marshman

As someone said, the new boats will have increasingly innovative systems aboard, like Whisper Emblem from Ferry, and it will all cost.

Why am I surprised about any of those things but what I believe is missing off your list is the fact that the user also has to show a duty of care!!!, There must be many many thousands of miles of footpaths where an action for "a broken ankle" incurred on a footpath would be unsuccessful, and indeed if it were, would probably lead to the closure of all footpaths!! What is required is a realistic approach to this type of issue - I dont want necessarily a buggy path, a litter bin, or a viewing platform and I certainly don't want insurance, but what I do want is the right to enjoy the countryside I share with others at, mostly, my risk!! I am not talking about risks from excavators, or heavy machinery but the normal risks you would expect on a footpath. Given the attitude of the EA I am surprised I am still allowed outdoors to wander river banks and indeed through many many farmyards! Why is that too much to ask??

Hi Strow - I believe now everything has been signed and it now falls on the BA to schedule necessary works to ensure the path can FINALLY be used!!! Quite what requires to be done I am not surer but it is still progressing, albeit slowly. I am hopeful we are nearly there but I have been here before so will not get too excited - yet!

Much will depend on what you feel you can manage but for just a weekend, I can see no issues. Boats are pretty easy ti handle and if you take mooring slow and steady, it is not that hard to do the maneuvering and the mooring on your own. Whilst the numbers of smaller boats get less and less, there are still plenty of the smaller boats around, and some of them are quite modern too - what you probably don't need is a boat with an upper steering as you then have to move pretty sharpish to get ashore. But the alternative might be to hire a riverside cottage and have a dayboat - loads of properties in Potter, or Horning, and elsewhere and dayboats big and small, cheap or more expensive.

I get your drift Peter, but what you fail to comprehend, is that I wish it would make a difference!!! Right from the outset i was against this proceeding without wider access but the trouble is, whilst i would have been happy with access being achieved perhaps, for canoes and other similar, it was always going to be a step too far, and uncontrollable, to include sailing boats and powered craft and that would never happen - yet. In the short term it would also defeat the object of the exercise which primarily, to restore the health of the habitat. Without that latter tag it would never have happened at all. I think in these circumstances a bit by bit approach is better than none at all - what has been achieved is better than nothing - just , but petitions have proved time and time again to be a total waste of effort unless you get the 100k number and even then its of marginal benefit. To get any less than that just proves to me, and probably others, that no one is really interested apart from the very few and thats why its ignored!! Sad but reality i suspect.

i am equally sure it will not make the slightest difference!!!!!

The mooring someone else referred to is Commissioners Cut - just before the Thorpe railway bridge ( East end) and the sailing club. It is a 24 hr mooring and you will probably get in but sometimes it has boats "overstaying" for some reason!!! Walk towards and over the railway line and you come to the main road with plenty of buses in and out. Simples!!!

Yep you are probably right but I am intrigued and will sniff around - might take some time though!!!

Hi Strow - it may well just be the repairing option that is causing the sticking point. Reading the thread, it seems it currently comes with a full repairing option which is currently being fulfilled but extend that on perhaps another 15/20 years, perhaps that is a liability they no longer wish to carry for that length of boardwalk. Cannot guess how much that would cost even at current prices, let alone at some indeterminate time in the future. As you say all speculation until facts are known and they will come out - will have a sniff around and about and ask a few questions here and there to get some bones on it!!!

Hi Strow - something in what you say but according to what I hear, they are still waiting for the documents to be signed - not telling where t he hold up is purported to be!!!!! Quite quite extraordinary how these things can be dragged out if you want to!!!!

And yes a very large proportion of it is in the hands of a fairly small number of landowners - the bigger the landowner it seems, the less access is likely!! But I do not see how you can "negotiate" when you have no cards in your hand - seems more likely to be about being dictated to..

As I posted elsewhere, please do not totally blame the BA but rather the landowners. Perhaps Woodbastwick Estates would allow all to continue to enjoy this wonderful boardwalk but instead of presumably demanding a cost, they could offer this facility free so we can continue to enjoy this beautiful area. i wish landowners could just see they are custodians of this land for everyone and why should access be denied? Its a real shame ,but not the fault of the BA. And for those who know the full details, it is again the attitude of the OWNERS who are responsible for the situation at Thurne. What is it with landowners who deny access constantly - I really do pity the individuals at the BA responsible for negotiating with these blinkered owners - how many years have those individuals in Ludham stood in the way of persons enjoying the walk to St Benets along the flood wall?? I have just lost count but negotiations are ongoing still after over 5 years or so!!! Whats even more infuriating is that this is not NEW access such as HGB but access being taken away and back into the hands of the few who in reality give not a t**s !! Phew I am angry about all of this but divert your anger to the real root of the matter and not automatically to the BA who may not warrant it.!! And oh, the Fleet Dyke situation could easily be resolved with a determined individual with a brush cutter!!!

