marshman

I have done many charitable presentations in the past, to both retain existing business and to apply for new charitable business and you are right in that you never know the real reasons as to why they need to review existing arrangements, nor are you often told why you were successful, or indeed unsuccessful. It could be that as James Colman said, they felt that it was time for a change and that was all it was. It may also be be that the Whitlingham Trust were using other people to carry out this review and that the Trustees only acted on the recommendations made to them. Often a change of a Trustee would be sufficient for a review to be initiated and indeed IMHO it is incumbent on any Charity to keep these types of arrangement under review for whatever reason they feel appropriate. However it would be unrealistic to expect everyone to be included in discussions on behalf of the BA and they may well have been limited in the number of people directly involved in any meeting - I have even seen that sometimes. And perhaps however much one might wish to help, they could also hinder any discussion and certainly any attempt to influence as PW suggested, could have an entirely different and negative , effect. But I don't know what occurred, nor will, I guess, much posting here change what has happened, nor are we likely to get any closer to the real reasons - I doubt even whether the BA know the truth. What they do know is that they "lost" the contract and thats probably about it!

I must admit I agree with those who suggest why bother? The tides are as difficult as they can be, levels are pretty high, daylight is going rapidly and with the amount of water there is at the moment, tides will be running quick. Thats a lot of extra diesel just to go and see the south which some love because of the solitude, and others just don't bother with! Its not as though the Northern side is less attractive and there is nothing to do - quite the reverse. I go south fairly regularly - but then I also cross at slack at neaps when the tides are nearer the middle of the day. I like an easy life!!!! P.S. ST - have you actually seen a dipper on Breydon? That would be pretty unusual being an upland bird? Not saying you havn't but it would be something of a rarity in the region methinks.

Come on PW - you cannot really expect either the BA or the Charitable Trust to go further into what would have been private negotiations? You can argue all you like that a charity is "public" but would you really expect any Charity to go into the details behind such a decision - can you expect to hear the National Trust, RNLI, or the RSPB go into details behind their decisions, especially ones that MAY have an element of controversy attached?. I suspect all you will get is what we heard from James Colman - that they thought it the right time to have a change. There are many reasons why charities change advisers and even if you knew, it would make little difference. I suspect some would wish to hear the detail so they could pick holes in what the Authority did, or did not do. I doubt those will be given that opportunity!!

There is a mile of difference between the old Tourist Information Centres and what I see as a Visitors Centre - even PW uses the RSPB one in Minsmere! Actually I am a bit surprised he opened up to that.....!!!!

Why - do you want to sponsor the venue??

For a variety of reasons, I am quite lucky to spend some time, especially in the winter, on the Upper Thurne and was up there fiddling around in February /March time - but don't ask me when but it was pretty nippy!! I am trying to recall precisely when it was, but a bit like my house, my brain is getting smaller! Well the point is that there was this chap out in one of the Martham boats fishing - he clearly was moving around a bit but it was all within the Hickling /Heigham Sound/ Eel Sett area and he was just off to bed having been fishing all night. And in that weather, and on his own. He said both on that night and the two preceding nights he had had catches EACH NIGHT of in excess of 100 pounds! He was taking it pretty seriously, as he would, but I found it hard to believe him - but then why bother to lie to me? It made no difference to me and he was unlikely to want to impress me, of all people!

Methinks not!!!!!

There is always two sides to every story as ST knows only too well - you should remember that for every negative side ,there is a positive!! Oh and just to pick PW up on a point about visitor centres generally - far from having had their day I see an even bigger role for these types of Centres. Look for example at the RSPB, an organisation you all love so dearly, they have tremendous success with theirs and commit to building even more; even the Earl of Leicester has seen their benefits and has just built a very big one up at Holkham by Queen Annes Drive. The National Trust too seem to see some benefits methinks . Or perhaps they are all wrong? People like these "one stop, meets all needs" type of place and to suggest the existing one in Wroxham would suit is way off the mark - thats no bigger than my front room!! Others will of course vehemently disagree with me; but remember two sides to every.....!!!

I think MM is probably right - my guess, for what it is worth, is that Sir Timothy thought it was worth a change, the Trustees feel that it could be now be done in house by themselves and that it would be cheaper. Somewhere in the equation cost would probably be involved and that was I guess the cruncher. More will emerge in due course I suspect. I doubt the 24 hr moorings would be affected - I would presume that this would be the subject of the usual type of lease and a separate issue.

Well thats at least solved the problem of a shortage of fish - oh and of the birds as well!!

'Bout sums it up really!

Does that mean I am exonerated?????

Have I been misunderstood? Whilst I agree it would be easy to leave the detritus on the bank, its the decision of the landowner isn't it? Since when have landowners ever bothered about the boating community - they care less for them than the BA!

It would make life a whole lot easier if the BA actually controlled it all - but at the end of the day, thats the landowners decision.

That will be cause for lengthy discussions when the handicap is discussed!!!!!

Not offering advice at all - merely an opinion and it is up to others whether they take any notice. Its merely my take on a number of differing factors. In fact given the slating that my opinion often gets from some quarters, most people will realise that what I say is totally unreliable and not to be believed, unlike others, so I guess they will not take the slightest bit of notice in any case! But like it or not, I shall still contribute and add my threepenuth!!

You can go through Yarmouth at any time - but whether your boat will go depends on its clearance!! IF you are going through around slack, my guess is that there will be plenty of room - but it depends on your air draught! Any doubts ring the Yacht Station - they can give a better idea than Forumites living away from the area!!!

