Vaughan

Mistake? In the pitch dark?

Qui? Moi? Just remember what my father taught me - never drink anything you can't see through. It's good advice, when you think about it! Whenever my father had a cough or a cold, it was always because he had been drinking out of a damp glass.

I do agree with FlyingFortress, however, that all of this is totally and utterly irrelevant if someone is going to be as reckless and careless as to take a hire boat out onto Breydon - an unlit navigation - in the middle of the night. I repeat - no one was hurt, even if they thoroughly deserved to be. These people were not the first in Breydon's history and they won't be the last. As for new rules, new posts, new restrictions, etc., it doesn't matter whether you are "coming in from the sea", "going south" or just going round in circles like the rare Japanese Oozlum bird (and those who know the song will know why it is rare). You will never prevent people from deliberately behaving like idiots if they really want to.

When just seeking controversy, there's little easier than quoting others, out of context.

It is up to each helmsman to use the Mark One Eyeball to check if they can get under or not. What is known as seamanship. When I grew up on the Broads there weren't any gauges on the bridges.

I am told that although they are called bee-eaters, they actually eat wasps and hornets.

I shall have to remember to tell all that to my customers, next time I do a trial run.

Hmm . . . A typical Porter and Haylett build with dark stained wood trim and a lot of use of contra - moulding, for seats, steps, toilet bulkheads, etc. The aft cabin and galley are non standard layouts but still quite obviously done by Porter and Haylett. I can't believe these boats would be in such good condition in and out if they had not been built as private boats. Either that or gutted and fitted out again from scratch. P&H were well known for doing that on their Continentale class. By the way, that hydraulic drive is a lot older than the engine!

I agree with the point of your post but your photo shows a row of closely spaced green marker buoys and I can see a row of red posts over to the left. I would not be in any doubt where the channel was. In addition I would expect to see green markers to starboard when coming in from the sea but a hirer should not need to know that, in my view. But a channel visible at 11PM in the dark? Not a hope! I only went over Breydon once in the dark, back in the 60's on a towing job. I have never done it again in my life and never will!

It must be "the way you tell 'em" then?

Surely not? That's another post I missed . . . .

This was one of the main reasons why the scheme never went ahead in the early 60s. There was an ambitious plan to go from Stokesby to Reedham, using the route of Tunstall dyke. It could not have been done without a lock, owing to the tides, but with such flat land, it would have to be pumped. There was also the crossing of 2 roads and 2 railways. Not two difficult for the roads but raising the railways enough to allow navigation under them would have been very much too expensive. For the same reason, they never connected the Bure onto Breydon at Scaregap Farm, which would have been only a few hundred yards but too difficult!

This is interesting, as we normally get a lot of them in the sandy soil around here, but I would think there are less than half of the normal visitors this year.

Oh well, I may as well mention . . . When I went out shopping at 0800 the car said it was 30º. It's now 42º in the shade outside the kitchen window. I think I am going to stick to railway modelling today!

Which is exactly what always used to happen, as described by Tobster and others. The Great Yarmouth Port and Haven (P&H) Commissioners were responsible for the P&H and for all the Yare up to the Port of Norwich. Their subsidiary, the Bure and Waveney Commissioners, covered the rest of the Broads and had their own bye-laws but they were not in charge of the Yare and neither was the BA, until several years after they came "into force". I believe the law has now changed since the introduction of Peel Ports, who now run the P&H. Maybe a member who is quick at looking up the bye-laws, can up-date us? As it is, I totally agree with JawsOrca that there is a heavy over-reaction to minor incidents these days. Everyone always seems to have to be classed as a victim. The same mentality which closes an entire main railway line for half a day, because someone was seen trespassing on it.

You can also see the Herringfleet swing bridge in the background.

And Andrews slipper stern launches. Andrews yard at Bourne End had sheds big enough for all customers who had bought their launches, to have them stored under cover and maintained in winter. In the end, one Andrews generation passed on and the next generation had no choice but to sell. You would not possibly recognise the site now unless you knew exactly where it was. Rows and rows of bijou executive apartments.

But on the Thames, the reason is different - shoreside property prices. You just cannot afford to run a boatyard on such hugely expensive land. In Kris Cruisers' case, you can't do much else with that particular plot, so they have managed to survive.

There were adverts in the EDP by a garage in the 60s, which offered the "heap of the week". Apparently these vehicles all sold well! Typical descriptions were : Fitted with roof rack - as the boot won't open. Would suit enthusiast. Finished in Sherwood Green. Which looks as though Robin Hood and his merry men have been using it as a target. And my favourite : One careful owner. The rest were all careless!

I thoroughly agree with your post, except that thousands of hire boats are crossing Breydon in perfect safety and routine normality every season. As others have said, you just can't legislate for those who seem to deliberately flout all the rules and advice. Let us consider responsibility for this : boatyards have now made the damage waiver an effective obligation, so they would be covered, except : 1/. It doesn't cover wilful damage. 2/. If they are navigating at night, they are in breach of the conditions of hire and more importantly, they are not insured by the terms of the yard's insurance. 3/. If they are cruising at night without nav lights, they are in breach of both BA and international law. (on a maritime navigation). It is unlikely that the boatyard would pursue them for recovery costs as it is not worth the bad publicity that always sticks like Breydon mud. The BA, however, could take them to court for dangerous navigation, in which case they would be very liable!

Absolutely right. Breydon is a maritime navigation to the port of Norwich but it is not a night navigation. In other words, them posts don't have no lights on 'em.

That would depend on the circumstances. If there is another boat free, they would be put on it for the rest of the week. I doubt they would be able to screw a refund out of anyone. There are other questions, such as what were they doing on Breydon at 11PM, if that is true? Boatyards always have the right to refuse "unsuitable" hirers. But as Wussername says above, probably nothing will happen. No-one got hurt, even if they might have deserved to, so it is just more water under the Breydon Bridge.

A pair of white herons visiting the Camargue in 1999. Didn't see them the following year. They are quite a bit bigger than the Standard NATO heron - more the size of a Canada Goose.

Which sometimes migrate to the south of France from Africa, but I have never seen one in Norfolk.

Actually no. In the winter you are too busy maintaining the existing hire fleet, so new building work is done during the summer when the hire fleet are out on hire.