Johnny Crowes Staithe - No More !

[Hylander]

The thing is when the boat was 'Berthed' on the Port bank on Sutton Broad I had an attitude of - Live and let live, non payment of Tolls / Bss / Insurance was the Ba's responsibility, yes he was freeloading but that was for the Ba to sort out, my biggest concern was the environmental impact of waste going direct into the river - If indeed it was.

If so I cannot imagine that anyone would want to moor there for a long time until it all cleared away.   Yuk!!

 

[stumpy]

We followed one of the boats,towing the  scrim-netted dory, over Barton yesterday afternoon. It peeled off towards Sutton - I wonder where it'll end up? (I could find a use for the tripod mounted Gatling gun however)

[Turnoar]

I think the dory is a europa 2+2 and with that livery and inventory a more modern coypu catching take on the traditional gun punt perhaps. At risk of getting shot down dare I say I quite like it?

On a more serious note though if this flotilla is someone’s home and the only alternative is temporary bnb accommodation or sofa surfing then given the waiting lists and the fact someone’s preference might be to live afloat then is a long term plan with infrastructure etc. worthy of serious consideration now? I’ve known many in the past to have lived afloat for a variety of reasons. We are an island and land is a finite resource as we see with housing replacing boatyards, fields etc. Floating homes provide a degree of flood resistance. I don’t have the exact answers but is anyone seriously pondering the questions?

[AndyTBoater]

Todays addition to the site is a set of mediaeval stocks firmly planted in the bank with a message of "Landlubbers Beware" scrawled on it. Its turning into a proper little pirates cove

Did make me giggle a little.

Hasten to add 

Not condoning the lifestyle blah blah blah. Not condemning the lifestyle blah blah blah

Andy

 

[Cheesey69]

57 minutes ago, Turnoar said:

I think the dory is a europa 2+2 and with that livery and inventory a more modern coypu catching take on the traditional gun punt perhaps. At risk of getting shot down dare I say I quite like it?

On a more serious note though if this flotilla is someone’s home and the only alternative is temporary bnb accommodation or sofa surfing then given the waiting lists and the fact someone’s preference might be to live afloat then is a long term plan with infrastructure etc. worthy of serious consideration now? I’ve known many in the past to have lived afloat for a variety of reasons. We are an island and land is a finite resource as we see with housing replacing boatyards, fields etc. Floating homes provide a degree of flood resistance. I don’t have the exact answers but is anyone seriously pondering the questions?

More than half of the UK land area is farmland (fields, orchards etc), just over a third might be termed natural or semi-natural (moors, heathland, natural grassland etc), a little under 6% is built on (roads, buildings, airports, quarries etc) and 2.5% is green urban (parks, gardens, golf courses, sports pitches etc).

even though it feels it, the uk is far from being built over.

and what houses we are building are the wrong type. 

[Turnoar]

Thanks for the stats C69, I wonder what the percentage of the UK wet area we've marinered over is, a drop in the ocean I suspect. A right place for development of course, I'm not condoning wherever I lay my anchor that's my home nor biting the field that feeds us.

I fully agree the houses built recently have frequently been the wrong type, cells rather than places called homes in a way contrary to boats accommodation that somehow doesn't feel so constrictive, but with new build prices rocketing for home workers new abodes including sacrificial workspace im not sure if people feel their is a choice.

[BroadAmbition]

I've received an emailed response from the Ba.  They have kindly answered my points and I do have permission to share their responses as per below:-

---------------------------------------------------------------

We have enforcement procedures in place for all byelaws issues. These will be applied to all vessels consistently. Any byelaw issues with any of these vessels will be dealt with in the same way as any other vessel. Unfortunately legal processes can be time consuming and lengthy. I cannot give specific details on any possible offence.

If the BA have – or is provided with – evidence of pollution of any type to do with any vessel then this would be reported to the Environment Agency for investigation and possible action. The EA is the relevant authority with powers to enforce.

The BA does not report any vessels that are moored on private land. These moorings are numerous around the Broads and are commonly known as wild/trespass/informal moorings. You are aware of this and as you say you have used this mooring yourself. The landowner must decide if they wish to prohibit mooring on their land and take measures to prevent it if so.

The Broads Authority and the Ranger Team are aware of the vessels you refer to and the fact that they are moored on a ‘wild’ mooring upstream of How Hill. The land is not owned by the Broads Authority so any issue with these or other vessels being moored there is for the landowner to deal with using trespass law.

The shed you refer to is in fact on a raft and not on the river bank.

The issue of a fire on the bank is a matter for the landowner and there is evidence of fires at numerous other ‘wild’ moorings on the River Ant. Unless the fire is a danger to boat users the Broads Authority do not have powers to stop this.

I am  not aware of any wild informal moorings anywhere on the Broads system that has sewage or pump out facilities. As you are aware boaters have to make their own arrangements to get pumpouts at suitably equipped yards. Other vessels that have used this mooring place previously would be in the same situation.

The Broads Authority can and will enforce through our normal legal processes any breach of Broads Byelaws but we do not have any powers to move vessels off private land. If there are any byelaw issues regarding this vessel then the ranger team will have reported these and they are being dealt with.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I then had a cordial telephone call with the above Ba author, he was informative, friendly and professional.  Due to data protection and the like some questions could not be answered, quite correctly too and I understand that

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My Opinion:-  Not for one minute do I hold the Ba responsible for sorting out this situation or 'Moving on'  the present occupants of JCS.  The Ba are doing their job with the powers they have at their disposal.  Tbh their hands are tied

If I or any of us for that matter want to proceed further with this then contacting the landowner is the only way forward.  Even then the landowner might be quite happy for anyone to use that wild mooring for any length of time that they want to.  They might also instruct them to vacate it.  They just might also stop anyone else in the future using it too.

Unless anyone actually knows who the land owner is then there will be a cost to find out via the Land registry

We also have to remember that '****' and associated rafts / boats are this persons home, whether by choice or circumstance

So what's the short term future for Johnny Crowes Staithe being used by all of us once more?

This is just my opinion - A cat in hells chance.  The Ba are powerless to evict / move on as previously discussed.  For the Landowner to evict is a lengthy and costly process even assuming they want to, they might not even know?  They might have given permission?

I'm really disappointed with the whole thing.  That was one of my personal favourite spots, the longest I ever stayed there was two days.  I will now remember those two days (With Macie Dog) with fading fondness and the highly probable fact that me and Purdey dog will never berth 'B.A'  there again

Of course the danger here is that more liveaboards do not play by the unwritten rules regarding wild moorings (Share and share alike) then theoretically any picturesque 'Hotspot' wild moorings could be taken up permanently and there is not a damn thing the Ba or the rest of the boating community can do about it

What more can I say or do?

Griff

[Wussername]

Griff.

The most emotive contribution on a forum I have ever come across.

There is much to be learned from your post, considered, discussed by those with a wisdom, a compassion and understanding of the legal complexity which effects us all and those less fortunate than ourselves. 

We must seek a solution but where that solution lies escapes me.

Andrew

 

 

[grendel]

the big issue here is that if the land owners take action, then from fairness they would have to act against everyone who moors on a wild mooring on that bank of the and from Johnny Crowes right up to Barton broad, as they own that whole section.

[Hylander]

Well as if we are not all depressed enough as it is.   I have just read Griff's post.    Old story wrong doers - 1 - people who play by the rules - 0.

 

[grendel]

of course we have no proof they are wrong doers, that is only our suspicion, probably better phrased a people who play the rules and people who play by the spirit of the rules.

Very similar to those who quoted the rules dont say...... as opposed to the reason for the rules, during lockdown to justify doing what they wanted. the vast majority knew what the rules meant and stuck by that, the small minority interpreted the rules to allow them to do what they wanted.

[BroadAmbition]

And the spirit of non Toll paying = Not being on the rivers?

Griff

[NeilB]

I presume the BA don't have the authority to seize vessels that are not tolled?

[vanessan]

Crome’s Dyke (which leads to Johnny Crowe’s Staithe) has been the subject of discussion elsewhere over the years. It would appear it is owned/managed by Catfield Parish Council. Only last year noises were purportedly being made at council meetings to the effect that the council were considering the possibilities of opening up the Dyke to create more moorings. I guess anyone really concerned could contact Catfield  Parish Council for their views?

[grendel]

that would be a welcome addition to available moorings, and they could add a time limit for how long you could stay if they made it an official mooring site

1 hour ago, BroadAmbition said:

And the spirit of non Toll paying = Not being on the rivers?

Griff

is presumably being dealt with by the Broads Authority as per your letter from them. but yes I would expect any boat out on the river (or in adjacent waters) to have the relevant tolls, insurance and BSS certification.

[BroadAmbition]

The Ba are indeed on the case regarding Toll - or lack of

Griff

[CambridgeCabby]

To obtain a toll I believe you have to have a current bss , assumption I admit but I would be amazed if the craft in dispute passes 

[BroadAmbition]

Apparently a false declaration of insurance is a bigger offence than not having a Toll

Griff

[BroadAmbition]

And another thought.

If no In date BSS certificate, would that invalidate the insurance?

Griff

[Paladin]

5 hours ago, vanessan said:

Crome’s Dyke (which leads to Johnny Crowe’s Staithe) has been the subject of discussion elsewhere over the years. It would appear it is owned/managed by Catfield Parish Council. Only last year noises were purportedly being made at council meetings to the effect that the council were considering the possibilities of opening up the Dyke to create more moorings. I guess anyone really concerned could contact Catfield  Parish Council for their views?

Purportedly? That suggests the report of the 'noises' might not be true. The source of the information was the minutes of the relevant PC meeting. It's a pity that concern is now only being expressed on here because a favourite mooring has been adversely occupied. If the same fervour had been focussed on getting the Broads Authority to fulfill their obligation to keep the whole dyke open, as part of the navigation, the PC may have been able to move forward on this more swiftly. Dr Packman has said that keeping the dyke open for navigation is not a priority. Today a small dyke, tomorrow...?

For some reason, I cannot upload either a pdf or docx of the minutes, so this is the relevant part of the minutes of that meeting:

 MINUTES OF THE  MEETING OF CATFIELD PARISH COUNCIL HELD at 7pm ON WEDNESDAY 7th October  2020 via ZOOM.

Attendance: Mr Beckley, Mr Filgate, Mr Harris, Mr Hill, Ms Johnson, Mr Jordan, Mr Read, Mrs Wickens and Dr Bacon in the chair, Mrs Millership and Mrs Grove-Jones (District Councillors), Richard Price (County Councillor), Paul Savage (Broads Society) and four parishioners. 

Apologies for Absence: Mrs Walker and Sasha Walton (Mushroom site).

Dr Bacon proposed that the Agenda items relating to Paul Savage’s presentation on Johnny Crowe Staithe should be covered next.

Broads Society – Paul Savage.  Dr Bacon sent round a map showing Johnny Crowe Staithe.  Mr Geoff Bishop (a parishioner) had sent an email regarding this matter. Mr Bishop commented about the Broads Authority and the lack of any clearance on the dyke at Crowe’s staithe and also mentioned that about four years ago on the Broads Forum there was a conversation in October  2016 about the Crowe’s Staithe where somebody had written about the staithe and the state it was in, unnavigable, John Packman, Chief Executive of the BA responded to that comment and several things which indicated that the BA would be supportive, if not financially supportive, about doing something to it. 

Paul Savage stated that Mr Hill keeps a boat near the top end of the staithe and Mr Savage understood that this is done in order to make sure that the BA does not suggest that the planning use has been abandoned. However, getting in and out is very difficult because probably twenty or thirty years ago there had been a line if trees,  they are all now coppice stools so instead of a single trunk there are probably six or seven and many of the stems have grown out towards the light across the boat dyke and that makes it very difficult for anybody to get in and out unless they take pair of loppers. Dr Bacon clarified that this is along the north side of the boat dyke, marked orange on the plan, the narrow strip where the line of trees is growing and obstructing the boat dyke.

Paul Savage stated that there are approximately twenty trees all of which have been coppiced between Mr Hill’s boat and the entrance, it is quite noticeable that the north bank at the entrance has worn away due to a lot of use by passing boats which stop there for the day Mr Savage had been told by Phil Heath who has worked for the BA for many years that twenty-five years ago it used to look as  it does on the Ordnance Survey map. Mr Savage suggested that the Parish Council should bear in mind that if it is made obviously feasible for mooring purposes it will be necessary to have a notice to make sure that people realise that it belongs to the Parish Council otherwise it will be colonised probably by squatters quickly. 

