marshman

In cold weather, its not the boat, food or anything else that can prove the problem but ICE on the rivers. It does not take too many frosts to ice over some of the quieter parts and in really chilly conditions quite a lot of the Northern Broads can be inaccessible.. Above Barton is a good example as are South Walsham, Womack and several other places. You may think it fun to use a boat as an ice breaker but GRP and ice do not happily live together and it is quite easy to damage hulls. But if its warm and sunny you don't have a problem!!

Church moorings, next to Caen Meadow

If I recall Langley Dyke has moorings both sides - not sure the west side under the trees is anywhere near attractive as the eastern side. You should check carefully which side the moorings offered are - think it might be different owners although wouldn't swear to it Do not confuse Hardley Dyke and Langley Dyke - Hardley Dyke is I believe Private but Langley Dyke is bigger and wider and much nicer - that is the one that has the 24 hr mooring at the bottom.

Hi Polly - you might love the sight of them but you would love them less if they had taken up residency in your loft. They can be very destructive and like all vermin should be strictly controlled. Not that uncommon to see them swimming - seen several over the years.

Missed a railway line as just after Whitlingham station and therefore after the bridges, the branch to Cromer and Sheringham splits off as well. All of those lines were very busy - I can remember even in the '50s the number of trains going to Yarmouth was enormous, especially on a Saturday. They used to be stacked up at almost every signal all the way down the line. Believe it or not people used to flock to Yarmouth for their holidays!!!!! Add in Cromer and Sheringham, and yes, it would have been busy. In any case labour was cheap and knowing the navvies (which I did not!!! ) they probably dug it over a weekend!!!!!!

Is it really worth the effort when there are areas some boats cannot reach - why not just hire a boat to go to the upper reaches like a day boat?? Must be cheaper than building such a facility into new boats? And as that would only apply to a very very limited number of boats annually, the overall water level continuing to rise would render them obsolete in another 50 years!!

All moorings are in the frame for handing back to the owners if the terms of the lease are too onerous but, i believe their aim is to have BA moorings every 30 mins or so - thats a long term aim but just because some of the moorings are underused, particularly on the Southern Rivers, it does not mean they should not be there. Thorpe Green is surrounded by other moorings and its loss is pretty irrelevant when I can think of 4 moorings within half an hour or so. Its all very well Dave you suggesting that Hardley Cross ( I suspect!!) is underused but that I guess was easy to set up as the piling was already in place - where do you think they need one? Is the piling already in place and is the landowner in agreement to its use at a realistic rent? Nothing is ever as straightforward as just making statements such as that!!!

The message that has long been put out by the BA is that neither pub should ever be successful in getting a change of use granted otherwise they would have disappeared long ago - a genuine new owner however may get more help if the commitment were made to keep them open as a commercial venture. However would take some courage and optimism to achieve a lot at Berney, given the issues over land access too!!!

Ssssh Marina - there are a lot of locals who would NEVER list the RSPB in with the RNLI!!! You have to remember that charities such as the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB are big landowners locally and there are many, including me at times, who are extremely critical of some of their policies and how they operate in conjunction with other local bodies such as the BA. The principle is sound but they can be seemingly very obstructive on some issues which can make them unpopular locally

Whilst everything is possible, I doubt it has been the doing of the BA. If this was land actually owned by them, which again I very much doubt, they would have turned it into a 24 hour mooring years ago unless there is an land access problem. i am sure more will come out in due course but it is sometimes a shame that the BA seem to get blamed for everything - sounds to me that the landowner probably has some involvement. Peter is probably out sailing but with a rubbish day forecast for tomorrow I expect he may be in to tell us more - it would be nice to know more and whether the finger is to be pointed at the BA, or more probably on the very brief info so far, the landowner of either that land or surrounding bits. I seem to recall some years ago problems surrounding that field in the past but cannot dig deep enough into my mind to recover it!!!!!!!

I am at a loss to understand why any thread on Thorpe and or the surrounding environs always raises "tempers" and encourages the worst in posters. Or am I ?

Hi Roy - why are you surprised??? Perhaps this and the proliferation of birds being fed explains why "this lovely mooring" is so underused and why the BA do not want to spend money on the moorings!!

Don't worry too much - water levels been rising of late although with high pressuire perhaps coming back in later this week you could be lucky - very lucky!!!

Bobdog - I think if you check that photo has long been discredited!!! Yet it continues to be dragged out time and time again as a regular consequence of fracking. Given the American blame culture, the sink owners have probably received enough compensation to move to a desert island!!

The trouble is with "renewables" is that cannot and do not produce when you want them to, and you cannot store that unwanted "product" when its produced and not used!! Handy that!! No doubt protesters were just as concerned with oil exploration - like it or not you cannot stand in the way of "progress". Someone talked earlier about HS2 - we just cannot afford not to have it and yet people still complain. I recall 2 little old ladies holding up the M25 for several years ( good some say!!) but in reality it was always going to happen so lets get on and do it. And whilst ancient ridge and furrow is of interest, there are many hundreds of acres of this in the country. However whilst I sympathise to some extent, it will happen because thats what the silent majority who do not care about your specific interest (sorry!) want and the Greens and objectors just make the whole process so much more expensive and provide work for lawyers and consultants - ultimately to no avai!!

