Baitrunner Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Just to add a bit of high octane fuel to the debate and I do apologise if someone has already posted this. I spotted this little 44 page free pull out that went out with certain copies of the March edition of the Norfolk magazine. Which is probably 90% sold in Norfolk so we probably already about this stuff. It says it is produced by Broads Tourism and the Broads National Park!! so we can't have a dig at the Pikeman himself. And I couldn't find any reference to the BA either. But the title gives the game away. Clearly a National Park and not just part of the National Park family!!! Interesting comment from Greg Mumford. Chief exec of Rickos and chairman of Broads Tourism "the Broads National Park is my life". And a description of Jacquie Burgess responsibilities which I wonder if she vetted? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 And???? The Govt, and now the Courts have said they can do that, so why shouldn't they? Whilst I am only too well aware of the issues and the views of almost everyone on this Forum, do you really think that any one else in the country really bothers about the name? You and I know it isn't, anyone interested knows it isn't and as it requires primary legislation to actually change the situation, its hardly going to creep in unannounced is it? Can we just let anyone who wants to do so, now get on with calling it what they like for the sake of books, leaflets, marketing material, and then perhaps take interest if something ACTUALLY happens? 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baitrunner Posted March 21, 2017 Author Share Posted March 21, 2017 Well I was only sharing information!!! Obviously we can all have our own opinions as well i actually like the idea it's called a National Park, but I'm also aware of the concerns of any "sneak tactics". Waiting until it happens will be too late if it becomes an issue. Mind you by then I will probably won't care as I doubt it will affect me. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScrumpyCheddar Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Really does it matter what they call it....??? They can call it Disneyland on the broads.... there's enough characters on the boats and broads.... Look we all enjoy and love the rivers and the area.... So really if they want to call it something different let them carry on... if it draws in more visitors and holiday makers and boaters... and brings more income to the area that's good for everyone.... Isn't it..??? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 12 minutes ago, ScrumpyCheddar said: Really does it matter what they call it....??? They can call it Disneyland on the broads.... there's enough characters on the boats and broads.... Look we all enjoy and love the rivers and the area.... Not if it leads to an unacceptable loss of navigation rights. That said, do we really want to revisit all the tired old arguments and debates? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxwellian Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 23 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said: That said, do we really want to revisit all the tired old arguments and debates? Well said Peter... I for one would rather we did not. Let the Mods relax for a couple of days. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScrumpyCheddar Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 38 minutes ago, JennyMorgan said: Not if it leads to an unacceptable loss of navigation rights. That said, do we really want to revisit all the tired old arguments and debates? What do you mean..... Loss of navigation rights... ?.? ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnks34 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 "National Parks" dont have any responsibility for Navigation! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisB Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 6 hours ago, ScrumpyCheddar said: What do you mean..... Loss of navigation rights... ?.? ... Over the the years there have been "Visions" concerning the Upper Thurne. These "Visions" do not include the navigation rights of powered craft. There could be other areas, I don't know! But as others have said let everyone enjoy the boating season, the subject has had the last drop of life squeezed from it. When there is something to worry about that is the time to do something about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExMemberBobdog Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 9 hours ago, ScrumpyCheddar said: They can call it Disneyland on the broads.... there's enough characters. What a brilliant idea! Mmmm, what Disney characters would you associate with certain Broadland people? I'll start; that old bugger who serves you with a smile (not) at Wroxham Marine ... Grumpy from the seven dwarves! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MauriceMynah Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 2 hours ago, ChrisB said: the subject has had the last drop of life squeezed from it. When there is something to worry about that is the time to do something about it. Chris, I fully understand your sentiments but I can't tell how we could know when that "time to worry" happens. For as long as Peter et al keeps 'banging on' about it, he keeps the subject to the fore, and by doing that reducing the opportunities for anyone (no names no pack drill) to try to further any moves in that direction. Some say that the law is the law and it cannot be changed without considerable effort. Whilst those people are correct, there are those who will happily expend that effort. Can a law that was set in stone be changed? Well For all my working life I was told I would get a state pension when I reached 65.....,. Nuff said. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 I got my state pension, lovely! Just to explain to Scrumpy, rather than just to extend the argument, the loss of navigation rights would be down to the application of the Sandford Principle. In both the Broads and Broads National Park's Bills strenuous efforts were made to gain the power to exclude boaters and anglers from what are presently navigable waters. That is a fact of history and verifiable via Hansard. We only have to look at the ten and more years of Dr Packman's continuous maneuvering to be able to use the term Broads National Park, if only for marketing purposes (!), to realise that the bloke doesn't take 'no' for an answer. Sorry to bore the pants of most of you but it appear that Scrumpy is not entirely aware of the ramifications of the Broads becoming, in legal terms, a national park. In reality I suspect that most Broads folk would welcome the Broads being a National Park if it were a means of maintaining the Broads as the Broads. However, if being an NP is to be the tool by which a small group of people re-create the Broads in their own vision, then no, the risks to the Broads are too great. I say 'small group of people', the RSPB for example, is not small. Like one or two others I wonder quite where the 'sharp end' really is. Enough from me for now, unless someone has some convincing evidence either way. