The Future Above Potter

[marshman]

I think weed cutting is due up above the bridge pretty soon - or so I believe. They usually do it around this time of year before the weed cutter goes off south to do the upper Waveney.

I was surprised to hear about the "hump" in Meadow Dyke - last year I must have gone up and down the dyke at least about a dozen times without any issue whatsoever. Water levels were quite low then and that was in a sailing boat of around 3'. However if the one above Martham was just after you go round Dungeon Corner, then I did hit that one and picked up some weed around that bit - it is were the chanel becomes a little indistinct as it broadens out, or narrows down! The trouble is that it is that matt weed stuff ( sorry don't know the real name) and that can cling a bit and winds on really tight. I don't know, but I suspect all weedcutting now requires EA approval!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't be fooled by the Potter report as it really applied to earlier this week when the pressure rose to over 1040 millibars - some people even reported "sticking"at Irstead where it was down almost to a metre - however with pressure now falling that may now alter rapidly and I suspect by tomorrow and the weekend it may have changed - a quick call to the pilots would be sensible to check!!

in any case never take my word for it - always check, as many things alter the issue and things  can change overnight!!

[Meantime]

The hump in Meadow Dyke is just on the bend shown in the pic below. Coming from the Mere when you need to turn right to follow the bend we ended up going straight and forced to the other side of the river. Once just round the bend it was ok. I suspect it is getting very shallow on the inside of the bend as you approach it from the Mere. It is approx. 40% of the way along the Dyke from the Mere end.

The weed sounds about right. It did seem to have wrapped itself around the shaft as well as the prop as it caused the engine to load up and temp to rise. Fortunately short sharp blasts of reverse managed to untangle it without the need for a tow, or lift.

[marshman]

That figures a little as that looks as though it is just about where the drain from Stubbs Mill comes out into Meadow Dyke and it will have brought silt down from that area before dumping it into the main Dyke.

I do know the Ranger who covers that area and perhaps it is worth getting them to check it, especially as I know there is a possibility that one of the smaller rigs may be in that area over the next 12 months or so. In the short term the situation may improve if we see water levels go back up or we have some decent rain to help flush out some of the Upper Thurne area. Well its always worth asking them to check - progress not guaranteed especially as it is a bit out of the way!!

[grendel]

I was in a Judith, at 6'7" on the guage I went through with easily 6" or more to spare - that was just after 8am this morning. 7'6" at wroxham was a breeze, I could have been a couple of foot off centre and still made it.

[johnm]

I touched bottom at that point in our half-decker at about the same time that ECIPA was up there.  I would estimate that there was about 2' 6" - 2' 9" judging by the amount I had to lift the plate to get free. That said it was a lovely sail 

[quo vadis]

6 minutes ago, johnm said:

I touched bottom at that point in our half-decker at about the same time that ECIPA was up there.  I would estimate that there was about 2' 6" - 2' 9" judging by the amount I had to lift the plate to get free. That said it was a lovely sail 

I touched bottom today 

[Meantime]

3 hours ago, johnm said:

I touched bottom at that point in our half-decker at about the same time that ECIPA was up there.  I would estimate that there was about 2' 6" - 2' 9" judging by the amount I had to lift the plate to get free. That said it was a lovely sail 

The point is we only just got through and back. If we are lucky enough to get a longer sustained spell of low water as there was last September, then I fear we will get through the bridge, but not reach places such as Horsey Mere due to lack of water. I also suspect there are a few in the BA that are happy to engineer the situation where the area above Potter just turns into a murky swamp that nothing can navigate. Call me paranoid, but I've already seen the changes for the worse in the last 18 years.

[grendel]

I was talking with a ranger yesterday and he said it was due to be dredged later this year, but the dredging priorities go to places with the higher traffic, I suppose when you have a limited budget, dredging somewhere that gets 30 boats a day gets priority over somewhere that gets 2 or 3 a day, so for example meadow dyke would get priority over catfield.

[marshman]

ECIPA - whilst I accept that you and others have this doomsday scenario about above Potter but if that was the dase why do the BA spend a lot of money every winter dredging above Potter? Its been going on to my knowledge for at least 7 years, so why bother?

[BroadAmbition]

If they didn't go spending £35k on signs that tell lies, God knows how much on the Acle towers folly - some of that money could be used to sort out above PHB a whole lot earlier and to a higher standard

Griff

[marshman]

Dredging priority has little to do with traffic, but much more to do with equipment and more importantly, adjacent landowners!

