marshman

Its a lot of spoil IF you have the landowners permission!!!!!!

Poppy - with respect thats a bit harsh!! Whilst you would probably expect an employee to support their employer, you would not expect him to deliberately lie! Indeed I think he is pretty close to the truth. Firstly as Kingfisher has said, the RSPB have no land adjacent to Hickling so I just cannot see that they should be involved in discussions concerning the area at all - their nearest land is at Sutton Fen. And for what its worth, Natural England DO have the final say on dredging, and indeed weed cutting. During last summer they even had control over the trial weed cutting that took place at various stages of growth and at various locations. He is not quite right about the disposal of dredging material, as last winter, a trial did take place to pump material ashore in the Hill Common area . I am not sure it was a great success BUT this has one major problem - you have to reach agreement with the farmer concerned and for what its worth, that is not necessarily a given and neither is it a cheap option as the spoil has to be contained within a geotextile enclosure. Farmers generally are not too keen on this method at all - it was trialled a few years ago adjacent to Upton Broad proving somewhat laborious. And one thing you will never get is permission to just "dump" dredging onto marshes or reedbed - you will recall the owner at Wayford who tried that and subsequently had to remove it. Indeed Hickling landscape itself has suffered from the disposal of previous dredging episodes - you will be aware as you enter White Slea from Heigham Sound of the stand of silver birch which sticks out like a sore thumb. It all grew up on the site of previous dredgings - there is nothing like nice clean mud to welcome those silver birch seeds to grow ,and like alder, should be treated as weeds!!! And to top it all, Hickling suffers as you well know, from a propensity to have prymnesium outbreaks, and this too hinders dredging with that only being permitted when the water temperature falls below a certain level. Thats an EA issue as well as a Natural England one! Would then things be as easy as you suggest - however the channel is again being dredged further this year and the dredgings being deposited within an area around Churchills Bay . As John Blackburn has said, to strengthen the shoreline and/or to reestablish islands - so he is right on that one as well!

Peter Pan!! Now thats a blast from the past!! Stop doing that Vaughan!! Most bow thrusters are more powerful than the engine in those!!

MM - I am aware of where you moor, and without wishing to commit yourself further, I am sure you will agree with me about the very special merits of the area, and perhaps also agree that if the area were opened up, it may impact the special uniqueness that it has. The comment on joining me to view it, was at best tongue in cheek,, and not directed at you personally! Although I would not mind the latter either I hasten to add! Equally I am not sure that these areas do exist in their entirety, or at least to the same degree unless perhaps managed by "outside" bodies, in other parts of the Broads - especially outside the New Inn. But earlier this year, I did have the pleasure of seeing, whilst eating my lunch tied to a tree in Meadow Dyke, the following within about 30 minutes - otter, bittern, kingfisher, marsh harrier, norfolk hawker, swallowtail, and the cranes. Whilst I suspect it could happen on the Ant, it clearly does not happen very often given the posts addressed to JP about the lack of wildlife! ( To be fair, I suspect it does not happen in Meadow Dyke all of the time! ) The real point I was trying to make is why risk the danger of losing anything from that area - I would like something special to show my grandchildren and that list does not include a long procession of Clives finest , nose to tail down the Ant! I am a great believer in leaving some space for nature in this crowded world we live in.

Ah but Vaughan you cannot see cranes from the New Inn - not yet at least! ( But to be fair you can not generally see the kites either at Horsey)

Fred - I go to Horning on a very regular basis to and have been doing so many many years and if the flooding to which you refer is that in Ferry Lane, that is a very poor guide. That road is well below river level at the best of times and perhaps you should point a finger at Anglian Water, who, having spent a lot of money three (2 ?) winters ago seem to have made it worse! That problem is more to do with the drainage in Lower Street rather than the Lower Bure!!!! And oh, FYI, any dredging has I believe to have the approval of Natural England - not my rules! My comment about wildlife has perhaps been misconstrued - would that wildlife still be around if Hickling looked like Wroxham? Methinks not, or at least to lesser degree I am sure you will agree

