Jump to content

Acle B.N.P.


JennyMorgan

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Paladin said:

I don't think a new thread is needed. I consider this news to be apposite for this thread.

 

Excuse me, but you have already exhorted us to keep this thread on topic.

I cannot possibly see what connection can be made between "Sussex Royal" and road signs in Acle.

As an ex Army officer I would be glad to debate the "Harry" issue with you, but not here!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Excuse me, but you have already exhorted us to keep this thread on topic.

I cannot possibly see what connection can be made between "Sussex Royal" and road signs in Acle.

The different attitudes to "Branding".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Paladin said:

Branding.

A bit of a tenuous link, if I may suggest? Hardly worthy of your debating skills.

The "abdication" of Prince Harry is a matter which concerns all of us most deeply. Especially traditional royalists such as myself. I just feel it would be more appropriate to discuss it with you elsewhere than the "Acle marshes".

Assuming, of course, that such a subject would fall within the terms of the TOS?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, floydraser said:

There, now would anyone care to try a constructive answer rather than disecting the question?

Not quite sure what the point is you are trying to make but the answer is obvious, you can`t given the nature of the landscape, there is no other activity that can provide the volume of customers, the employment opportunities or added value to associated businesses, we have all seen the reduction in jobs, pubs, shops etc over the years as the hire boat industry as shrunk, private owners cannot replace that but under the same climate would also cease to exist as well giving a double whammy.

Fred 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Vaughan said:

A bit of a tenuous link, if I may suggest? Hardly worthy of your debating skills.

The "abdication" of Prince Harry is a matter which concerns all of us most deeply. Especially traditional royalists such as myself. I just feel it would be more appropriate to discuss it with you elsewhere than the "Acle marshes".

Assuming, of course, that such a subject would fall within the terms of the TOS?

 

I have no intention of debating the Royal family, here or anywhere else. I instantly saw the branding link, you don't. So be it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rightsaidfred said:

Not quite sure what the point is you are trying to make but the answer is obvious, you can`t given the nature of the landscape, there is no other activity that can provide the volume of customers, the employment opportunities or added value to associated businesses, we have all seen the reduction in jobs, pubs, shops etc over the years as the hire boat industry as shrunk, private owners cannot replace that but under the same climate would also cease to exist as well giving a double whammy.

Fred 

..is the correct answer! Or at least the most likely and the one I was expecting. Sorry if the point is well buried but this may clarify:

Just on the evidence within this thread it seems that some object to the use of the Nation Park brand in part, due to a fear of the deterioration of navigation rights in favour of wildlife campaigners. That fear is aligned with the reputation of, and lack of trust in JP and his unknown ambitions.

It has also been said that the broads is a significant economic consideration but has been in decline since the 1980s.

Surely birdwatchers and their associated industry (a couple of burger vans and a shop selling binoculars) will never provide the same level of income as the boats.

What doesn't seem to add up is why does anyone think an ambitious, driven man like JP would allow the very thing he is in charge of, to decline in favour of something else?

I offer the following thought: (Quick, he's on to us. Jump in here with a distraction like, “Are you saying...” or “No, it's a legal thing from 1872.:default_dry:)

Maybe Dr JP is trying to be the one who brings the area (yes, I mean the area, not just the Broads) kicking and screaming into the modern World for investment in the future. Maybe he wants control of planning so he can tidy the place up a bit and attract investment in say, super marinas with luxury yachts, bars, a gym etc. There has already been speculation on this forum about the future of Broom's site so how about it? Has anyone here stayed in Windermere Marina Village?

Far from stopping dredging JP may want to dredge deeper for bigger craft. Woe betide anyone who doesn't keep their riverside chalet in good, presentable order and you would have to tidy up that scruffy wooden fence behind it but hey ho, that's living in a National Park for you.

I think some of you may be barking up the wrong tree for the right reasons, or the right tree for the wrong reasons, you work it out, but one thing's for sure: you all enjoy barking up any tree!:default_coat:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, floydraser said:

Maybe he wants control of planning so he can tidy the place up a bit and attract investment in say, super marinas with luxury yachts, bars, a gym etc. There has already been speculation on this forum about the future of Broom's site so how about it? Has anyone here stayed in Windermere Marina Village?

Far from stopping dredging JP may want to dredge deeper for bigger craft

He would have said in order to stop dissent and bring people to his point of view and fulfillment of the plan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, floydraser said:

..is the correct answer! Or at least the most likely and the one I was expecting. Sorry if the point is well buried but this may clarify:

Just on the evidence within this thread it seems that some object to the use of the Nation Park brand in part, due to a fear of the deterioration of navigation rights in favour of wildlife campaigners. That fear is aligned with the reputation of, and lack of trust in JP and his unknown ambitions.

It has also been said that the broads is a significant economic consideration but has been in decline since the 1980s.

Surely birdwatchers and their associated industry (a couple of burger vans and a shop selling binoculars) will never provide the same level of income as the boats.

What doesn't seem to add up is why does anyone think an ambitious, driven man like JP would allow the very thing he is in charge of, to decline in favour of something else?