Clearly others than those on various Forums take a differing view of JP - its easy to read Forums and think that the views stated are necessarily the correct ones and indeed the only ones!!!!!!!

I suspect that at the end of the day the numbers moving will be quite modest - lot of difference between talking about it and actually going. Whilst I would not wish to be seen as a Devils Advocate, there would be some who may suggest the Southern Rivers would be better off if some do move - its not just a money issue in some eyes. There was if you recall a quite strong support for higher tolls on large seagoing cruisers only fairly recently. There are quite a few issues in this complex discussion - don't expect me to take sides!!!!

Scotchbrite on GRP?? Sounds too harsh to me so won't be trying that methinks!!!!

But of course all those questions are very easily answered by typing the question into your search engine!! Or have I missed something??

All these old relicts raise an interesting but sad, point. Although there are some centralised archives they are still many hundreds of images that are hidden away in private collection and which as their owners get older, will never be digitalised and saved for our children - how sad this is and what a real treasure a National Archive of Broadland images would be.

Poppy - you might be right and indeed we are all well aware of that but the signs prohibiting mooring at the mouth are new. I do not know when they went up and I , and others, miss the fact that hither too,people have always moored there, Private or not!! The proliferation of "Private" signs everywhere is something to be abhorred - its even sillier at Upton now the fishing platforms are there as there is plenty of room for both fishermen and boaters. At a guess there is probably room for at least 10 anglers now and who ever saw 10 anglers at Upton???? Given the amount of kit most carry, it is just too far for most fishermen to go!! If I thought it would make any difference I would contact the EA, but i know they would argue forcibly for the fishermen, despite the fact that its hardly ever used. Its a bit like S Walsham - you can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times you see fishermen on the platforms at the bottom of Fleet Dyke and it is hardly surprising to see boats moored there at peak times. Equally I shall continue to moor at Upton Dyke mouth as I have always previously done so - I will give way to a fisherman nicely if he asks and all other places are occupied. Fat chance of that!!!!

The moorings at the mouth of the dyke seem yo have been "usurped" for the purposes of fishermen. All round that bit now are notices saying " No Mooring" reserved for fishermen or such ilk. The moorings in the dyke are I believe owned by the EA so they seem to think its for fishermen only at the mouth despite the fact that they also have a number of often unused fishing platforms available.. There has always been moorings for about 2 boats at that bit for as long as I remember - shame they have tried to stop it now. I say "tried" as I still moor there and just ignore the signs as there is plenty of room for fishermen and 2 boats!!!

Gracie - I had long gone to sleep!! Must be that time of year when no one has anything particular to say!!! Breydon is easy if you can read and/or can be bothered. If not you can enjoy the extensive wide horizons and views of mud and wait until the tide comes back at no risk. Please don't call the emergency services - you are rarely at risk and equally I would suggest the RNLI review their local station operating criteria to ensure their resources are focussed on those in danger and not those who are not at risk. Do they register everyone "rescued" as a life saved for their records?

Why do people automatically assume that being a National Park would mean navigation is banned? There is no evidence that that would happen so why keep on perpetuating that myth?

But in reality who really decides policy in a democracy - the silent majority or those who pursue self interests and/or make the most noise??? Not sure which is the worst?????

Must misunderstand something - what do you expect the BA to do?? Allow every minority interest or very wealthy private individual to always dictate policy? Is that what you really want? The individuals concerned are possibly more interested in their own specific quarrel than in the interest of the broader public. If they had not not brought this rather silly action ,maybe the BA would not have to expend their resources on defending it and all to what end??? I guarantee it will make not one jot of difference over the longer term other than to line lawyers pockets further!! It certainly makes no difference to me a user. And PW you clearly are illustrating that you do not understand how the law works - any QC will say what he is paid to say, not what he believes!! Every court, every day throughout the land is full of QC's trying to defend the indefensible. Surely you do not want me to begin a list....!!!

Quite agree John - this is turning yet again into a diatribe against the BA - there are many considerations which certain posters continue to overlook and I just cannot be bothered to comment on them all - yet again!!! Except say the recent events prove nothing at all and support no case either for or against!! Its done and no crusade is going to change it now - perhaps we should have a special section for this type of reaction so people can then just not bother to read them until there is really something new and important to say!

Correct Polly - two mudweights would work better - just make sure to secure the second to the first securely!!!