Without wishing to start off a never ending argument for and against, it is a fact that US oil and gas production is back to its highest levels last seen in the early 1970's as a result of fracking and they are about to consider exporting oil again - some turnaround and if they are self sufficient it takes some pressure off world resources. The internet is a wonderful thing - for every positive suggested by some learned body promising wealth and prosperity, you can find a negative seemingly equally learned report promising gloom and despondency. Join the GM food scare, Mr Fracking - its great to have principles but please don't in the same breath moan about the cost of food and energy increasing if you cannot embrace new technology .IMHO man is only where he is today by doing just that and moving forward but its an argument some never accept - as if you can really ever stand in the way of advancement. Just ask the Luddites! Me? What do i think? I am not sure anyone really cares and my thoughts will have no impact on the end result of either!!

The one that was at Womack has, I believe, gone up to Waterside as suggested but is not on their books yet.

You are absolutely right but there is one authority whose responsibility it definitely is not - the BA

Martin - no you did not mention it directly but i guess people on the Somerset levels may object to EA money being spent on something which is primarily, the Councils legal responsibility. So by getting the EA to do it, then you are effectively getting fishermen to subsidise council tax payers in the respective areas. i just don't see why my tolls payable to the BA should be paid towards rubbish collection which as a local I have already paid my council to collect. Similarly i do not see why my fishing licence money should pay for rubbish collection which is not the responsibility of the EA. I suspect however,sadly that this a battle already lost by the BA unless the proper authorities can be forced to do what they should - sorry about mixing all these threads together!!!

So Martin - are you suggesting that councils get involved with fishing licences or are you saying the EA should "give" some of the fishing licence money to councils? Let us get the issues quite straight - rubbish collection is not something the BA should be involved in and neither are fishing licences. Rubbish collection is either the responsibility of the councils or individuals and fishing licences the EA and they have the appropriate powers - but choose not to exercise them. The BA do not technically, have the power to be involved with either so why should they?

Simply because fishing is not a BA responsibility!! Quite straightforward really. All fishing enforcement these days is a joint operation between the EA and the police - the BA often go along to provide transport but I am sure they have no authority other than to offer advice. Why lumber them with yet another responsibility and cost? Its a bit like the rubbish issue - waste is a responsibility of councils or individuals - every additional responsibility you add on to the BA impacts their already stretched budget and ultimately on your tolls. There is already an enforcement regime for licences - why add to it?

Hi Janice - that is all absolutely right and you should use Eco friendly washing up liquid etc but as I mentioned earlier, its a tiny drop in the ocean compared with what goes in in the form of nutrient rich run off from farmers applying fertiliser and phosphate rich effluent from the very many local sewerage works. There is for example a commitment by Anglian Water to put in phosphate scrubbers to remove the washing up liquid and shower gel from all those landlubbers who have never heard of the Broads living locally but I think its years behind schedule. If you have ever wondered what all those barriers are around Barton ,they are fish barriers to keep fish OUT of those lagoons to allow the plants to grow but it is a huge job and very difficult to manage and think also that of those Broads - 58 was it? - many are landlocked and are often worse than those attached to rivers. The BA have literally loads of information and call in at their lovely offices and you could leave laden down with report after report on such issues!!! But believe me there is an improvement but they are still nibbling away at a mountain - despite the fears of many conservation does not take more than its fair share of the overall budget but you are beginning to see the magnitude of their problem in balancing the various competing issues - and no, I do not work for them and never have !!!!

Hi Janice - as far as i am aware it is only sailing boats that do not have tanks - not sure if you have ever looked at or been in a Broads sailing cruiser - if you had you would see the problem instantly!!! Quite literally there is not room to fit one, perhaps other than the size of a bucket!! At the same time I would not want to be in a sailing boat with a chemical loo - the thought of chemical liquid at loose is a far worse thought. As others have pointed out, it is no really an issue given the tiny number of sailing boats around. Others have commented on the colour of the water and this has nothing to do with what is in the water directly as it is algae growth - or rather it is and it is phosphates put in by everyone with there "gray" water from sinks and showers on boats and farmers and the rest of the community at large. Come to the Broads later in the year and the waters are much clearer and this is as a result of algae growth dying as the water temperature cools - I have actually seen the bottom of the Ant at times!! Despite what is said and feared, I really doubt you would catch a lot in the rivers although far be it for me to encourage it - it is defo much cleaner than 40 years ago without a doubt.

I cannot be bothered to search but I think you will find that it is mandatory on the Broads too except for specific craft - there was a long debate on this elsewhere and I believe it is a current Byelaw. Come on Paladine - where are you when needed??

I am not sure whether any motor cruisers discharge - with possibly a very few historic ones being an exception.. As far as the remark by Donnygeoff is concerned, it must have been a very unusual occurrence and from a larger ocean going boat as no Broadland cruiser has that facility to pump out their own tanks. Even so my guess was it would be silt.. It is not feasible for the smaller sailing boats to fit tanks - go on a Hunters boat and you will see why!! I personally do not see the so limited numbers being a problem and I doubt even the human waste "emissions" are measurable. Don't forget, water quality wise the Broads are the cleanest they have been for many many years and there is plenty of evidence to support this - white water lilies for example now grow here and they do not tolerate "dirty" water - the yellows do more so!! But be much more concerned about phosphates being in the water from field and agriculture run off and from out of the pipes of many local sewage works - now that is an issue!! Swimming - I don't think you would come to any harm but from your posts I doubt you will even consider it!!!