JohnK

I like the idea (even as a dog owner). Could it be enforced on public land? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m sure you’re sucking me into this but .... So I’ve travelled halfway around the world to visit some national parks (let’s assume more than one) and one of them is only called a National Park rather than actually being a National Park. I’d only care if there were real differences wouldn’t I? Are there? People live and work and farm in the others, there are boats in some of the others so how would I tell the Broads isn’t a real NP by visiting it? Unless I go on the internet and find people bleating on about it not being a National Park (joke!) [emoji57] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Go on then, I’ll take the bait, what’s the problem with that one (apart from the Broads National Park bits)? [emoji57] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m not saying that’s the case, I don’t know. But I can understand why it might be. I doubt pleasure vessels could ever be expected to be given the same priority as commercial traffic by a company that makes the majority of its income from commercial traffic could we? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had no idea you could sail that fast. You have my attention now [emoji57] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All vessels or commercial vessels? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah ok, bad choice of words by me. That’s what I thought had happened and what I meant to convey. What are the rules regarding rescheduling your slot. Could they say you’ve missed yours and you have to give 24 hours to your next one? I’m not saying that would be morally ok but would it be within their rules? I think they have to move people from the port to open Haven, I think I heard three people. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, my bad, thought it had been booked for 13:30 and then changed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe it’s just lifting the bridges for pleasure craft they object to. I don’t need the bridges lifting but I’ve passed through a couple of times and they’ve been very helpful on VHF and by phone. Playing devils advocate (again!) I usually leave my VHF on channel 12 (scanning 16 too) when in the area and I’ve heard a lot of private craft calling for the bridges to be open with a pretty poor attitude towards Yarmouth Radio. I’m not saying it’s ok to not open and I’m not saying Independence did anything wrong (other than not making the booked time) but I can see why the staff might have a worse attitude towards pleasure craft than commercial traffic. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Goodchilds build and service a lot of pilot boats. Very impressive they are too. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haha, I’m back “home” pretending to work for a living. I prefer dydling! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I read it again and you could read it in several ways I think. 1. We wanted to drop back to statutory navigation rights and still do. 2. We wanted to drop back to statutory navigation rights but now don’t. 3. We didn’t ever want to drop back to statutory navigation rights, we just didn’t say we would continue dredging etc, but we will. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see what you’re saying Paladin. Thanks for the explanation. That makes more sense now. I guess it’s just what you read into that omission. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok, very much playing devils advocate... If we’re going to assume whatever he says is irrelevant because we’re just going to assume he means what we believe he means what’s the point in quoting him? That’s almost: Q: what colour do you think this is? A: red Q: I know you really think it’s blue. See, I told everyone he thought it was blue. As someone very new to the debate it’s really interesting. There are some of you that have been involved for a long time and are very knowledgeable that seem to assume everything said and done is part of a plot. There are some of you that have been involved for a long time and are very knowledgeable that seem to assume the BA has moved on. I’ve gained a lot of respect very quickly for people on both sides of that. But it’s damned hard to pick a side. I’d say there’s more recent evidence the BA has moved on but I also completely accept that if that’s not true they would want people to think that. Could we start with something easier like peace in the Middle East and come back to this one? [emoji57] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Paladin, I’m afraid I don’t fully see which are your words and which are BA’s words. But I’m not seeing the bit where you say DrP is proposing to remove the protection of the interests of navigation. To be honest, what you’ve put in italics makes me feel more secure if anything. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks both. Ok, I’ll keep talking [emoji6] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I stand corrected. I thought I’d got a good grasp on it. I thought that when legislation was rejected that’s when the stated aim changed. Sorry, I’ll stay out of it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All of those things sound to me like calling it a National Park which they’re allowed to do aren’t they? None of those sound to me like actively seeking a legal status change. But maybe I’m just naive. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it possible there are two feasible “journeys” for how we got here? Let’s assume for the sake of argument DrP is the architect and it started with him wanting to turn the Broads into a NP for whatever reason. It then went as far as a submission to parliament who rejected it. Now DrP has two choices doesn’t he? 1. Continue to pursue full NP status by nefarious means if necessary 2. Accept non full NP status use it as a marketing term and claim happiness because that saves face. I completely accept MMs point that if us “it’ll be fine” sayers are wrong the consequences are dire whilst if the “we’re all doomed” sayers are wrong it’s all good. However, we are seeing more actual evidence of option 2 aren’t we? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we all (or at least nearly all) agree the Broads isn’t and shouldn’t be a full National Park don’t we? Isn’t (or at least shouldn’t) the debate (be) whether or not anyone is trying to turn it into one? Some people seem to think some people are trying that and every mention of NP is a sly way of moving towards it. Other people think the full NP status attempt has had its day and everyone has moved on. Personally I think that if the first statement is correct we should stop bickering with each other because we’re actually on the same side. We just disagree about what’s happening behind the scenes don’t we? Whilst I’m of the belief the NP thing has had its day I acknowledge I may be wrong. Because of that I’m glad some people are watching like hawks even though largely I don’t agree with their take on what’s happening today. All of that said I do wish we didn’t have the constant “it’s not a National Park” statements everywhere because it detracts from what’s actually happening. I’ll get off my soap box now [emoji57] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TapaTalk shows the first couple of lines of the latest post of unread threads. I prefer it to using a browser. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think I’d go 10mm on your boat. Not sure on type, I like braid on braid but I find it quite difficult to splice. There’s a guy works in Norfolk Marine, I find him really helpful on types and sizes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Haha, thank you. I’m with you. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Really? I assumed it only looked like that was happening. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So it’s nearly low tide and it appears one side of the river is flowing one way and the other side the other way. Conveniently both flowing in the direction of boat travel. I think it’s just an optical illusion because the wind is causing ripples on one side. Or is it?? Ignore the dog, she’s mad and just stares at the water. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk