Acle B.N.P.

[Paladin]

2 minutes ago, marshman said:

Apart from the BA is there actually a pro BNP camp??? I know where the centre of the anti one is, but a pro one....????

It's against the ToS to name and shame, so I'll leave that question hanging

[floydraser]

5 minutes ago, D46 said:

A Mirror required possibly ??

[rightsaidfred]

10 minutes ago, marshman said:

Apart from the BA is there actually a pro BNP camp??? I know where the centre of the anti one is, but a pro one....????

Yes one headed by a certain Dr and his cohorts.

Fred

[D46]

1 hour ago, floydraser said:

Sorry Fred but:

"Pete Waters, of Visit Norfolk and Visit East of England, said: "We should be proud of the fact that we have a National Park in this region, one of just a handful in the whole country."

From the EDP. This is why it's confusing to the outsider.

No doubt someone will be along in a minute or two to explain that Visit Norfolk and Visit East of England are NOT there to market the region?

Has anyone said that Visit Norfolk or Visit East of England shouldn't promote the region ? What they should be doing is fact checking first and then promting the region in it's true light .

Both however actually do promote the region but they do it far outside the region itself .

[ChrisB]

As members here will know I have said that there is a great deal more to Norfolk than The Broads and Boating.

Actually in Tourist terms boating is pretty small beer.

 

[rightsaidfred]

5 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

As members here will know I have said that there is a great deal more to Norfolk than The Broads and Boating.

Actually in Tourist terms boating is pretty small beer.

 

Ah but Norfolk isnt a NP and nobody is claiming it is

Fred

[ChrisB]

But many seem to be blinkered that Tourism Norfolk is just the boating industry, it is not. Here in North Norfolk the wildlife/Birdy type tourism is huge and 52 weeks of the year. Holiday cottages are hardy ever without bookings.

 

[Paladin]

From the Visit Norfolk web site, which calls itself "The official visitor website for Norfolk":

"The only National Park with a city in it!"

Presumably, that would be the City of Wroxham.

Nuff said!

[ChrisB]

I think they are official, I seem to remember these "Visit" X Y and Z areas of the country organisations are in fact limited companies under fixed term contracts to the Tourist Boards.   Or something along those lines.

[JennyMorgan]

That the BA itself has triggered this devisive BNP furor is clear testament to their lack of ability when it comes to their questionable marketing skills! Unless things have drastically changed in marketing since my professional involvement then antagonizing the customers is never a wise move.   

[floydraser]

5 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

I think they are official, I seem to remember these "Visit" X Y and Z areas of the country organisations are in fact limited companies under fixed term contracts to the Tourist Boards.   Or something along those lines.

Most likely if the .co.uk is any indicator. 

Likely reply: "Who said .co.uk was anything to do with National Parks!"

[Paladin]

8 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

I think they are official, I seem to remember these "Visit" X Y and Z areas of the country organisations are in fact limited companies under fixed term contracts to the Tourist Boards.   Or something along those lines.

I would think an "official" organisation should get its geography right.

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

56 minutes ago, marshman said:

Apart from the BA is there actually a pro BNP camp??? I know where the centre of the anti one is, but a pro one....????

Yeah, it's you and bb. Come on marshy admit it, you know you want to  😂p

[JennyMorgan]

26 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

But many seem to be blinkered that Tourism Norfolk is just the boating industry, it is not. Here in North Norfolk the wildlife/Birdy type tourism is huge and 52 weeks of the year. Holiday cottages are hardy ever without bookings.

 

And that is without North Norfolk being marketed as something it is not.

I agree entirely that Norfolk, and indeed Suffolk, are a great deal more than just boating. In my opinion neither needs the marketing confusion that is being created by the BA.

[JennyMorgan]

8 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

Yeah, it's you and bb. Come on marshy admit it, you know you want to  😂p

Plus a few others, just possibly!!

[vanessan]

24 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Likely reply: "Who said .co.uk was anything to do with National Parks!"

[marshman]

Very sadly, I have to inform all those who think otherwise, that I am neither in the "pro" or "anti" camp!!! I am very much a fence sitter for many reasons and I will not change unless I see real evidence that the current status quo is about to change, and even then I have no idea which way I will slip off that fence, simply because, at that time, something else could have occurred, to influence me. Either that or I will have pegged it and then my views will be irrelevant!!!

