marshman

Our figures at the moment are around 1047 and moving on into the week, look to decline a bit - I would also expect it to impact water levels but surprisingly its only reducing levels a bit and not as much as many would hope. This shows how many factors affect Broadland tides and their levels! There are two which may be relevant - I think normally the upstream marshes take a lot of the water when tides are at their highest as they have been, but this winter the "sponge " effect has been reduced as they are already very wet. Some of the few reedcutters are very concerned that levels this year are going to impact what small amounts are still cut annually which does have a knock on effect. The other point is that the other day, out in mid Norfolk, I noticed even there, there was a lot of water about. Hawk and Owl Trust by Fakenham for example, have had to close temporarily as they are inundated. Whilst we have not had a huge amount of rain of late in Broadland they may have had more there and its all got to pass through and out through Haven Bridge!! Everywhere is wet and all the extra has to run off as land is pretty saturated. We need 2/3 weeks of dry weather, preferably with drying easterly winds, to dry everything out, but its not on the cards - yet!!

OK PW I give up - you and your "protagonists"are never wrong! You all manage to highlight expressions and words to your own advantage and forget fundamentals! To argue against additional moorings anywhere, and that they should not be paid out of the Navigation budget is IMHO stretching the imagination - does it matter that it is adjacent to a Nature Reserve? Its a mooring of which almost all visitors and posters ask for more of - when one is provided we now have to argue which part of the budget it comes from? OK and as posters now propound , take it to the Ombudsman as soon as you can. My guess, before you actually get there is that it will not get anywhere at all - but thats my view! With all honesty I suspect, like myself, many readers of this Forum will shortly be driven away by all of this squit by a very few individuals over not a lot. Persist by all means but lose the balance and many people who time and time get rather bored with the sport of BA bashing, will probably drift away! And wish by all means, the demise of the BA - BUT be very careful of what you wish for. It could be a lot worse...!

I am sorry to take issue with you again PW but can you explain why, in your view the dredging in Heigham Sound and Hickling over the last 5/7 years, has anything much to do with conservation? My understanding is that it is, and was all about dredging the channels and disposing of the spoil. After all how else can you dispose of the spoil in that area, other than filling in a few shallow bays? The last time it was comprehensively dredged the spoil was dumped on a piece of marsh near White Slea, and the consequence of that was, in the middle of an area of marshes a wood of birch became established and only recently was this cleared to attempt to return it to what it should always have been - and to restore the wind to the sailies!! Anyone who really knows that area will know that that wood was not a natural event but only because the spoil was dumped there. I think the " resistance" to dredging in that area was more where to stick the stuff!!!

Returning to the OP, if I may, requesting the "local"rag carries out an investigation is in itself slightly bizarre. Whilst I am not even going to bother to look in detail to find them, I can remember several times over the years when Members of this very Forum have bemoaned the lack of accuracy of the reporting from that venerable institution - do you think that anyone in these circumstances would actually believe what they said if they did agree to carry out a serious piece of investigative journalism?? Methinks not more than a few! It is after all a newspaper and we all know what the prime objective of papers is - to tell the whole truth? Not my take on them in general terms!

Rightly or wrongly, my view, not necessarily accepted by all, is that this argument has become very tedious to the point of boring. Nothing has changed yet now another topic, closely related, is being hijacked by a small number of individuals to discuss their views ad nauseum with NOTHING new being actually discussed. It has all been said before, not once but time and time again!! Is there nothing happening in the Broads of real interest? Surely its time to move on until something actually happens that directly alters the issues?

3 at least! Ferry, HW and Bridgecraft so far..!!

Presumably as they envisaged "road signs" it cam out of the Navigation budget!! Whatever next!!!

And in contrast Ferry seem to have started!! I think the yards find it quite disrupting - they still have to provide breakdown cover, and when the boats go out, there are dewinterised, and winterised when they come back. They also have a planning process whereby boats are taken through the sheds for overhaul and this all has to be fitted in. I suspect Len is of the view it is just uneconomic, which it probably is!! Cannot believe in reality if it is worth the effort, or not!

I believe the "ditch" is an IDB drain which runs down from the How Hill area and is pumped out into the river - there is a pump I believe behind the boatyard. I shouldn't think that it is particularly prone to flooding but at that time the Upper Ant did have flood warning out and was probably some overtopping in some places. Hence probably the stilt arrangement for times like we had.

Hello, hello, hello!! This seems to add up to a measure of agreement!!! No - that must be wrong!!!

Whether or not the sign should or should not be on the post, perhaps the point is in reality, it is easier for this Forum to take a pop at the BA than all the other agencies/firms that now use that slogan and also who were directly involved in the original decision to erect that sign. That means, the local authorities concerned, including probably the Highways Agency under whose auspices the A47 will fall, and then everyone who uses the "lie" on their material from the OS downwards. Off you go then boys, and do your duty!! I wish you well and many hours of happy correspondence - and no ST that does not mean that I support the introduction of a full NP for this area

So Grendel - would it be a good idea to put that type of powered boats on the Trinities? I assume from your comments you would think that a good idea, or rather would not oppose it! Sorry ST - guess again as to my thoughts!! ( I actually do not ever recall supporting a NP per se for this area, although I might have pointed out that legislation is required for that purpose, rather than the appearance of a road sign. Equally neither Clive's brochure nor the OS publications actually make it one either! ) I do think that sometimes my comments are perhaps taken too literally - don't forget there is a need for balance in all discussions and rather than read all posts following the "party" line, there is a need to point out the other side of the story! I just believe the need to point out there is another side to be considered.... ! Balance is what its called!!!!!

