Poppy

Strong N. westerlies. Always happens. No surprise.

Interesting document. Thanks for posting. An exercise in establishing why not to do something you didn't want to do in the first place. I wonder how you convert Tons into cubic metres - or vise versa ?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/waste-exemptions-disposing-of-waste The BA and the EA have consistently said 'you can't do that', citing in many cases, EU 'Law', whilst conveniently ignoring this exemption.

But still nothing fron anyone indpendent of the NWT/RSPB. Bit like the religious using the Bible to prove the truth ..... of the Bible.

As riparian owners they certainly do have a say, along with the 'ear' of many in the BA, who in turn are close to and funded by ( in part ) by the EA !

No. The NWT certainly and the RSPB ( I think ) have owned the bankside of Hickling Broad for many years. The issue of the depositing of spoil is not a new one!

Ask them both, as a member why they have always been opposed and have blocked the deposition of dredging spoil on the banks of Hickling Broad, a practice which was always traditionaly carried out. Ask anyone who has regularly sailed on Hickling broad for some time how conditions have changed regarding depth, especially off the main chanel. Ask the HBYC how their membership has changed, and why . Then you mabe, just maybe will have some idea ....

Agreed too. ! Sadly, many are only concerned about getting to the next pub and to be sure of a mooring there .

I'm sure there HAS been dredging of the Lower Bure. The question is - has there been enough to have a measurable effect at Potter ? My guess is no!. 'Environmental impact' studies are requred by the EA before any works can be carried out, and I understand that the BA were told years ago that such work would nort receive approval since they would be consirered to have an adversr impact on water levels upstream.

Brilliant ! Keep it up lads !

Well that depend ... as they say in Norfolk. There will be on every tin details of maximum and minimum overcoating times, which will largely be dependent on temperature. Sand between each coat if going over that time.

I should have added - stay clear of two pack varnish and one pack polyurethane ! It's almost impossible to make a good repair to damage, additionaly although very durable, it's susceptible to cracking and UV damage, much more so than conventional yacht varnish. Also when buying your varnish , beware of some of the 'big named ' brands which, believe it or not are labeled as not suitable for external use

I agree with Marshy on this - Poppy goes into a big dry barn in November, and there she stays until the following March or April. The winter frosts can play havoc with varnish unless really dry. If that isn't an option, are you sure that the covers are truly breathable ? PVC or similar is not, and in fact will make things worse! The secret is 'preventative maintenance'. As soon as you notice damage to the varnish, patch it. I keep a small jar of varnish on board for thaat purpose. Plan your maintenance too ! This winter I,m stripping back the toe rails and rubbing strakes to bare wood, and they will be then coated with at least three coats of 50/5 varnish and turps. At least another three coats of neat varnish will follow - more if time and temperature permits. Elsewhere a light rub down followed with one varnish coat will keep things looking good. Inside there is less to bother about, lust keep an eye on things and theat accordingly. Before finding inside winter storage for Poppy we chose to keep her afloat, planning for some time afloat. In all reality it wasn't worth it ( and we live locally ! ) The extra work which ensued, balanced with the number of opportunities to take her out mad the decision a 'no brainer'. We have even noticed that the fibreglass hull has benefited from drying out too.

Strange as it may seem, I enjoy the winter maintenance - all except the anti fouling that is