Be careful on relying on what I say, as I know nothing, but there are a number of factors which will probably work in your favour! The Barton one is probably fairly irrelevant as what needs to happen is that the water in the system needs to escape - so watch the Acle one instead or even the Three Mile house one on that website. Once the tidal heights start to drop thats a good sign! However that is unlikely to happen today if this NW wind keeps up but this will switch tomorrow to S or SW and this really will bring a change. At the moment the N Sea is being blown into the "funnel" at the bottom and this, combining with the spring tides around now just exasperates this. I was going to say watch the tidal predictions at Yarmouth too but Peel Ports seem to have lost the page - try Lowestoft as this will give an indication as it changes - neap tides are also due around the middle of next week. https://www.ntslf.org/data/realtime?port=Lowestoft 'ol Lorenzo looks as though it is going to sweep up the West Coast and strangely that too could help - I believe, and others can contradict as I am only guessing, a good old low to the north of Scotland tends to have the effect of "sucking" water out of the N Sea or so I believe, but rather unconvincingly!! Pressure levels too down here look set to remain fairly stable so that may stop things getting worse as well From tomorrow I think we could see a changing picture and water levels begin to drop away - well I think they will but as you know my views are regarded as "different" ! Once it makes its mind up to go, levels can change quite quickly!! By the weekend and certainly by Sun /Mon I think things will have improved - a quick call to LBBS late Sat may just help too as they should be able to tell you what is going on with actual levels, although that may be a bit early for significant change - or so I guess!!

ST - I do not now anything - its all pure supposition and guesswork!!! However thats all beside the point, as I was merely going to check with you, that you had been in touch with the NCC Roads Survey team to check whether the bridge is stable or sinking?? That would at least clear up one of your issues and I look forward to you advising us all of the true picture so we can be clear on at least one thing!

MM - clearly that is the opinion of the EA as well and as their permission is required before you can do any dredging on the Broads then we might as well get on and accept it I suspect When I was a lad I used to spend a lot of time making dams in streams and playing with water and I quickly learnt that if you put a pile of mud in the middle of a watercourse, you restricted its flow - I have extended that principal to my belief that is what occurs in the Lower Bure, but I would expect their will be others using their "expert" knowledge to think otherwise and probably disagree with my conclusion!! However I am also aware that that "hump" is not new and have "heard" about it many times before, but I do not have access to the info the EA have so I cannot even guess how long it has been there!! Looking at it logically, or in my case some would say probably not very logically, you will be aware that Yarmouth has real issue with flooding - just to add another variable or thought, perhaps the EA are keen to hold water up in the Bure to stop it meeting up with the incoming tide through Yarmouth??? These issues are never straightforward and I wish you well in getting to the bottom of it - as you might but I doubt there is just one easy answer to this and other associated issues! None of this alters my selfish view that nothing should be done about Potter Bridge either, as it helps preserve one of the last vestiges of a precious area harking back to a bygone age which you could so easily destroy by uncaring visitors intent on "going everywhere" with little or no regard for the consequences, especially as that facility still remains, albeit not in the conveyance of their choice.

Saltwater surges are still encroaching further up the Bure, but how far they come depends on the size of the surge!!! The last time I chatted to one of the EA guys about them, the effects were to be seen up by Horning Hall Farm but other factors have to be taken into account too like the amount of freshwater coming downstream to hold it back. Anything about tides and surges is very complicated depending on many factors but it doesn't do the fish a lot of good at all. And yet some individuals are still in denial that sea levels are increasing There is no doubt that further significant dredging away of the Bure hump would exacerbate the issue however but there are just so many differing factors to be taken into account which impact Broadland tides and surges.

Don't worry - to confuse the issue Catfield has two staithes, or possibly 3, if you count Wood End Staithe, but Pallys picture shows the dyke up to the derelict one by Cromes Broad - both the dyke and the staithe fell into misuse "several" years ago and whilst Grendel is correct in that there is a boat shown up the dyke, I think that has long been abandoned. It belonged to a guy who was trying to go "off the radar" a long time ago there was a thread on here about it - I think the BA at the time were trying to get him to get a licence so he did not "hide" that well!

Pally - I did read somewhere that the access dyke to that old Catfield Staithe is going to be cleared - but I cannot remember when!!! However don't hold your breath about whether it will be dredged or the staithe refurbished so it can be used as a formal mooring! Dilham can be tight at times and I would be really surprised if that Catfield could ever hold one of Richardsons finest, let alone turn it! However we shall see.....!

I just cannot, with respect , understand why you won't believe the evidence ST?? ExPilot has suggested you contact NCC who regularly carry out surveys to obtain precisely the information you crave - may I suggest you contact them and ask for the information you require? I cannot provide the information you want so badly, but I seem to know a man who does and who has suggested where you can get it! And yes, I suppose I am selfish to deny some access to that area to stop it being altered forever. Just as you ask what right I have to be so selfish, may I ask what right you, but probably others too, have to destroy what so many seem to wish to keep the same and what is so very special, harking back as it does to an entirely different era? But of course it is open to you and others too to go there - you are well aware how easy it is to access but making it as easy as you suggest, would undoubtedly destroy exactly what is so special. Its not a theme park where you can "experience" it from the comfort of your large plastic bathtub with the rooftop firmly shut, but an area of outstanding beauty and solitude filled with magical peace and with precious wildlife in a unique water filled environment. Destroy it and it could never be recreated.

Its the beam thats most rel]evant!!! Someone somewhere will have an old catalogue...........?