There is absolutely no reason, hot topic or not, to believe that anything has changed - we are not a NP and IMHO no closer than we were 6 mths ago, or 2 years ago, despite 41 pages of posts on this topic alone, and many countless others, which suggest otherwise. I actually do not believe for one minute for example, that if we were ever to become a NP, that conservation would actually take priority over navigation - and do not point me towards a hearsay conversation some 10 or more years ago, or something written that may be out of date! Recognise that things change and do,  so I will wait until or if,  definitive proposals are made and decide on the evidence at that moment in time - and then, and only then will I go one way or the other!!

So until then, you can post what "evidence" you like and convince yourselves of plots, sub plots, conspiracies or otherwise, and I shall continue to point out to the protagonists that there is actually another view and that those held by those individuals are by no means necessarily in the majority!! (except on this Forum!! ) As you know I am a great believer in that "other" view!! If only in the cause of "balance"!

Sorry if I have disappointed some of you!!!!!!

[D46]

1 hour ago, Paladin said:

From the Visit Norfolk web site, which calls itself "The official visitor website for Norfolk":

"The only National Park with a city in it!"

Presumably, that would be the City of Wroxham.

Nuff said!

1 hour ago, Paladin said:

From the Visit Norfolk web site, which calls itself "The official visitor website for Norfolk":

"The only National Park with a city in it!"

Presumably, that would be the City of Wroxham.

Nuff said!

Nope it is indeed Norwich as promoted by this booklet picked up from the broom stand at their first boat show last yr , obviously it's a visit the Broads publication , but no prizes for guessing who runs that ! .

Most people attending were local although I accept there may have been visitors too , but this is still promoting the area within the area to people already here , that's not good marketing practice , and it will make virtually zero increase in the number of visitors .

Read the first paragraph , immediately it's stated that Norwich is the only city in a national park , not only is that inaccurate but it's totally falsehood , and yet some people wonder why the authority isn't trusted , there lies a very good reason for such lack of trust .

Appolgises for the double pic and it's orientation .

[marshman]

Far be it for taking issue with those with marketing knowledge, I recall not too long ago (by my standards! ) a poll of some Norfolk, or Suffolk, school children in the EDP,  and of those polled, well under 50%, knew what a Broad was!

 Perhaps we do need to start at home in this area!

[batrabill]

2 hours ago, marshman said:

Apart from the BA is there actually a pro BNP camp??? I know where the centre of the anti one is, but a pro one....????

Yes, it’s quite infuriating that this is misrepresented. There is no pro “camp”. 

Personally I don’t care one way or another if the Broads is designated as a de facto NP as it is now, or made a “full” NP. 

What I insist on, as I believe you Marshman also do, is an element of balance to the relentless negativity and the false logic of, if the Broads was a National Park Sandford would apply and then boating would be ...... (insert ridiculous unproven claim here)

[rightsaidfred]

No good at sitting on the fence I would end up falling off, given the choice I would sooner fall on the side with a cushion than the side with a cow pat.

Fred

[grendel]

26 minutes ago, batrabill said:

Broads was a National Park Sandford would apply

Sorry you are under a misapprehension there, as we have recently learned, section 62 of the environment act would apply - not sandford and its been that way for 25 years

[batrabill]

10 minutes ago, grendel said:

Sorry you are under a misapprehension there, as we have recently learned, section 62 of the environment act would apply - not sandford and its been that way for 25 years

Exactly!

 

But I’ve read that a million times on this site!

 

That is the myth that has been pedalled for donkeys’ years

[batrabill]

JennyMorgan said: 

, I'm sure that you will agree. There is no question that Sandford is part & parcel of the NP package. There is no doubt that in the past Dr John has sought the powers required to exclude boaters from waterways, see the Broads Bill. John, I ask you one final, pertinent  question, can you prove to me, beyond any reasonable doubt,  that Dr John doesn't still retain the desire for NP status and won't, once again, change policy in order to achieve that goal?

This is from JM in Feb 2018. 

 

[grendel]

28 minutes ago, grendel said:

Sorry you are under a misapprehension there, as we have recently learned, section 62 of the environment act would apply - not sandford and its been that way for 25 years

i did say recently, 2018 isnt in the last week