marshman

Finny- not sure why it affects you but I find I can moor on those new banks in a "normal" Broads cruiser without any difficulty - and indeed do. The trouble is, I think, unlike years ago, the majority of users seem nervous about doing so. Way way back in the 70's / 80's when there were so many hire cruisers about, they had to make and use those wild moorings - look at the Ant today they are slowly coming back, but all Fleet Dyke needs is a brush cutter to open a few slots. But people now prefer, or seemingly do, the more formalised mooring. They don't even like mud weighting - now I am often one of only a handful mud weighting overnight on places like South Walsham and or Black Horse

Anyone going to say "Well done BA for sorting that!" Or perhaps why bother even to put a Notice out!!!

John - go back to your dydling - you were making clear progress with that!!!!

You see, on looking at my earlier post about about the Scottish National Parks, I see the "hares" are out again!!! I never meant to infer that the Scottish National Parks were not properly constituted merely that they were slightly different from the ones south of the border. Which I still believe they are, slightly! Just as mine are sometimes, words and conversations of JP are analysed ad nauseum to find a lever to reintroduce an ongoing discussion, and I suspect over punctuation if appropriate, but in reality, I like John, think there enough has been said to make me happyish for the time being - not sure what COULD be said to satisfy the doubters so I guess they will still persist, as they have done as long as I can remember. So I, again like John, I shall probably leave you to this endless task of splitting the "hares", whilst I leave them be!!! Probably!!

I agree with John, again!! Whilst it is good to see those continuing to keep watch just in case a fire breaks out, I still see no evidence that things will change, or indeed many really want them to. I too shall leave this to the likes of PW and Pally to continue to search for clues that is suddenly more urgent, at which time I shall take up cudgels with them. Until then I shall join the vast majority who are probably take my view anyway and see no reason to split the poor " hares " anyway. Actually to be honest, I might find it very difficult - John I am sure will too but he will probably be out dydling!!

Pally - strangely enough I do see what you say! But you too know exactly what I am saying! Its a competition and the Broads are very similar to the National Parks and my guess is that as the National Parks seem to be quite happy to call the Broads one, then I see no reason why it should not be included in that competition. As such, like others I have voted for it, simply because for many reasons, I like it over the others.

Well I am glad you put me right Mr P - you can be relied on! I think what I was trying to illustrate is that not even all the NP's in the country are the same , so I could see no real reason why the Broads could not be included in a competition especially as 99% of the people voting could not tell the difference , nor care a great deal. To me the competition is as valid as ever!

I think you will find that the Scottish National Parks are set up under separate legislation as espoused by others , but I recall reading on this, or another post here somewhere, that they have an "extra leg" to their objectives or certainly operate under three principles - or did I dream that? If that is the case they are NOT the same as our own and as such should not be treated as being equal. Or are they???? The trouble here as that some people just do not read , or refuse to understand how legislation is required to change this status quo - it is not a question of the BA "declaring" it or it arriving "secretly" by the back door but will require a full Act of Parliament, with three successful readings required in the House of Commons and then it going to the Lords , just like Brexit.!! Stop panicking - another Broads Bill is not really likely just to satisfy JP's wishes (if indeed you feel that they ARE his wishes and I have yet to be convinced on this point let alone many others! ) And I can also tell you that whilst there are detractors in all the National Parks, as you would expect, equally there are many who have welcomed the support and "interference " of the National Park Authorities. Somewhere else you will see this, again on a thread here, that the changes on Windermere were in fact welcomed by many of the people in the area and whilst it had understandably had an impact, I too would have said it was for for the better, and no doubt had I lived there, would have been a strong advocate for introducing that speed limit. You can enjoy water without the speed - see the Broads for evidence of that!!

Alan - how do you know those people are not staying in a holiday cottage within the Park?

Do you think that in Scotland they have this never ending discussion about what they call their "National Parks" - which are not? Lets hope they have had the sense to move on? We all know that both they, and the Broads and the remaining Parks , for whatever reason, are lumped together within a broad generic term - and thats what it is! Individually we know what these reasons why this has happened, and until that changes, I am more than happy to vote for this area within that scope. I am not sure whether Defra's support was sought but what was said was true - equally what was said in the High Court was true - that there was nothing wrong in calling "it" that! I voted for the Broads and would again simply because I like the Broads and can see through all the semantics!!

John - whilst idly fiddling around on this site, click on Handy Information and then Tides and you then have even more links - choose Shorebase and then click bottom right (you still with me ? ) for the new feature and fill in the no of days you want and lo and behold you will have what you want, and perhaps more!! Moon phases , low tides in different places throughout the Broads, plus sunrise/sunset in GMT (note this stays in GMT throughout the year so add your hour in BST ) - all you will need!! Except you are above Potter so its all dependant on many other things as well. Don't forget that up there it can be at least a couple of days before you notice what is happening at Yarmouth - blow up the bridge and it might react more quickly Broadland tides are also influenced by many other things including rainfall, but chiefly pressure - low pressure they come up, and high pushes it down! Clever stuff this! And then there is the wind - a few days of strong NW winds down the N Sea pushes tide level ups in the whole of the S North Sea, and of course vice versa - for realtime predictions of whats happening out at sea see here http://www.ntslf.org/data/realtime?port=Lowestoft and in Broadland here https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/river-and-sea-levels?location=horning Now learn all that and you could become a good 'ol Norfolk boy but not yet, 'cos its all a bit of a guess!!!!

