Another Eye Sore

[Hylander]

13 hours ago, OldBerkshireBoy said:

Haha, I`m not getting involved. All I did was ask a simple Q here as a newbie and two days later a screenshot showing my post and username (amongst others) was posted on a n other website!

The trouble is unless you post under Private Members out and about under which rules say you cannot repeat anything anywhere else, you are open to this kind of thing.        That is why I try to post under Private Members Out and About where possible.

[OldBerkshireBoy]

I stand by anything that I say on social media so have no fear of being quoted elsewhere however I was bemused to see my post asking a simple Q about somebody I have never meet was included amongst the others that the gentleman highlighted in his post but as he owns the site I guess he can can post whatever he likes. That said it did make me wonder if posts of mine on UK plumbers help forums have been copied & pasted on plumbers forums in other countries.

[vanessan]

19 minutes ago, OldBerkshireBoy said:

That said it did make me wonder if posts of mine on UK plumbers help forums have been copied & pasted on plumbers forums in other countries.

I’m sure others will be very grateful to ‘tap’ into your expertise. As long as you don’t ‘sink’ to supplying anything other than ‘bog’ standard information, you’ve no worries! I’ll leave it there as my plumbing speak is limited but I know there will be more! 

[vanessan]

Actually, going back to the original topic, isn’t it about time that old houseboat was removed? I know it’s not in the true navigation channel but it really is an eyesore. 

[OldBerkshireBoy]

2 minutes ago, vanessan said:

Actually, going back to the original topic, isn’t it about time that old houseboat was removed? I know it’s not in the true navigation channel but it really is an eyesore. 

Probably all about costs which I believe has been covered in other post(s).

[Smoggy]

1 hour ago, vanessan said:

I’m sure others will be very grateful to ‘tap’ into your expertise. As long as you don’t ‘sink’ to supplying anything other than ‘bog’ standard information, you’ve no worries! I’ll leave it there as my plumbing speak is limited but I know there will be more! 

You do talk a load of old ballcocks!

Take no notice OBB, just solder on and keep going.

[vanessan]

1 hour ago, OldBerkshireBoy said:

Probably all about costs which I believe has been covered in other post(s).

To be sure, costs will come into it. It’s just that so many boats come out from Richardson’s and many of the crews will be new to the Broads. It’s not a very pretty sight for an introduction to what is otherwise a beautiful area.

 

2 minutes ago, Smoggy said:

You do talk a load of old ballcocks!

Take no notice OBB, just solder on and keep going.

I rest my case m’lud!

[marshman]

And I think availability of heavy lifting gear could be an issue - they need to get a decent crane to lift it and they do not have one up there above Ludham Bridge. The only excavators would probably only break it up and that brings further problems in that you could well have significant pollution issues in the midst of a extra special SSSI!!!! So its only a guess but the problems of removal are perhaps not as clear cut as some may imagine?

And that would significantly increase the cost to everyone!

[MauriceMynah]

Trying to clean up that wreck is in everybody's interest. It's in a lovely spot, one I wouldn't mind using myself, and the fact that Miles Weston has started trying other methods to put pressure on the BA to either get their fingers out and clear it or explain why they can't, is no good reason to attack him., It is obvious that he monitors this forum and probably the NBF too. I would if I were in his shoes.

There is a fact, unpalatable to some no doubt, but Miles is on the broads, and likely to remain so. I have met him several times, often mooring next to him. I suspect he is aware that I doubt we would ever be close friends, but I hope he does not see me as an enemy either. The broads isn't big enough to have enemies.

His views and mine are very different on broadland matters, he complains about many things that I have no problem with even approving of some, and, if I were to join his forum, we'd be arguing about almost everything on which he feels strongly . That doesn't mean I shall not be reading it though. I read any source of broadland information.

I remember the "troll" issue and have my own opinion, one which I hold privately. Yes he has overstayed 24hr moorings. So have I! I have also turned up to Stalham staithe and sworn under my breath because it's full and with " the same people" BUT using the same few moorings on rotation is within his rights however irritating it may feel. 

No, I haven't signed the petition, not because Miles started it but because I think it's the wrong tool for the job.

[JennyMorgan]

I suspect that the wreck is out of the navigation channel as such thus it is low priority. However, the owner might be known and the BA is hoping that he'll face up to his responsibilities. Yes, it needs shifting, anyone fancy volunteering? 

[Bernard]

The guy who owns it will do nothing, is known for leaving a mess wherever he goes. Do you have to tax a sunken vessel?