I offer the following thought: (Quick, he's on to us. Jump in here with a distraction like, “Are you saying...” or “No, it's a legal thing from 1872.:default_dry:)

Maybe Dr JP is trying to be the one who brings the area (yes, I mean the area, not just the Broads) kicking and screaming into the modern World for investment in the future. Maybe he wants control of planning so he can tidy the place up a bit and attract investment in say, super marinas with luxury yachts, bars, a gym etc. There has already been speculation on this forum about the future of Broom's site so how about it? Has anyone here stayed in Windermere Marina Village?

Far from stopping dredging JP may want to dredge deeper for bigger craft. Woe betide anyone who doesn't keep their riverside chalet in good, presentable order and you would have to tidy up that scruffy wooden fence behind it but hey ho, that's living in a National Park for you.

I think some of you may be barking up the wrong tree for the right reasons, or the right tree for the wrong reasons, you work it out, but one thing's for sure: you all enjoy barking up any tree!:default_coat:

Yes I have stayed in Windermere Marina Village, it was buzzing when we bought our two time share cottages in 1997 you had all on getting into the pool, the bar and getting a meal. By 2006 /7 that was all over and when we last went in 2010 even the pool was closed.

Regards

Alan

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, floydraser said:

..is the correct answer! Or at least the most likely and the one I was expecting. Sorry if the point is well buried but this may clarify:

Just on the evidence within this thread it seems that some object to the use of the Nation Park brand in part, due to a fear of the deterioration of navigation rights in favour of wildlife campaigners. That fear is aligned with the reputation of, and lack of trust in JP and his unknown ambitions.

It has also been said that the broads is a significant economic consideration but has been in decline since the 1980s.

Surely birdwatchers and their associated industry (a couple of burger vans and a shop selling binoculars) will never provide the same level of income as the boats.

What doesn't seem to add up is why does anyone think an ambitious, driven man like JP would allow the very thing he is in charge of, to decline in favour of something else?

I offer the following thought: (Quick, he's on to us. Jump in here with a distraction like, “Are you saying...” or “No, it's a legal thing from 1872.:default_dry:)

Maybe Dr JP is trying to be the one who brings the area (yes, I mean the area, not just the Broads) kicking and screaming into the modern World for investment in the future. Maybe he wants control of planning so he can tidy the place up a bit and attract investment in say, super marinas with luxury yachts, bars, a gym etc. There has already been speculation on this forum about the future of Broom's site so how about it? Has anyone here stayed in Windermere Marina Village?

Far from stopping dredging JP may want to dredge deeper for bigger craft. Woe betide anyone who doesn't keep their riverside chalet in good, presentable order and you would have to tidy up that scruffy wooden fence behind it but hey ho, that's living in a National Park for you.

I think some of you may be barking up the wrong tree for the right reasons, or the right tree for the wrong reasons, you work it out, but one thing's for sure: you all enjoy barking up any tree!:default_coat:

So we have what has already been suggested a possible land grab except nothing in the rest of Norfolk really justifies NP status.

Or we have what history is littered with egomaniacs sacrificing the many to satisfy their own lust for power.

Both sound a bit extreme but as its your scenario I will let you choose.

Fred

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

So we have what has already been suggested a possible land grab except nothing in the rest of Norfolk really justifies NP status.

Or we have what history is littered with egomaniacs sacrificing the many to satisfy their own lust for power.

Both sound a bit extreme but as its your scenario I will let you choose.

Fred

Sorry Fred, but what do you mean "Nothing in the rest of Norfolk really justifies NP status".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, ranworthbreeze said:

Yes I have stayed in Windermere Marina Village, it was buzzing when we bought our two time share cottages in 1997 you had all on getting into the pool, the bar and getting a meal. By 2006 /7 that was all over and when we last went in 2010 even the pool was closed.

Regards

Alan

They had a devastating flood in 2009 I think. The pool plant was ruined and they decided to rebuild without the pool. There's now a range of apartments and a modern bar/restaurant. I think you would see quite a difference now. Each apartment has a large balcony overlooking the marina which is full mainly high end yachts. Imagine that at Brundall, with the local eating places and a station on your doorstep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, floydraser said:

Far from stopping dredging JP may want to dredge deeper for bigger craft.

Far from stopping dredging . . . . but  he already has! 

If we take the Yare as an example, and this is a fact, since shipping (bigger craft) no longer uses the Yare it has become declared policy to allow the river to silt up so yes, in that instance, no dredging. Mind you, I do see their logic on this, not to say that there aren't other implications. e.g. reduced flush.

I suspect that there are those at BA Towers that give greatest priority to their personal interests whilst giving rather less to matters that disinterest them, such as navigation. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, floydraser said:

They had a devastating flood in 2009 I think. The pool plant was ruined and they decided to rebuild without the pool. There's now a range of apartments and a modern bar/restaurant. I think you would see quite a difference now. Each apartment has a large balcony overlooking the marina which is full mainly high end yachts. Imagine that at Brundall, with the local eating places and a station on your doorstep.