I think it would be appropriate to remember that navigation is not necessarily the primary objective of the Authority! Of course the Authority has to dredge ,and it does, but you must not forget its remit elsewhere. This whole issue began over the situation at and above Potter - is there really a good argument to turn it into Disneyworld? Do none of you think it should remain as it is? If you allowed what some propose then you can guarantee it would impact the wildlife - post after post complains about the lack of wildlife and constantly demand the Broads Authority take action - perhaps this is their cunning riposte! But it is only above the bridge that you can almost guarantee seeing some of the species which make this part of Norfolk so very special. I don't know the answer to the questions raised regarding the bridge nor the Bure but I can guarantee that neither Natural England nor the EA would give their approval to what is hinted at here - simply because no one knows the impact! I am not a hydrological engineer, and incidentally neither are most other posters, so for what its worth, without the facts, you can hypothesise as much as you like to, I guess, no avail. Posted on behalf of the Broads Authority Cheerleaders Society - but only when it suits!

Yes MM, - you might want the headroom at Potter restored to 1960 levels but as a result of the actions taken what would the consequences of that be? I would suggest, with respect, that you have not a clue!! As indeed the BA do not and neither do the EA. I can guarantee you they will not take the risk! And what would be the point in any case? Spoiling an area of Broadland loved by far more, for its peace and quiet and its diversity of wildlife? There are plenty of ways to enjoy it still, so if you wish to do so, please be my guest - it is open to the public should they chose to go there.

So if you removed the "bump" at the bottom of the Bure, would surge tides, and indeed normal tides, come further upstream? the fact is none probably knows but is that what is wanted? You can hardly put it back? Is the "benefit" of increased headroom worth it weighed against the increased salinity perhaps affecting the fishing and impacting the delicate balance of freshwater/brackish water ? Simply because the impact of such action is questionable, all the pro's and against's will never agree and since the actual cost would certainly outweigh the benefits, is it not a risky strategy, given the limited plus points? I actually want the Upper Thurne left very much as it is - my guess it is very redolent of the Broads as it used to be and in itself is worth preserving - there are few real benefits of changing that IMHO

Just to cheer you up, the Broads this time of year are generally warmer than after Christmas! In the late autumn we benefit from the warmer sea almost surrounding us and that helps the land temperatures a bit - after Christmas as the sea temperature begins to fall away this benefit tends to lost - this can also have an impact early in spring but the other way round. Although the Spring is always something to look forward to, here in Norfolk,especially if the easterlies set in, it can often be a trifle nippy!

Two things have happened definitely - sea levels , and indeed river levels have risen through out Broadland. Boats have got bigger too, both upwards and generally wider. Almost all boats are now built out to their maximum beam - that clearly has an impact too! An inch is only an inch but 2" in twenty years and relative to the sharply curved arch, makes a huge difference. But I have also spotted the subtext - takes me a bit these days but I think you would have to work a bit harder to prove that one!

So MM you clearly have the precise figures for the situation at Potter and are able to say that over the last ten years, Potter Bridge has sunk more than that? Or in fact are you just guessing? Methinks the latter!!!! If not why then it is suddenly disappearing after all these years? Or has it suddenly started to sink further since the mid 80's - perhaps it something to do with the demise of the GYPHC?

Not sure "a good fit" and "a nice air flow" quite go together! For what its worth and IMHO only one option and thats a wet shed or a very large barn for the winter! Otherwise I suspect she will beat you! This time of year, methinks even boats in wet sheds get too wet - classic boats should be treated like classic cars i.e. very lovingly and very carefully! I wish you luck but not a task I would wish take on!!!

That's a cracker Vaughan!!! Thing is though, I can hear him saying that, clear as a bell!!!!!

I suspect Lee Sanitation or even Norfolk Marine will have just the bit!!

He is the one credited with the picture! Strange how this sort of thing follows him around - cannot imagine why?????

It is well balanced - those for, those against! Its only unbalanced if you take one side away - which we try to avoid!! Bit like Brexit discussions in reality!!

Like those pictures at the dolphin - although running aground is an acceptable manoevre if it slows you down! It was a well known trick of the wherrymen to "bung it in the hedge" to slow down - todays Skippers are discouraged from using this tactic! It also helped when turning. I remember in the late 60's sailing up into Maldon on the first of the flood in a Thames Barge - we only had the topsail up so it was not that windy but the tide was flooding nicely. At mid tide its not that wide opposite Hythe Quay but there is plenty of mud - as we got to the quay, put the wheel hard over, dropped the topsail in a trice, and slid back gently into the middle and the way carried us almost back onto the quay. Like thats how its been done for years!!

