.png.5ff10cca1d0967e44a17e4a2edde2a80.png)
dom
-
Posts
695 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by dom
-
-
I've just noticed the comments on the article, including one about plots being auctioned to unsuspecting buyers.
The last auction was actually far more recent - maybe a month or two ago. It's been an ongoing issue for quite a number of years - probably decades now. I don't know why the BA are bothering. I'm all in favour of protecting historic landscapes, but it's a stinking bit of stagnant bog, full of mosquitoes. It'd be no great loss to allow mooring to be dredged and cleared, with a limit set to stop any more extensive development. It's not like it's the only bit of "wet woodland" in the vicinity. It runs right down to the entrance to Bewiderwood, continues on the other side right through to Long Lane, as well as through to Burntfen Broad.
It just seems like a classic case of BA on a power trip. The same BA who presumably didn't see fit to protect all the beautiful old trees around the Ferry Inn, which gave the place far more character than its current barren state.
I suspect there may well be quite a few nice warm fires in Horning next winter...
-
4
-
-
I can't believe there's any money left in the planning budget with 8-9 staff, the farce at Irstead, the other TPO at Ludham, etc.
-
3
-
-
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/24159862.crabbetts-marsh-woodland-norfolk-broads-protected/
Suspect this one will get heated and lead to BA expending large amounts of resources defending actions yet again.
-
1
-
-
I used to drive through Wicken twice a day for something like 8 years, but have never actually been down to the water there. Seems like the lode is getting incredibly narrow these days from some of the narrowboat videos I've seen.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Bikertov said:
The River Great Ouse at St.Ives, and Jones Marina, has been mainly unusable since I have been there in October. You could probably go upstream a bit, but my boat won't get past the low bridge at Offord. The Lock at St.Ives had been out of use due to river levels since almost if not all that time.
Things seem to be slowly improving. They must be, as EA have finally moved the Project 31 adrift on the Old West since Christmas.
Not going great over on the Cam though. Someone managed to wipe out Upware lock with a car last night, so Reach Lode is currently accessible.
I was actually over that way a week or so ago. Reach Lode is like a millpond and it'd make a nice place to spend the winter pottering up and down a few miles of river, but the moorings are very open and not somewhere I'd want to leave a more expensive boat.
-
2
-
-
That cranage fee is a lot higher than I'd expected. The way they do so many boats at once, I'd thought maybe they'd offer a decent rate to get as many out of the water (and harm's way) as possible. It'd be interesting to know how it all stacks up over the year for a permanent mooring. I find marinas seem to do their best to make fees as obscure as possible. The worst one is the way some mix ex.vat and inc.vat prices on their advertised rates.
If it was the Broads, I think I'd be trying to stay in the water year round so you can get trips out but that seems an unlikely prospect in winter with RGO flow rates.
-
1
-
-
Any signs of osmosis, either whilst you were doing this or during a survey?
With an older Broom, I'd probably have considered taking it out over the winter to mitigate osmosis issues, but I'm not sure if yours is new enough not to be too much of a concern for this?
Does Jones' yard charge a lot to lift and dry store? The way they do it, I'd assumed the cost would be fairly minimal, but some of what you've said suggests not.
-
12 minutes ago, NeilB said:
I also suspect the modelling will show that none or very little dredging is required.....
I still don't understand how no-one is questioning whether the already scheduled Bure mouth BA dredging might be a factor in the current situation.
I'm sure the original document was more specific and they seem to have changed the way the area in question is highlighted, making it much more vague. I can't help but wonder though if the minute they do this, it'll be like removing a plug and vast quantities of water can suddenly move, quite possibly taking a load of silt with it.
I've suggested elsewhere that the delay might be funding - but it could also be that they're afraid to do it before things dry out, in case it suddenly shows their culpability in upstream flooding.
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, Vaughan said:
Sorry, but if a Norfolk wherry can no longer make passage on the main rivers without grounding in the channel, then the BA are not fulfilling their obligation to maintain "The Navigation".
Maybe someone should organise a wherry trip to Yarmouth for Dr.P to demonstrate the issue?
Obviously it'd be very hard to argue that dredging was being done properly when stuck fast.
-
1
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, Mouldy said:
Call me cynical - I know I am, so no offence will be taken, but this appears to be a body representing six water management boards and in association with a seventh, who are collating data, presumably to take to The Broads Authority, EA, IDB and Anglian Water.
I presume this is a net effect of Duncan Baker's meeting. I'm sure it was Henry Cator who first mentioned the organisation in question. He's obviously pro dredging and suggested they could provide insight into where issues lie.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said:
I have also read elsewhere that there are more boats going aground in the Lower Bure nowadays than on Breydon.
I'm less than convinced on this, as there seems to be no real evidence being posted anywhere by anyone. The main reason I'm a bit cynical is that people are claiming to have issues with typical Broads cruisers (generally 2'6" or so draft). If this were true, seagoing boats such as a typical Broom (which obviously tend to come through around low water to avoid the bridges) with average draft around 3' would be grounding hard. Sailing yachts, typically 3' 6" wouldn't stand a hope in hell of getting up with a foot less water than needed.
I'm of the opinion that trying to tackle the BA with the dredging issue isn't going to achieve much, other than a short bit of forced dredging - but if it is genuinely happening and people think it's expedient to highlight, someone wants to get a typical yacht (not a blue water model) and to film a passage on a neap low - ideally from shore or another boat if at all possible.
-
7 minutes ago, Smoggy said:
Ea have a shocking record of not dredging on the great ouse, don't hold out any hope on them doing what's needed, they are well practiced in excuses for expensive operations if there's no photo/paper opportunity.