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanetAnne Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Is 'the Broads' the only man made national park? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfurbank Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Just now, JanetAnne said: Is 'the Broads' the only man made national park? The Broads were man made over many years by many people digging for peat. The Broads "National Park" was man made by one deluded person in only ten years. I suspect "The Broads National Park" is his plan before he retires. I suggest we be alert, The Broads needs more lerts. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanetAnne Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Is it ok to keep lerts in the box with the roundtuit? I am no Ionger able to say 'when I get a roundtuit' anymore. Some smart a... - sorry, her indoors, bought me one for Christmas 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 If the Broads is to be a National Park then, according to Sandford as I understand it, it has to be accessible to the public. This does not necessary mean that you have to go boating on it, and this is the dangerous difference. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 One word changed or inserted can give completely the wrong picture: Norwich A Fine "Town" Wroxham capital "city" of the Norfolk Broads (and Suffolk of course) Johnb A "handsome" beast. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 2 hours ago, Vaughan said: If the Broads is to be a National Park then, according to Sandford as I understand it, it has to be accessible to the public. This does not necessary mean that you have to go boating on it, and this is the dangerous difference. When I went to Parliament over the issue of access & the Broads Bill one reason my objection was upheld was because the requirement to be able to exclude the public, and boaters in particular, was far to general and without limitation. I'm sure that we gone full circle now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JennyMorgan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Perhaps a timely reminder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandford_Principle The issue is simple, could we trust the Authority, under its present leadership, to use Sandford wisely, fairly and as intended whilst maintaining the right of navigation? I personally doubt it. Definitely full circle now! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfurbank Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Quote "Definitely full circle now!" Did someone mention The Falkirk Wheel? Now they wouldn't close that to boating traffic would they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Would it be a good idea to please put this to bed as suggested? None of us have the gift to foresee the future and to be honest it is all supposition on the part of PW and Vaughan too, and indeed others, as to the impact of what could, or indeed, would happen. Its a guess, and IMHO not even a good guess! Times change and so do circumstances - rules too and you might just as well argue that without the full title being used, the grant will be cut completely ( which it won't !!! ) When so much supposition continues to take place, you do get an awful lot of squit in some posts , which in some cases far far exceed the worst case scenario (IMHO) but none of us know or can guess so why do people persist in making vague statements which even they know are based on supposition and not fact?? Give it a rest chaps - we know where you are and lets just wait before calling on the big guns to fight a shadow, especially when the sun is not even shining!!!! Peter and the Wolf comes aptly to mind.....! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfurbank Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Marshman, It could equally be argued that it is all supposition on your part that PW, Vaughan and indeed others are wrong!!!!!! If your entitled to your view and take on the matter, which you are, then so are others. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshman Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Agreed, but none of us have any hard facts, so its all speculation, or at least some of it! I might take more interest if someone could produce "hard" evidence but they cannot! Even Sandford is vastly overplayed as though its imposed and actually used daily - which it isn't! But why continue to put about such "speculation" when there is no evidence to support it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaughan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Why don't we go back to the start of this thread, by Baitrunner, and have another look? It concerns a publication, by Broads tourism, no less, entitled BROADS NATIONAL PARK. According to the letter from DEFRA to Dr Packman which Peter has published on another thread, this appellation is ILLEGAL. No matter what the semantics, what concerns me (and this is not "speculation") is that a National Park, in Sandford thinking, is not consistent with the special needs of the Broads as a boating area. I have been on several National Parks in my time. I have tromped across them in Army boots, wearing full pack and equipment. They are what Macbeth would have called "this blasted heath"! All you have to do with them is maintain a few hedges and gateways, make sure they are grazed by suitable ponies or sheep, and leave them for the public to ramble and cycle as they choose. Sure, that's a very simplified description - of course it is - but it's nothing like the Broads, is it? Surely we don't want to see the Broads turned into just another piece of Old England, "where sheep may safely graze"?? This is not the time to put it to bed, or to wait and see. By their very insistence in trumpeting a National Park, the BA demonstrate clearly that their "vision" is not good for the Broads as a system of navigable rivers, whose income relies on pleasure boating. The time to keep resisting this trend is now. Not when we have "waited to see" and thus found it is too late to go back. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poppy Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 17 hours ago, ScrumpyCheddar said: What do you mean..... Loss of navigation rights... ?.? ... For those unaware.... Mr Richard Bacon (South Norfolk) (Con): There is a key distinction between the broads and other national parks. National parks take account of the Sandford principle, which balances the interests of conservation and natural beauty against enjoyment by the public, but if the two clash, conservation takes precedence. Since its inception, legislation governing the broads has been explicit about the fact that the interests of navigation must also be taken into account, so the broads can never be a national park in the same way as others are. Does my right hon. Friend agree that for the sake of tourism and the economy of Norfolk, that should remain the case? http://www.keithsimpson.com/content/norfolk-and-suffolk-broads-debate This explains it perfectly. Over the years, there has been pressure for the Broads to become a full blown National Park from the conservation lobby. They are not unaware that Sandford must come with that..... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.