Look at a tide table - the moon cannot read and hasn't a clue when to suck it in or spit it out!

Vaughan - bitterns! The RSPB do manage reedbeds where they own them and its appropriate - Minsmere and indeed Strumpshaw are both reserves where beds are managed specifically for bitterns and have been very successful in attracting them, and/or keeping them. Elsewhere, in the Broads the BA have a real problem in managing the reedbeds - remember they own very little land so again you should be pointing fingers at the landowners who own marshes! Whilst I suspect the BA will help with some management, the weather is a major player in whether (!) they have a good year or not. If you have a dry spring and river levels remain low and marshes dry out, bitterns suffer as the supply of frogs etc diminishes and I think climate change (if it exists! ) is not helping - we are also at the extreme edge of their area of distribution and despite numbers increasing of late, it is a long slow slog. I agree Norfolk reed is one of the best, but where are the reedcutters? Its a really hard job as most of you know and difficult to mechanise efficiently in the Broads and whilst there are a few still around, it is certainly less than even ten years ago. Its fragmented, and the individual areas cut modest in size and a struggle when you can only cut for 3 months of the year and imported reed from China is cheaper - hard to find new dedicated cutters I suspect with the economics involved.

And Vaughan, not sure I really agree with that comment about bitterns - saw more last year than ever before! There is no doubt that at places like Minsmere where the reed beds are managed, bitterns now thrive. Sadly in the Broads reed bed management, despite several initiatives, continues to struggle through funding issues but bitterns do need a managed bed - if the reed is not cut periodically bitterns cannot get around them so readily However what has happened, is that no one is actually counting them anymore, although the BA help keep an eye on them.

Surely though Ricardo, the whole world pays taxes and charges on services which they don't use at all - that sadly is the nature of taxation. Whatever rules as to who pays are set down, there will always be someone who thinks it does not apply to them!

The two don't exactly match up do they?? Its either going to be flooded imminently and if it does, the RSPB will not have an important freshwater wetland - take your pick!! Abandoning the coastal fringes is not quite the same as allowing the sea up to the A149 area - that was first put forward as alternative in the 12th Century and it still has not got there! Equally the RSPB do not have much land in that area - the nearest is Sutton Fen. The bulk is Wildlife Trust and they have not made such a statement - or have they?? All that proves absolutely nothing - worry about it when it becomes imminent and likely! At the moment, neither seem to be the order of the day!

The Upper Thurne is still very accessible to those who have the right craft and I, and many others continue to sail over it in Broads boats without too much trouble! To me its a magical area and I never seem to have too much problem enjoying it. And despite the scaremongering from the predictable few about managed retreat, letting the biries have their way, and no dredging, this year again dredging will still take place. To my knowledge thats at least 4 separate years over the last 6 that dredging has occurred up in that region. If you have your concerns, do not necessarily always blame the BA but address them to Natural England who control everything in that area, including dredging, weed cutting et all. Oh and do not forget the farmers and landowners who do not want spoil on their lands which is why of late, money has had to be found to establish new margins which have always been at risk from erosion by the wind. Hardly the actions of an Authority that is about to abandon it all willingly? Methinks that is "fake news" without evidence to the contrary?

Bit like gold dust these days - they fetch good money in auctions if ever found! Trouble is people buy them to put on walls etc etc in poncy pubs - not to use! You might have to make one from an old saucepan - get to work!

Sorry Griff, even with your influence the NWDCT would not be able to open the navigation within a year!! Small matter of an uncooperative landowner!!! After all this is Norfolk so why is that a surprise!!!!!

A bleedin' chilly one too!!!

You can stand on the front of the barges all day long if you like - always short of mates for that job I believe!

John - will send you a PM

First of all John, you must realise that IF that really could be attributed to the BA it is either Fake News or a deliberate lie!! This is the second time I have had to say this but John, you talk some sense! I too will vote for the Broads simply because like others, I love this area and will not be influenced by the vociferous minority who for some reason or another cannot climb a wall, that does not even exist. You will find that many on various Forums struggle to find a good word for the BA, and equally there are others who will support them just to provide some balance - sadly the detractors outweigh the others but in real life, I actually find the reverse is the case, - the majority do not want to be involved in these differences. As I said earlier, I WILL get involved if I perceive a risk but at the moment its merely a figment of imagination, not supported by FACT.

Good to see a vibrant two way discussion in a good natured way!!! Or very nearly!!! Long may democracy reign and I can have this discussion without being put away because on this Forum, my views might be different!!! Hurrah - long live the Queen and the National Parks - except the Broads and the Scottish ones as they are not the same either!!

You will not be surprised to think I think this is a load of 'ol squit about not a lot! And I am sure the same people who normally do so, will say otherwise! It is a competition for goodness sake and you can pick up thousands of publications and internet references saying that the Broads are a National Park - when its not exactly! But we all know what the "exact" position is but as The Broads are in the same "broad" genre, I can see nothing wrong - it is after all a marketing exercise and proves absolutely nothing. I would be quite happy as a result to vote for the Broads for what it is. Before you all go off the deep end at me however, be well aware I know of the issues and will be standing up to be counted IF push ever came to shove and WHEN it matters if I think it appropriate!