Annual expenditure of about £2 billion though. They could probably spend more than BA's annual budget and put it down as a miscellaneous expense. I think they're proabbly perfectly able to tackle the issue, but it's the old adage - the squeakiest wheel gets the oil.
-
It's particularly frustrating that it was a direct question "what assessment his Department has made" and the response didn't in any way answer it. It's a perfect example of what's wrong with modern "democracy".
-
1
-
-
I'd not seen this until now:
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2024-01-15.9499.h
The thing I'd really like to know is - if dredging to alleviate flooding would cause major saltwater incursion, why was this not a problem in the past? Why can we not simply stick to the dredging regime used historically? Robbie Moore has obviously been briefed, quite possibly by BA, and the answer clearly infers dredging beyond the historic norm. It would be interesting to know if Brandon Lewis has followed up at all.
The other question I have is why BA are apparently so commercially inept as to overlook the financial benefit dredging could yield for them. They're not responsible for the cost of doing it for drainage purposes. They could therefore offer up their services. If they tendered for the work at, or fractionally below the commercial baseline rate, they could get the monkey off their back, generate revenue and possibly even expand their current resources. If I were Dr.P, I'd be making clear we'd done everything necessary to maintain navigation, but are happy to assist with drainage with appropriate finding from EA or elsewhere.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, PaulN said:
However I don't understand why I have seen nothing in this debate from Richardson's CEO albeit he is part of the B.A. and on the Navigation Commitee, or have I missed something? Surely as the biggest hire boat operator they have some clout.
I suspect if their fleet don't start going under Ludham Bridge more easily in the near future, they may become much more vocal. At the moment, they run the risk of losing bookings, either altogether, or to less affected competing yards if they start complaining that some of their fleet is limited to 10 or so miles of river.
-
1 hour ago, CambridgeCabby said:
£6.46/mile of accessible navigation
When you consider how few times an average boater is likely to make use of each mile in the course of a year, it really is pretty shockingly expensive.
I'm currently waiting to see how my life pans out before deciding what boat to buy and where, but the more time passes, the more attractive a yacht on a swinging harbour mooring somewhere becomes.
-
24 minutes ago, Wussername said:
The CRT and the Norfolk Broads are somewhat different. Why do you question and compare their system with ours.
I was really doing the opposite and pointing out the error in the Broad Society's logic. I've spent quite a bit of time on various canals, so well aware of the fact they have dramatically more infrastructure to look after (and that includes things like Elsan points, as well as locks).
If you use Broads Society's own chart data, it shows that you get 2.4 miles of canal per pound of toll from CRT. For the Broads, it's just 0.43 miles per pound.
-
4
-
-
Sounds like you're fairly well set. Only other things I can think are to take a scraper/sanding material in case there's loose material on the previous coat which didn't come off with the perssure washer and to consider how to tackle the bits under where she's propped up.
-
1
-
-
Quote
Charges of £10 for an overnight stay, £5 for a daytime visit and £3 for a powered boat using the dinghy dyke at Ranworth will only apply during the main season from April to October.
https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/news/frequently-asked-questions-navigation-charges-2023
If they start charging earlier, it'll be a change to advertised policy.
The more pertinent question is probably when will they start charging at Reedham?
-
April Fool's day
-
The fact the Broads Society have locked comments on both the Facebook post and the blog post itself really speaks volumes to me. It's notable that they've been deathly silent until relatively recently and suddenly very noisy as toll payment season approaches.
The blog post itself is interesting, but seems fairly biased, inferring that BA tolls are good value versus CRT ones - but conveniently overlooking that 200% more toll with CRT gives access to virtually the whole country and a vast network approaching 3k miles, rather than 125 or so on the Broads. They could very easily have put a £/mile column on the chart, but have obviously not done so, as it'd look very bad for the Broads.
Personally, I can't help but think that Broads Society are largely on the National Park side and that a lot of the "science" which they're spreading does just support the BA narrative - which is possibly slightly odd given the apparent views of their patron.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, floydraser said:
I may have missed something and this is probably a question for BRAG but, JP had a letter signed by five MPs to which he said he would reply. Have I missed the reply?
I presume the letter from Bill Dixon shared on BRAG around 12th December was the definitive response?
Puts the blame squarely on a lack of government funding and tries to get Duncan Baker on side to plead for more money. I'm sure they've had £1.3m since.
-
To be fair, I think most people recognise the difference between those at the top of the organisation and those on the ground doing good work. There was a bit of slagging off of rangers happened on BRAG's Facebook group recently. I was amongst the people complaining to the admins about it and even they had the good grace to kick the person concerned out and to make a public apology.
-
4
-
-
Now explain the difference between a sextant and an octant
I have quite a lot of WW2 training documentation which I inhereted from my grandfather (plus some other v.rare stuff like German language propaganda flyers dropped whilst on raids). Unfortunately, it's all in storage at the moment, but I suspect there's probably some navigation training in amongst it.
The thing I always find hard to comprehend is that airmen underwent extensive and lengthy training on these things, often running into months - only to then be lost, sometimes even on their first raid. Pilots used to get shipped over to Canada, learnt to fly, got shipped back again (often in convoys which got attacked and sunk), then spent weeks in training at conversion units before they flew their first ops. I don't think it was much easier for navigators - or the rest of the crew. It makes me really sad that younger people who are aware of and appreciate all this are becoming increasingly uncommon.
-
3
-
Crabbett's Marsh
in Broads Chat
Posted
Definitely not willows. They had fairly substantial trunks and actually look a bit like oaks in some pictures. I tend to think oak wouldn't manage to stay upright on that type of land, but I think there are a couple on Horning green, so may be a possibility.