In between each of the coppiced stool there is a tendency for the top soil to have washed away and it even make the trees appear to be growing out of the bottom of the dyke, they are not actually,  if a stick is poked in the water it is only about a  foot deep and on this occasion Mr Savage suggests taking the brash, the small twiggy pieces that arise when trees are pruned or cut down, pack them together

tightly and pin them in place and that acts as a sieve as the tide comes it in it should collect sediment and the wood will eventually rot. It should be packed down a little higher than the height of the riverbank or the boat dyke bank and then over time it should turn back into top soil and it can be used conveniently to get on and off a boat. 

Dr Bacon pointed out that Mr Savage is chairman of Broadsword which is the part of the Broads Society which carries out practical work of mainly tree and scrub clearance along navigable waterways. Paul Savage stated that they have been doing this for about twenty-five years but latterly for insurance reasons, the Broads Society do have insurance, apart from this particular project they have not considered doing anything for anybody other than the BA in recent times but it is the same function. Mr Savage suggested to Dr Packman, when he was asking for people to make suggestions for useful projects, would the authority like to do this work and he declined to get involved obviously because of money but if the Broads Society do the work there is not any financial cost to the BA. 

Dr Bacon stated that John Packman does state on the Forum an important point which is as far as the BA is concerned tress along the riverbank or along a navigable waterway are the responsibility of the landowner, that the BA is supportive of keeping them clear but it is not their job.  This is where hopefully Broadsword can do the necessary work on behalf of the Parish Council. 

Mr Savage stated that the only issue the Parish Council ought to satisfy themselves about is that if this was hundred acres of woodland for example the Forestry Commission should be approached for permission for a licence if you wanted to fell the hundred acres of woodland and they probably would not give the licence. Mr Savage did not think a felling licence is required here, he is not suggesting clear felling, it is more a case of pruning but just to be on the safe side, as suggested in correspondence to Mr Filgate, it would not do any harm to pick up the phone and have a chat with the local office just to run it  past them and make sure that they are happy. Other than that there are no licences that are required, the BA does this sort of work but they spend months going through all sorts of paperwork to get Natural England to give permission. For a private landowner on a small scales Mr Savage did not think that is necessary. 

Dr Bacon stated that this is clearance of the line of the boat dyke, the top end where the  large staithe area is John Packman again said on the Forum that he would not be opposed to the idea of having that staithe completely restored but it would be a very expensive job and one that the BA could not prioritise but he did regard the boat dyke as being part of the public navigation up to at least as far as the staithe. 

Mr Savage stated that if the Parish Council could generate some income from charging people to moor then gradually over time that would provide the Parish Council with some resources and some restoration work could be done on the staithe itself from a historical point of view that would be an attractive proposition, but that is in the future. 

Mr Harris asked firstly if Mr Savage owned the land what would he do, is there a possibility that this could be converted into an income generator and secondly one of the concerns that has been raised is that the BA would not allow you for planning and other reasons to put in berths in there which could then be let, is there a problem with the BA for doing that? 

Mr Savage replied there is always a problem with the BA as mentioned in his email to Mr Filgate earlier, he did not know if people were aware that there was a planning application at the New Cut which was dealt with during the summer in which the landowners had used their part of the New Cut for many years as a permanent mooring site until it became impossible because of the poor condition of the quay heading, not something which applies to the Parish Council because there is no quay heading

but the New Cut is retained by quay heading. Eventually the landowners persuaded the Environment Agency, whose responsibility it is, to replace the quay heading because that is an engineering process they have to apply for planning permission, the BA granted it but imposed a condition that it should not be used for mooring purposes  which seems to  have been done in very bad faith. Subsequently an application was made successfully to remove that condition but even then the head of planning said that in the opinion of the BA there was not planning permission so she was taking away with one hand what had just been granted with the other hand. 