[CambridgeCabby]

Could always surreptitiously tow it into the navigation channel 

[Sam]

Could always surreptitiously tow it into the navigation channel 

Might be difficult. Doesn’t it have a concrete hull? Like the idea though.

 

 

Sent from the Norfolk Broads Network mobile app

[NorfolkNog]

1 hour ago, Sam said:

Doesn’t it have a concrete hull?

Quite possibly. This was it when it was afloat. Sorry the pictures a bit fuzzy. 

[Sam]

Wasn’t that when it was at the end of Sutton Staithe?  Such a shame 

[marshman]

You mean it was such a shame it was on the moorings or someone did not pour diesel over it?

[Sam]

I just meant it was such a shame that it had been allowed to get into that state, and the boat with it. Has that been dumped somewhere as well?

[NorfolkNog]

Diesel isn't flammable but I take your point. But it must have been someone's pride and joy back in day. its such a shame to see them go to rack and ruin. 

 

Sorry, crossed with Sam!!! 

[Smoggy]

If diesel isn't flammable please explain how boats keep moving around the broads....

Leave the flappy things out of this, they are not normal!

[ChrisB]

8 hours ago, NorfolkNog said:

Diesel isn't flammable but I take your point. But it must have been someone's pride and joy back in day. its such a shame to see them go to rack and ruin. 

 

Sorry, crossed with Sam!!! 

Diesel is very flammable. It just does not have a low flash point like petrol which in certain circumstances makes it safer. It is a much better bet if you want an accelerant to start a fire as you are not likely to loose yourhair and eyebrows. It's much higher flash point means it is a worse pollutant than petrol as it does not evaporate readily.

[Vaughan]

3 hours ago, Smoggy said:

If diesel isn't flammable please explain how boats keep moving around the broads...

Compression ignition.

[JennyMorgan]

15 hours ago, Bernard said:

The guy who owns it will do nothing, is known for leaving a mess wherever he goes. Do you have to tax a sunken vessel?

If he's known but has no funds then I suspect the BA considers it pointless chasing him. Blood out of a stone springs to mind. 

Regretfully a number of end of life boats belong to folk with no funds, I suspect that the BA would love a solution to this growing problem. If we say that the average life of a boat is fifty years, that to dispose of a sunken wreck is five thousand pounds then ask ourselves whether or not the toll should be increased by one hundred pounds per year in order to cover that eventual cost?  

Perhaps if a public slipway was provided where boats could be hauled out to be maintained or broken up then maybe people would make use of that facility? 

In the past wrecks would simply be hauled ashore and set alight, don't see that happening now, especially with synthetic boats and indulgent tree huggers. 

The problem is not going to go away, indeed it will get worse. Any ideas?

 

[grendel]

the silly part is if it could be floated even for 30 minutes it could be got to the slipway at sutton staithe boatyard, where it could be dragged out and broken up.

[Vaughan]

I am not sure I would like to be offered the job of re-floating that, in its present location!

Floating reed beds all around, no road access, no hardstanding for a crane, and water too shallow to approach with a barge or wherry.  It would have to be done with divers building a plywood coffer-dam all round it, before pumping it out.  That all assumes it hasn't got a hole in the bottom, or if it is indeed Seacrete, that the hull has not cracked apart at one of the corners.  It has been known before!

And then what to do with it?  I very much doubt that the slip at Sutton Staithe would handle it, so maybe Richardsons.  Would they really want to be involved in a job like that?

The fact remains, it is not sunk in the navigation, so it is not a BA obligation.  If the land-owner objects to its presence, they can pursue the boat owner through the courts.  Which would be rather akin to tilting at windmills.

Anyone else got any good ideas?

 

[ChrisB]

1 hour ago, JennyMorgan said:

1 hour ago, JennyMorgan said:

If he's known but has no funds then I suspect the BA considers it pointless chasing him. Blood out of a stone springs to mind. 

Regretfully a number of end of life boats belong to folk with no funds, I suspect that the BA would love a solution to this growing problem. If we say that the average life of a boat is fifty years, that to dispose of a sunken wreck is five thousand pounds then ask ourselves whether or not the toll should be increased by one hundred pounds per year in order to cover that eventual cost?  

Perhaps if a public slipway was provided where boats could be hauled out to be maintained or broken up then maybe people would make use of that facility? 

In the past wrecks would simply be hauled ashore and set alight, don't see that happening now, especially with synthetic boats and indulgent tree huggers. 

The problem is not going to go away, indeed it will get worse. Any ideas?

 

The problem is not going to go away, indeed it will get worse. Any ideas?

 

In Japan, where alot things of recent manufacture have shorter lives they were grinding GRP hulls and adding it to road surfacing and non-structural concrete.