Hi Carol - you are right the internet is wonderful! See Tug Genstream here http://www.ourgreatyarmouth.org.uk/page_id__172.aspx Scroll down and you will see a bit about working on the tug and barges/lighters. Sadly the pictures do not show the length of the tow - anyone else got some 50s/60s pictures showing this?? Vaughan - not much has changed then in the Courts!!

I cannot see any smoke at all, let alone fire!! If the truth ever became known, it probably has nothing to to do with some peoples imagination - there are many many reasons why people move on and or change jobs. If it REALLY was on a matter of principle, I think the "news" would have broken in a more appropriate manner, rather than in something such as Pike Broadsheet which many people do not even have access too, and equally most who do, rarely read these days - generally hot air and squit comes to mind!!!

I remember that "squat" effect and the time it took for the coaster to appear after you were aware of the water shifting around! It could be quite surreal. I am not sure always that they went with the tide - quite a few used to leave Norwich well before slack which meant they they had to pass somewhere or other - I remember being at Postwick bends once when there was one well stuck, and one coming upstream and another down - fortunately in the end it did not all happen on the big bend but a bit beyond! I also remember the lighters coming up to the gas works when in addition to the coasters and the hire boats, I recall they had the tugs with three lighters, on very long tows, coming along behind, Each lighter had someone on the tiller as well which must have been a dreadful job in the winter - nowadays they would want a toilet as well!! ( Must search Broadland Memories some time to see if the tows were really as long as I imagined!)

Just wait until Vaughan reads this - he will have a few tales to tell I bet about the coasters! In the early 60's I used to spend a lot of time ,wasting my time at Bells in Brundall and one morning we launched a brand new cruiser for a private owner. It was around mid morning so we all nipped off to the tea shed for a cuppa, leaving the cruiser on the front, when there was a loud crunching sound and a coaster, swinging a bit wide, calmly side swiped the new boat and put her under. Cannot remember much beyond that but it seemed a bit exciting at the time, - except for the new owner!!

Don't want to disagree with Vaughan but my understanding was that they were intended to charge batteries for cruising - they were meant to be for overnight charging and I believe one or two boats did try this approach. I don't think that fast charging as we now understand it had even been invented - certainly there were no Li batteries or any such fancy things as that but the good old lead acid type. Lets take this one stage at a time - when were the first posts installed then?

Robin is right again - well almost right in the whole of his reply! Like it or not, the toll is as he suggests, a good deal. It is the second half of his reply where he goes a little awry - or I think he does! As he has demonstrated the whole idea of posts has really got lost in the wash a bit - what they are not really intended for is the whole charging issue. Yes that was the intention but I think at the time, they were only "playing" with the idea and perhaps pandering to some "green" motives - the technology just id not exist then to take it very seriously. At the same time, many boats even then had the ability to "trickle" charge their boats on their own moorings, so it was decided to provide these facilities away from home - no one then even dreamt really about heating, and cooking from them alone, or even supplementing these facilities from them. And they have in a way now been a victim of their limited success in that the consumer is now demanding more - and in most cases, they cannot now do that realistically. Many of the BA 24hr moorings are a bit remote and you can see the costs of getting power to the Acle Bridge moorings - and thats only a dribble in the whole context of full electric boating. So out of general interest what exactly do you want the BA to do now? Continue to try and hook up as many moorings as they can to a dribble or go the full hog as Robin describes some of the London Boroughs are having to do to cope with demand ? Beyond this you can see just how stupid the Government are in their reaction to diesel cars - typical of authority to react in the way they have as it appears a short time fix which when you look further, will prove to be impossible to provide a workable solution - bit like Dutch boys and their fingers!!!!!!

Those not wanting street lights could put a note on the gate, those not wanting cycle lanes in Norwich could send a polite notice to Norwich City Council, those watching only ITV on a standard tv could inform the TV licence Office but as I hinted earlier, thats what life is about - you do not actually have a choice in it and you might as well make the most of it and move on!!