland reverting to carr woodland and preventing grazing marshes from being drained and going under the plough, in many places. I'm quite prepared to listen, if anyone has evidence of mis-management, that any of these organisations has done to the area. Though I believe the silence will be deafening... Common Cranes over Meadow Dyke.
  15. kingfisher666

    Sea Level Change, Since 1970...

    I can't disagree with that, there will always be at least two sides to a discussion. Unfortunately, spending perhaps hundreds of thousands of pounds to prove that dredging may or may not have the desired effect, just is not going to happen. Perhaps a halfway (and far cheaper) answer, might be a proper hydrological study of the percieved problem. Though who would carry it out (without bias) and who would actually pay for it, would probably lead to yet more discussion...

Important Information

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