Dr Bacon thought that the answer here with the BA on this particular site is that the Parish Council could offer a combination, there could be a mixture of some let moorings and some open twenty-four hour public wild mooring which the BA is always keen to find. If the Parish Council is offering that deal  of say fifty/fifty of wild public mooring and private mooring that the Parish Council let out they would probably be happy with that. Certain officers would be happy with that arrangement because they like to increase the amount of public wild mooring available.  That is a very popular area for people to pull up for the night.  For many years the Parish Council has let moorings so there is a long history of using part of that as moorings that are let out. 

Mr Harris said that given that the Parish Council probably could get some moorings in there provided it is handled properly with the BA what would Mr Savage do, would it be economically sensible to consider actually trying to restore this for some form of moorings which could be let. Mr Savage replied yes, but in the process of doing it he would suggest that the Parish Council does not do anything which could be described as building or engineering. The Authority when somebody wants to replace their quay heading, which is often timber faced, they take a very fussy attitude and they ask people to put in a planning application. If you don’t do anything beyond as what Mr Savage would describe as gardening then there is no work which requires planning permission so the only issue then would be is there an established use, as Dr Bacon had just explained there is an established use. 

Mr Harris stated his question was slightly different, he understood that Mr Savage was saying that Dr Bacon very helpfully suggested that the Parish Council could probably get over the planning issue. Mr Harris said his question then becomes an economic question is it sensible for the Parish Council to try and use this to generate income both generate income and to generate amenity for parishioners by creating some more berths there whilst also possibly making some more public berths for the Broads which is in all of our interests. 

Mr Savage replied that the answer to both questions is undoubtedly yes because especially on the northern Broads moorings are in acutely short supply and where people run mooring basins for commercial reasons they make a lot of money out of it. Mr Savage’s boat is moored at the Adventure Centre and pays for the year about £800, across the other side of the river is Cox’s boatyard where there are more facilities it would not surprise him if the bill would be double that. 

Dr Bacon said that this is just in the short-term, in the long-term by getting that dyke cleared the Parish Council is opening up the possibility of restoring the actual staithe end which would open up the possibility of several moorings. Mr Harris stated that this was an added bonus, then surely the question is how does the Parish Council develop an action plan with a business plan in terms of spend x to get y to take this forward. Dr Bacon replied that the first thing is to get Broadsword to clear that bank so that it is navigable and then move from there, as long as the Parish Council does not get involved with quay headings, as long as the parish Council stick to soil bank moorings we will not be running into all the technical and planning problems that go with quay heading etc. 

Mr Hill stated if someone could explain what would be the procedure regarding mud in the dyke because the water there particularly as you enter the dyke from the river is very fleet and the boat is normally on the mud. Mr Hill understands, but stands to be corrected, this is classed as contaminated waste. How would we go about increasing the depth of the water which would be fundamentally essential in its current condition.  Dr Bacon stated that in a way that would not be the Parish Council’s problem because the boat dyke is part of the public navigation and Dr Packman said as far as he is concerned that is part of the public navigation therefore it is the BA’s duty and problem to deal with the mud, at the moment their excuse is there is no point sending a  mud pump in there because there are lot of overhanging trees so once the trees are cleared there is a good case for saying this is public navigation please include it in your program of mud pumping. 

Mr Hill also stated that since his boat has been at Johnny Crowe’s Staithe every last thing has been stolen from it and vandalised, everything that is possible to steal has been stolen including the steering wheel. Dr Bacon asked if it was land based or waterborne crime, Mr Hill thought land based. 

Mr Harris clearly from what Mr Savage has said the Parish Council should go ahead and clear it but he would like to see, if someone could do this, a business plan in terms of if the Parish Council did this we get four berths or six berths and if so we could perhaps get £600 each this would give an income because it would then scope the project in a way that the Parish Council could then see how attractive it was and therefore we could then see that it develops according to a plan rather than ad hoc. Mr Harris proposed if there is someone who could do that that would be helpful, he would be happy to work with Mr Savage to try and look at the numbers. 

Dr Bacon asked in the meantime are councillors happy for Broadsword to go ahead with the clearing. Mr Beckley replied that if Broadsword are happy to do that work on behalf of the Parish Council he would support that. 

