What Would You Pay Extra Tolls For?

[JohnK]

If tolls had to rise to cover the extra cost what would you be prepared to pay extra for?

More moorings?

Better facilities at moorings?

Higher bridges (this one might require quite a bit extra )?

Less swimming races?

What?

[quo vadis]

Maybe if our toll money was spent more wisely we could already have some of these things (higher bridges not included)

[JohnK]

And if it was spent less wisely we could have less

[Guest]

Floating pontoon 24hr moorings (like the one at Hardly Mill)

[Aristotle]

Iwould definitely be happy to pay more for more moorings but most of all for a reduction in the number of large hire craft. in my view anything over 40ft LOA should be banned as hire craft - they are just too big to be handled by mainly amateur helms-persons .

[JennyMorgan]

We already pay enough, just that 40% to 50% is hived off for non navigational purposes. 

What would I rather that money was spent on? Well, dredging and yet more dredging, with a rational disposal of spoil would be a good start.

What would I rather less money was spent on? The planning department would do for starters followed closely by the BNP fiasco.

Just my thoughts, having been asked!

[JohnK]

Great to see so many people answering the question rather than just taking the opportunity to criticise the BA again

[JohnK]

What would I rather that money was spent on? Well, dredging and yet more dredging, with a rational disposal of spoil would be a good start.

Is the depth only a problem to keeled boats or is there more to it than that?

[Guest]

I would gladly pay more to enable the BA to enter into agreements with riparian landowners to allow wild mooring on their river banks. No signs, no development, just a blissful absence of "no mooring" notices.

[JohnK]

I would gladly pay more to enable the BA to enter into agreements with riparian landowners to allow wild mooring on their river banks. No signs, no development, just a blissful absence of "no mooring" notices.

If there isn’t a no mooring sign can you wild moor anywhere?
Or is the opposite the case ... if it doesn’t say you can moor then you can’t?

[Wyndham]

8 minutes ago, Aristotle said:

....but most of all for a reduction in the number of large hire craft. in my view anything over 40ft LOA should be banned as hire craft - they are just too big to be handled by mainly amateur helms-persons .

A bit harsh Aristotle if I may say, when you think a novice in a 42ft boat is still a novice in a 38ft boat.

JMs dredging is a good call.

Me, I'd pay* (not me personally) for a BA representative to be present during busy periods, at all moorings giving help, advice, guidance to all. There is so much talk of bad helming, bad behaviour, bad manners, etc and most of that is down to lack of knowledge and understanding. A friendly figure of authority on hand could help a lot.

(*depending on how nuch it would cost)

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Wyndham said:

A bit harsh Aristotle if I may say, when you think a novice in a 42ft boat is still a novice in a 38ft boat.

JMs dredging is a good call.

Me, I'd pay* (not me personally) for a BA representative to be present during busy periods, at all moorings giving help, advice, guidance to all. There is so much talk of bad helming, bad behaviour, bad manners, etc and most of that is down to lack of knowledge and understanding. A friendly figure of authority on hand could help a lot.

(*depending on how nuch it would cost)

You mean more Rangers for the last point.

 

[Wyndham]

2 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

You mean more Rangers for the last point.

 

Was that a question or a correction?

Either way, someone to educate was my point.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Wyndham said:

Was that a question or a correction?

Either way, someone to educate was my point.

It was intended as a solution

[Wyndham]

8 minutes ago, Philosophical said:

It was intended as a solution

I see now....

more rangers at moorings, I'd pay for that..

[imtamping2]

Leave the "No Mooring" signs alone  its taken me ages and a few quid to change my name by deed pole  to .....you guessed it "No" and now the Broads is my cockle 

[JennyMorgan]

1 hour ago, JohnK said:

 

Is the depth only a problem to keeled boats or is there more to it than that?

 

Being any boat with a keel, a goodly number of twin screw motor cruisers draw as much as the average Broads sailing boat. 

[Bound2Please]

See my post on Burgh Castle Moorings

[Ray]

Webcams and replaced, accurate signage at the significantly low bridges.

[Chelsea14Ian]

Before they were to charge me and others more.I think they need to review what and where they spend our money .Then put in a costed plan of any increases.

[Simon]

Is there a max / safe limit on the number of boats on the broads, I gather reading online in the peak season there is a requirement to find a mooring early afternoon.

Will there come a point when overcrowding / lack of moorings becomes a real issue. ( coming from someone adding to numbers as about to move his boat to the broads)

[MauriceMynah]

1 hour ago, Chelsea14Ian said:

Before they were to charge me and others more.I think they need to review what and where they spend our money .Then put in a costed plan of any increases.

Spot on!

It's not necessarily J.Ps. fault, the problem is that these days a great deal of money is wasted on such things as "Re-Branding".

Whether it matters or not if the broads is called a "National park", the expense of sending people out to change signs, re logo vehicles and even replacing stationery, costs a fortune. Instead  stationery could have been replaced as and when it ran out. Signs replaced when general maintenance needed etc. JP does not make these decisions, he employs others to sort such things out and those "other people" are lead by the nose by the Marketing dept. This is happening pretty much the world over .

9 hours ago, JohnK said:

Is the depth only a problem to keeled boats or is there more to it than that?

 

If you think of the lower reaches of the Bure as it goes into Yarmouth, there is what used to be a massive mooring (Who's name I can't call to mind at the moment). At low water the silt is left high and dry. This is a result of insufficient dredging. If that whole area were to be dredged to it's former depth and width, the flow would go back to its former rates. If that were to happen, Rivers would return to their former levels... and it THAT were to happen then the boats that regularly used to be able to get under Potter Heigham bridge would be able to do so again.

To do this dredging which would have to be pretty much from the Pleasure Boat Hickling, to Breydon Water would cost a fortune, but in reality, that is what the tolls were originally there to pay.  

[JohnK]

Some very interesting points there folks.
I hadn’t thought of dredging with regard to opening up moorings. But then if that increases the capacity of the Broads is that what people want? More boats?
Personally, I’d pay more to have the Broads less crowded.

Other than rebranding (because you can argue that either way) what do you see the BA wasting money on? I’m not seeing it (I’m not saying it isn’t there, just that I’m not seeing it). When I consider what I get for the money I pay I think it’s awesome value especially when I compare it to what I’ve paid on other waterways. Maybe I just see it that way because I have very small (and hence low toll) boats that I use a lot (other than a ski boat with a bu**ered engine ☹️)

[Aristotle]

10 hours ago, Wyndham said:

A bit harsh Aristotle if I may say, when you think a novice in a 42ft boat is still a novice in a 38ft boat.

40ft was just an arbitrary choice of length -  as you say - stopping anything over 38ft would be even better .

Of course - fewer long hire craft would mean a bit more space at moorings as well - two benefits for the price of one!

[grendel]

34 minutes ago, JohnK said:

what do you see the BA wasting money on

I think looking back at the past a lot of money has been spent on legal cases, which they have subsequently lost, others will probably have better details than I.