Yep agreed - utter boredom with all the semantics involved????

Correct - Grasmere currently has only rowing boats, hardly 30/40' gentlemans electric launches with overnight accommodation!!

Its not a question of "going for big bucks", but if you are to make an investment, surely you can not deny them the right to make some money out of it? If indeed you do not allow them to make money, then they will not invest and without investment, the Broads will surely die? Its no use saying that the shop can be redeveloped because my guess is that you just would not get any return whatsoever - who would use it? OK a few would pop in to buy something they were missing, but why not wait if going upstream to get what you want and cheaper at Stalham? If it requires the holiday lets, then so be it but even that is a dodgy market with few guarantees - its certainly not a place I would go and rent a property for peace and solitude, right next to a fairly busy road and above a busy public mooring! Good luck to them I say and will it be a success I ask? Possibly marginally but I doubt if anyone is going to to make big bucks, or what I call big bucks!!

No Upcycler - you cannot turn the clock back and if you had ever owned a woodie, you will know what heartache they are! OK they give pleasure but I recall however smart they looked, there were always hidden corners where even angels feared to tread!! And the bigger they are, the bigger the pain!!!!

As you say, one of the "bibles" of wherries containing a wealth of information - how ever much you think you know, a valuable reference book. Just the sort of book to be kept around especially when afloat And of course, the Norfolk Wherry Trust will benefit and anything to help the Trust to continue to have a presence well into the future is to be welcomed

ST - how I take delight in keeping you guessing!!!! But do not assume that just because I appear to disagree with PW a lot, we are that different in our objectives - what I dislike most is how some are so negative about everything the BA does and it is so readily assumed that what some say is always right, when in fact the vast majority of members of this, and other Forums may well have a more "benevolent" view of that organisation. The last post continues to lambast that organisation, rightly or wrongly, but my view has always been that you should not moan all the time, or indeed find fault over what IMHO, and I suspect others too, see as not a great deal and certainly be aware that this constant negativity and finding fault is not supported by everyone and he would do well to remember the fable of Peter (!) and the Wolf!! I shall save myself for the real battles and not imaginary ones! Anyhow enough of all this for the time being, I am just going to nip down to the boat to see whether all is still well with reality!!

Vaughan - I agree with you to some extent about rural crafts, but as far as reed is concerned, it is impossible to realistically make a living from it, especially when imported reed from overseas is available more cheaply! Allied to that fact is the issue about how it is just too hard a job in this day and age, for the people who are looking for jobs - you would have to really love outdoor life to freeze your b*****ks off in the winter and get fried and bitten to death in the summer to cut sedge!! Pally is right that it does "exist" and it does, but only at a very "low" level - they do keep looking at opening "new" beds but it is only in bits and pieces. The thatchers prefer nice even and clean reed and thats not always available in any real quantity and it is still, on the marshes, very labour orientated. Some thatchers like single whale (cut after one year) others double , cut after two.This winter at the moment, for example, is probably going to quite difficult given the huge amount of standing water around and even lightweight machines will probably have difficulty - fun doing it in waders in deep water all day I promise you - not!!! Oh for nice level marshes able to take heavier machines as they have on the reedbeds on the N Norfolk coast - some around here won't even take the machines that bundle it and it still has to be cleaned whatever machine is used. The BA planners like to see Norfolk reed thatching but don't insist on it, but I very much doubt whether they would approve of straw thatching along the riverside!! So I expect where it is indigenous to the region its hardly surprising that planners like to see straw thatching alongside existing straw thatching - but who grows long stemmed wheat/barley for thatching these days - if you combine it it will just chew it up I guess!!!! And guess what ST, you are wrong again when trying to guess my views!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nonetheless as I am not being ask to do this in reality, and I cannot second guess whether there are any other factors, I just think its all a bit pointless!

To be honest - it is not happening at this time, so you just cannot say!! So its entirely hypothetical and without knowing what else is involved, I don't see that it is a particularly relevant question. Everything and anything could be changed - so I am not sure what is the point?

MM - I would just go away and get drunk again! Nonetheless you do speak many words of wisdom!!!!! Incidentally my reading of the report mentioned is not that the Broads should be subject to the Sandford Principle per se but that consideration should be given to applying it to all areas of AONB. However for what it is worth, you must remember that these are proposals only and it does not mean it is a concrete proposal across the board; there is plenty of wriggle room in those words as they acknowledge. Earlier some posters were setting great store by suggesting the RSPB was making firm proposals for the Broads - just read the title of the document as being "a vision". PW has a vision for the Broads without JP - doesn't mean its definitely going to happen!! In any case, the RSPB only own a small area of Broadland and play only a minor role - far less than the NWT for example. Also remember that the heavy hand of the EA already controls almost everything the BA does, and does not, do. The rumour around is that the legislation protecting water voles is now going to be more vigorously applied than previously, and it may well be used to impact such issues as dredging or the disposal of dredged waste! We shall see!!!!

To be really honest, I doubt many will really care!! Does anyone criticise Richardsons for its website which says much the same thing!!

But, by "taunting" him to answer a question to which they already know the answer, that's exactly what the questioners are aiming to achieve!!! Hopefully Tom will not respond and remain "slightly damp"!!! And as for the Broads becoming as popular as those other places (one wonders why PW bothered to go to either if they are such dreadful places ) we know that won't happen as the tolls are already outrageously expensive and new owners are already being frightened away as a result!!

Great - another no news day and the EDP has just to confirm it!!!!

I was going to say something a bit obvious, but promised to keep out of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!