The bit from the main channel on Hickling up to Catfield Dyke was dredged this last winter but that rig is too big to go up Catield Dyke, and in the dyke itself, they would as a result probably need to side cast the spoil - perhaps they cannot get permission?

However one of the smaller rigs is likely to be up above Potter in the winter I believe and we shall have to see what they do - but I don't think it is Catfield.

One point you sometimes forget is that in the Upper Thurne they are paranoid about a prymnesium outbreak - as the Forums generally were convinced in the past that dredging and prymnesium were linked, they will now only dredge when the water temperature has fallen to a certain level leaving a much narrower window in which dredging is possible up in that area. The posts at the time went on and on trying to prove a link and as a result I suspect no one wants to start all that again!!

[marshman]

Griff - at a cost of £45 a grab thats only 777 grab loads. Probably not worth the effort!!

[Meantime]

13 minutes ago, marshman said:

ECIPA - whilst I accept that you and others have this doomsday scenario about above Potter but if that was the dase why do the BA spend a lot of money every winter dredging above Potter? Its been going on to my knowledge for at least 7 years, so why bother?

Because pure and simply I've seen and experienced the changes for the worse above the bridge. I've also watched the 3 Rivers Race pretty much each year since I've found out about it, and there never used to be any complaints about running aground. Reports have become more prevalent in recent years.

When I first went above the bridge, twice in hire boats and in the early years of getting my boat through, the only concern was getting the clearance to get through. Unlike some who would like to see something done about the bridge itself, I'm happy to live with it's limitation and cherish the few times I do get above the bridge, and also look for other ways to achieve it. I've sailed a half decker from Martham boats, a Wood class from Hunters and hired day boats from Pheonix. Not so long back Pheonix weren't allowing their electric boats through the bridge because of weed growth. I believe the same was true for Herbert Woods. The last time I went through in a boat from Pheonix we weren't that sure about doing Catfield in a day boat. I've had my boat up there at least twice and two hire boats in the past, one a 31ft and the other a 38ft, both 12ft beam without any issue.

[MauriceMynah]

Very approximately speaking, what is the draft of a traditional broads sailing boat? or indeed a Norfolk wherry, Albion say? How does that compare with a single keeled Westerly or a Pegasus?

We read much about people buying the wrong sort of cruiser for the broads, would it be so unreasonable to suggest there might be unsuitable yachts?

[Poppy]

A typical Broads yacht draws between 2'6" and 3'6"

[Poppy]

30 minutes ago, marshman said:

One point you sometimes forget is that in the Upper Thurne they are paranoid about a prymnesium outbreak - as the Forums generally were convinced in the past that dredging and prymnesium were linked, they will now only dredge when the water temperature has fallen to a certain level leaving a much narrower window in which dredging is possible up in that area. The posts at the time went on and on trying to prove a link and as a result I suspect no one wants to start all that again!!

So craft stirring up the mud where silt has been allowed to build up won't cause a prymnesium outbreak ?

[Poppy]

Albion can draw as much as 4'6" .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion_(wherry)

[marshman]

I do not have a view on what causes prymnesium outbreaks - just go back over the old threads!

 

[Poppy]

Just now, marshman said:

I do not have a view on what causes prymnesium outbreaks - just go back over the old threads!

 

It was a general question.

[marshman]

Ok ! 

There is a belief that it hides further down - stirring mud with a boat does not seem to set it off.  I am sure an ardent fisherman will come along  and suggest the possible whys and wherefores!

[JennyMorgan]

49 minutes ago, marshman said:

Ok ! 

There is a belief that it hides further down - stirring mud with a boat does not seem to set it off.  I am sure an ardent fisherman will come along  and suggest the possible whys and wherefores!

Fisherman's hat off! I have attended EA consultations on this subject and scientific opinion from various worldwide sources suggests that mud itself just being stirred up does not cause the problem so sailing boats are off the hook! What appears to be the problem, or part of it, is dredging when penetrating the crust of established mud banks. 

[marshman]

Phew!  Being supported by the eminent PW is some achievement!

[Hylander]

2 hours ago, marshman said:

Griff - at a cost of £45 a grab thats only 777 grab loads. Probably not worth the effort!!

How did they get to the costing of £45 per grab?

[marshman]

No idea - I guess only an accountant could work that out!!!

[BroadAmbition]

No idea - I guess only an accountant could work that out!!!

More as likely in the favour of whom the accountant is being employed by  no doubt

Griff