Jump to content

Hickling Broad Update


JennyMorgan

Recommended Posts

My suspiciuos mind makes me think with the NWT now owning these waterways, it could spell the death of boating on these waters?.  I`m now picturing all the marshes with millions of bird hides etc all round the place, and not a boat in sight, except for an electric trip boat of course?.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I am suspicious. I also note that the EDP says they are needing to raise one Million but IIRC the original sale price was 2.5 million.

Do they have reserves for the rest or have they been given the nod from the Lottery funds.?

Alternatively are they planning to sell off the built up bits off, I.E. the sailing club and boat yard (and a few other bits In that corner of the broad area).?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having been up that way today, I am told that the NWT bid for the whole has been accepted. The locals in the 'Lot 5' area know no more than that.

I must admit to being somewhat concerned noting the Trust's intransigence wrt dredging and (as I understand from sources) the historical opposition of certain key players in NWT to even keeping the navigation channel open during previous high weed growth years - it may have been 20 odd years ago but bruised egos have long memories!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bobdog said:

I don't think you'll notice any difference.  NWT have been managing the area for years under lease from the owners, all they're doing is going from leaseholders to freeholders.  The moorings at Deep Dyke, Deep Go and White Slea are owned by NWT and let out to (and maintained by) the BA.

Hi Bob,

i don`t usually like saying this, but in future years, "somebody might quote you on that"?.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Bobdog said:

I don't think you'll notice any difference. 

4 hours ago, Bobdog said:

all they're doing is going from leaseholders to freeholders

So going from being tied by the terms of a lease to having complete control over land that they will now own. I am afraid that I beg to differ Bobdog, I am sure that we will notice a difference. Probably not this year, maybe not in the next two or three but in five years or so when sky rocketing rents have forced out the boatyard and weed prevents the sailing club from operating what then?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bobdog said:

The moorings at Deep Dyke, Deep Go and White Slea are owned by NWT and let out to (and maintained by) the BA.

That in itself, sounds like the kiss of death. Look what has just happened on Thorpe River Green.

I predict that the only way to maintain navigation upstream of Potter bridge in the future, will be to enforce the statutory rights of navigation to the public staithes. These rights go back to Time Immemorial and can only be repealed by act of Parliament. So now is the time to enforce them.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bobdog said:

Usual scaremongering nonsense.

Hi Bob,

i don`t think in all honesty, Vaughn, or certainly NOT myself are trying to "scaremonger" anybody. Recent history has seen boating, and boating related requirements, ie dredging and mooring, have been put very low on the authority`s list of responsiblities, in favour of  conservation and wildlife.  Nobody has actually stated those are the things that ARE GOING TO HAPPEN, merely voicing concerns of what MIGHT happen, based on recent history. So i think to label peoples post as scaremongering is unfair.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Ba are so keen to uphold their chief responsibility - i.e maintaining navigation, then why don't they buy it?  They could start a crowd-funding account, publicise that they need help to purchase the whole blooming lot, they could even enquire about putting down a deposit and pay monthly.  I'd certainly donate to that cause.  In the meantime I have been purchasing euro millions tickets faithfully (And needlessly as it turns out) since the news of the sale was announced.  I'm fast running out of time - and hope

Griff

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three responsibilities? Navigation, conservation and self promotion? Nah, cant be that, maybe its Navigation, conservation and revenue raising? Dont seem right either... Navigation, self promotion and revenue raising? Nope, I give up, need a clue here...

Someone just remind me here exactly how deep the water needs to be for "protecting the interests of navigation"

See, I'm not bitter!

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bobdog said:

The BA's "chief responsibilty" is not navigation.  Read the Act of Parliament and you'll find the BA has three responsibilities, each having equal weight, and "protecting the interests of navigation" is just one of them.

Nor is it conservation, and especially not conservation by exclusion enforced by strategic neglect.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bobdog said:

The BA's "chief responsibilty" is not navigation.  Read the Act of Parliament and you'll find the BA has three responsibilities, each having equal weight, and "protecting the interests of navigation" is just one of them.

That's not quite correct. As a port authority the Broads Authority is also subject to the Shipping Act, the governments Maritime Safety Policy on behalf of the Department of Transport, International Maritime Organisation regulations, and currently, European Union legislation...although upon article 50 the UK intends to adopt EU legislation piecemeal so this will still apply. All of the above legislation places the onus on human safety and the right of navigation. There is also the slight matter of 'statutory prejudice' best explanation is covered in the regulation regarding improper conduct in a public office, which also applies, and the paper storm that is the dreaded health and safety legislation.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A statement made by Dr Packman in regard to the proposed Suffolk Broads National Nature Reserve near Oulton Broad:

Broads Authority chief executive John Packman adds his support by saying: “The natural world needs our help as never before. What a tremendous opportunity this is to repair the mistakes of the past and bring nature back to this special part of the Broads.”

I'm not sure that he's not right, up to a point. Fortunately the proposed nature reserve does not impinge on the navigation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Sponsors

    Norfolk Broads Network is run by volunteers - You can help us run it by making a donation

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.