Sadly the place now is not what it was, yes there are a lot of boats, some high end, yachts etc put the place even in the height of summer where we had two of of our weeks is almost empty by comparison. boats mooring charges are for 8 months only for electric and water if you require it for the rest of the year it is by negotiation. Several craft were submerged during the 2010 floods with marina staff only being able to cut the lines. I hate to think of the insurance repercussions. because of the downturn after the speed ban the marina had to consolidate to try and maintain their income hence the new buildings and the smaller clubhouse bar.

Regards

Alan 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Do the BA actually control the dredging programme or do either/or the EA and Natural England not have considerable input? Equally the landowners have to join in too, and like it or not, we just cannot go back to the distant old days much as some would like, when all dredging was side cast, simply because many landowners do not want spoil on their land in this day and age, particularly on the Yare where the silt contains residues considered pollutants dished out by industry.

This year,  I know that part of Waxham Cut has been dredged (with the rest due next winter), Catfield Dyke, and also Dilham, together with further dredging on Hickling and Heigham Sound - the work of course of an Authority determined to allow the navigation to gradually wither away and be restricted!

I sometimes think some people just where it has been dredged!! Whilst you may well disagree with where is dredged or the size of the annual target, it is actually going on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

You tell me what does as much as I love Norfolk I cant think of any part that would justify becoming a National Park AONB possibly but not NP

 

Fred

The world important Saltmarsh and Barrier North Coastline with it's tidal creeks and unspoilt harbours and villages which make a number of Broadland ones look a bit shabby.

An evening flight in Autumn of one hundred thousand Pinkfeet is beyond words.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My feeling has long been that there are areas of both Norfolk & Suffolk that could and should be declared to be 'national parks'. In that I would include one or two areas of the Broads.

There is a valid argument that the Broads is dependent on the vast watershed that feeds the Broads environment thus, as a national park, the boundaries should recognise  this fact. That argument is equally valid for the areas around Minsmere , Dunwich, Blakeny and Brancaster for example. But where should these boundaries be?  Inevitably  some of the surrounding features that would fall within these boundaries are far removed from the general perception of national parks.  Lots of questions, even more answers.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, floydraser said:

They had a devastating flood in 2009 I think. The pool plant was ruined and they decided to rebuild without the pool. There's now a range of apartments and a modern bar/restaurant. I think you would see quite a difference now. Each apartment has a large balcony overlooking the marina which is full mainly high end yachts. Imagine that at Brundall, with the local eating places and a station on your doorstep.

With The Sandford Principal in the background of an NP, I doubt that would fit the idea. And with all that distance to the coast, would it be feasible?. That said, do the boat owners of Brundall really want it,?. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Turnoar said:

BBC Look East show casing apprentices working in the “Broads National Park”; on in a few minutes I expect. Their words not mine.

I have just seen it. They weren't even on the Broads - they were in the Whitlingham gravel pits.

Last thing I heard, I didn't think the BA managed that any more?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ranworthbreeze said:

Sadly the place now is not what it was, yes there are a lot of boats, some high end, yachts etc put the place even in the height of summer where we had two of of our weeks is almost empty by comparison. boats mooring charges are for 8 months only for electric and water if you require it for the rest of the year it is by negotiation. Several craft were submerged during the 2010 floods with marina staff only being able to cut the lines. I hate to think of the insurance repercussions. because of the downturn after the speed ban the marina had to consolidate to try and maintain their income hence the new buildings and the smaller clubhouse bar.

Regards

Alan 

For the sake of clarity: I mention WMV as an example of what may appear, as a succsessful marina. The image I was thinking of is here. These two views are from the apartment we had there in September 2014. Two weeks ago when we passed it didn't look any worse. 

PYCAD_005_20.05.2014_06.JPG

PYCAD_004_20.05.2014_07.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

With The Sandford Principal in the background of an NP, I doubt that would fit the idea. And with all that distance to the coast, would it be feasible?. That said, do the boat owners of Brundall really want it,?. 

I imagine that if someone came along with enough money anything is possible and the boaters of Brundall may not have a choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

My feeling has long been that there are areas of both Norfolk & Suffolk that could and should be declared to be 'national parks'. In that I would include one or two areas of the Broads.

There is a valid argument that the Broads is dependent on the vast watershed that feeds the Broads environment thus, as a national park, the boundaries should recognise  this fact. That argument is equally valid for the areas around Minsmere , Dunwich, Blakeny and Brancaster for example. But where should these boundaries be?  Inevitably  some of the surrounding features that would fall within these boundaries are far removed from the general perception of national parks.  Lots of questions, even more answers.

I totally agree with you Peter that whole area south of the Blythe to the East of the A12 and North of the A14 as it goes into Felixstowe including The Sandlings and Orford Ness is worthy of a NP status. With it's improving comms to the rest of the UK now that the A14 is being sorted around the Cambridge area I could be very tempted! North Norfolk is lovely but you drive for 90 minutes and gone nowhere if you are on a journey N, S, or West.

 

 

Screenshot_20200220-123321_Gallery.thumb.jpg.5f03de424e53890fa083a2abe9e83453.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.