Dr Bacon stated that Mr Bishop had written to the Parish Council would he like to make a comment. Mr Bishop replied when the BESL did the flood defence improvement on the Broads Authority side, on the How Hill side of that dyke they did take out quite a lot of the silt from Chromes they used to build up the flood defences and the water depth at that stage was round about four feet deep since that happened the reeds have encroached from the BA side across the dyke and it that which is preventing a lot of the ingress because the trees have not grown that fast that is what need taking out to bring the dyke back to the width that it was when the work was done originally. Mr Bishop has photographs. Mr Bishop asked stated that Mr Hill’s boat draws more than one foot so if he can get up and down there so there is depth in the middle but a lot of obstruction is being caused by the reeds. 

Dr Bacon stated that if the work starts with the trees which are in the control of the Parish Council we can then start to put pressure on the BA about their aspect of it.  Mr Bishop stated that the other benefit from having people moor on there it should cut the crime rate down, if there are people mooring overnight there is more discouragement for thieves to go down and take things. 

Mr Beckley said that a decision needs to be made, there is a proposal that Broadsword do the work for the Parish Council. Mr Filgate declared an interest as a member of Broadsword and the Broads Society, Dr Bacon stated that  it was not a financial interest, but the interest was noted. Mr Harris stated that clearly there would be a majority to clear it and it would be sensible to do it this winter if we can but Mr Harris is very happy to sit down with Mr Savage to try and scope it as a business plan would that get support as well because Mr Harris thought that would actually give some sort of context to the whole thing, why are we doing this, what could we make out this, he is willing to do that. 

Mr Beckley commented that on a  point of order, Mr Harris is quite right and Mr Beckley would back him up on that but Mr Beckley had made a proposal that Broadsword should carry out the tree

clearance along  the boat dyke could we have a seconder and a vote please. Mr Hill seconded the proposal with all in favour. 

Mr Harris proposed that he sits down with Mr Savage to scope it to see how much it could produce and how much as a financial proposition. Mr Savage stated he was happy to help on that, he had picked up what Mr Hill was saying about theft and as Mr Bishop said earlier with the idea of the public mooring there being a  discouragement because it shows people are about add that to an offer to the BA telling them there are some mooring space which the Parish Council would allow overnight mooring on then they would be very keen on doing that and might even pay a modest rent.  Mr Beckley seconded the motion with all in agreement. Dr Bacon stated that Mr Harris would get together with Mr Savage and possibly one or two others if they wish to get involved to discuss a business plan. Mr Hill asked if there was anything the Parish Council could do to help the team with the project. Mr Savage replied that because of the virus numbers are uncertain as to how many can be used and this affects the length of time it is going to take, if anybody wants to join in they would be welcome. Dr Bacon stated that Mr Hill and he could help logistically with regard to land access if needed. 

Mr Beckley went on to say that Mr Savage recommended that a notice board should be put up at the end of the dyke saying that the Parish Council own it to save squatters going there, Mr Beckley proposed that  this should be done as well, Mr Filgate seconded this with all in agreement. 

Dr Bacon thanked Mr Savage for attending.

 

 

[MauriceMynah]

I am saddened by an entirely different aspect of all this. I have just cruised passed several places where these boats have, in the past been moored. There is no sign of their previous visits, even though said visits have been frequent and long in duration.

There is no rubbish left there, no signs of sewerage or other nasties, the only trace is that the bank has been flattened slightly, which, in fact, makes a new wild mooring easier to use.

It seems to me that the "live and let live" attitude mentioned earlier only applies if they moor somewhere where we don't wish to,  but maybe that's the cynic in me.

In my opinion there are worst sins committed by boaters. Failing to help other boaters in need, blocking emergency ladders, you know the sort of thing! 

[BroadAmbition]

News - I have contacted Catfield Parish Council yesterday morning regarding JCS via email.

They have acknowledged my communication stating that they were not aware of the situation but will look into it and get back to me in due course

Griff

[grendel]

 I have temporarily locked this thread, due in part to the posts we have had to hide that came close to or broke the TOS when describing the person moored, it will remain locked unless someone has any pertinent facts to add, in which case message me and i will either reopen the thread or add the information for you.

Just a reminder, we will not stand by and allow a trial by forum, all of the relevant authorities have now been informed, I suggest we leave it in their hands and hope for a successful outcome.