Potter Bridge Closed To Road Traffic

[Mouldy]

21 minutes ago, Smoggy said:

When it drained harder it would have taken more silt down with it, the stuff they dredged from the lower bure was probably from the thurne/hickling in the first place, as soon as flowing water slows anything being carried drops out, hence the insides of bends are usually much shallower.

Of course then the salt surges from higher sea levels would likely go further upstream.

But as it is now, is it not fair to say that when the river levels rise due to a high tide, because it doesn’t drain out as fast, the issue worsens.  If the lower Bure was dredged, surely it would allow the excess to drain and restore normal levels more quickly?

[BroadAmbition]

Meantime, I and lots of others agree with your statement. This is a theory / opinion that is common. Reason? The Blessed authority introduced the Bure hump and reduced dredging the lower Bure to save them maintaining the upper Thurne to depths they inherited 

Griff

[Meantime]

I guess the problem now is that the backlog of dredging is there now. So IF they dredged the lower Bure to a reasonable depth and that increased the chances of passing under Potter bridge, I'm sure its going to highlight the extreme need to dredge whole swathes of the Upper Thurne, else boats are going to get stuck.

In which case who pays? Dredging is not getting any cheaper, the tolls are going up by record amounts. Would it be right to concentrate on sorting out an area that even with better clearance it still limited to many.

I guess what I'm saying is that the areas across the whole system that need dredging already far outstrip the available resources to complete that dredging. So if your in charge of making decisions about where to dredge, you've got to be looking at which gives best value for money, or benefits the most people. In an ideal world, with money no problem you'd triple the workforce and equipment and do the lot, but with current financial resources that is never going to happen.

It's my personal opinion but I think the job of sorting out the navigation above the bridge has just got too big when considering the few that can benefit from it.

The area above the bridge can still be navigated in smaller boats. I guess we need to reset our sights on what is now a boat built for, or suitable for navigating above that bridge.

The lesson to learn is we must never let it happen to the other extremities of the navigation. Above Wroxham bridge all the way up to Coltishall Common, or above Beccles bridge to Geldeston.

 

[marshman]

Despite the fact that some people blame the so called Bure Hump on the situation at Potter, I am not sure that it convinces everyone! If the Bure Hump does exist can anyone explain why it does not hold back salt incursions?

Salt incursions continue to come further up the Bure year after year - some 15/20 years ago the furthest they came upstream was Horning Hall Farm, then it became Horning Waterworks, this last year I think it was Swan Corner. Meantime comments on the dredging above the Bridge as if it doesn't  happen  - they have been dredging for some long time above the Bridge. Heigham Sound, Waxham Cut, Catfield Dyke, Horsey and the channel in Hickling have all been done, and this year above Martham Ferry, particularly around Dungeon Corner has been done as well.

And for those with long memories, I can assure you Wroxham HAS got a lot worse. It is a wider arch which helps but 15/20 years ago there was hardly ever an occasion when I could not get under, often with a foot or more to spare, but it seems a lot closer these days! 

Perhaps it is all just about rising water levels? There is plenty of evidence all around Broadland of general water levels rising, and on threads some people have posted just how much they had risen over the last years - or do none of you actually believe it? Just why have they had to increase once again the height of the defences around GY - or is that due to the Bure Hump as well?

 

 

[FlyingFortress]

Difference with Wroxham is that there is no alternative to the bridge.

There is at Potter.🫣

[MauriceMynah]

MM, I have to ask if the same problem exists on the Southern waters, as I doubt climate change only effects the northern broads.

What is the data for Beccles old bridge?

[marshman]

I guess its similar but perhaps not so evident as I think the tidal rise and fall is much higher - even at Geldeston the rise and fall must be all of 18" or thereabouts.

I think we sometimes forget that the BESL scheme cost £150m raising the flood defences around Broadland - because of rising water levels!

[BroadAmbition]

Of course Wroxham has got worse as its on the same river that the Thurne drains into - DOH! 

'So Called' Bure Hump - I invite you onboard 'B.A' next time I'm due to cruise that way and you can keep a beady eye on our depth display and witness it for yourself as many others have done

Meantime - with regards to the state of dredging, sadly you are correct, clearing out the Bure hump and dredging the lower bure would expose many areas of the Northern Broads that the Blessed Authority have neglected over the years

Rising seal levels? - Really?  By a whole foot at PHB. Less so at Wroxham, has the rest of the UK suffered a 1 x foot rise in seal levels or is it just the upper Thurne - Hmmmm, let me ponder that one for a nano second

They really have no excuse or defence for allowing this to happen.  They brought it on themselves.  Navigational areas were deep enough and the lower Bure was just fine when they came into being, they inherited a fully accessible river system.   But instead of keeping financial resources into maintaining what they had been given, no, - off they went power base building.  Employing dozens and dozens of new posts in Packman Towers,  becoming a planning authority, getting involved in marketing (We already have the English tourist board for that) Education  (We have the education system for that) Conservation over navigation - We can all see that happening year on year, Vanity projects aka Acle Folly, failed and expensive court issues over bank side access, then the old Jenner's debacle, Thousands spent on marketing a Lie (National Park indeed - Really?) then erecting signs gleefully all over the place, some locations outside their own planning department boundaries.  The list goes on and on and on.  No wonder dredging has taken a back seat, the money for all that lot has to come from any budget already earmarked they see fit to take it from

 

BTW - The above is not a rant (Although It could be justifiable so) - Just telling it like it is

Griff

[FlyingFortress]

I actually enjoyed your rant Griff 👍

[Meantime]

It's hard to disagree with any of what you've posted Griff.

1 hour ago, BroadAmbition said:

has the rest of the UK suffered a 1 x foot rise in seal levels or is it just the upper Thurne

With the exception of Horsey, probably not, there were quite a few born there this year. 

[rightsaidfred]

2 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

MM, I have to ask if the same problem exists on the Southern waters, as I doubt climate change only effects the northern broads.

What is the data for Beccles old bridge?

While I dont have any data I am sure flooding in Beccles, Brundal etc has increased over the last few years, coincidently the prevalence of wind in strength and frequency seems to have increased over the same period and we all know the effect this has on water levels.

Fred

 

[Bernard]

Keep the water high at Potter Bridge, keeps Deep Dyke quiet in the summer for fishing.🫣

[ScrumpyCheddar]

Oooooooops  🤣🤣🤣🤣

[FlyingFortress]

Yeah 👍😁👍😁😁😁😁👍👍👍👍😁😁😁😁👍👍👍👍🍺

[Vaughan]

15 hours ago, BroadAmbition said:

Navigational areas were deep enough and the lower Bure was just fine when they came into being, they inherited a fully accessible river system. 

A great post Griff and I can certainly vouch for the quote above.  I can well remember the navigation as managed by the Commissioners and it was a different place!

15 hours ago, BroadAmbition said:

Vanity projects aka Acle Folly, failed and expensive court issues over bank side access, then the old Jenner's debacle,

Not forgetting  spectacular failures such as "yurt-gate" at the WRC and the quite incredible farce involving the "change of use" of a telephone box.

Now we hear that having put up our river tolls, they have bought a large tract of land near How Hill.  How do they justify this expense, if it is just to re-wild it?  I thought the BA have always announced, during other disputes, that they are not meant to be land owners?

And the Sword of Damocles hanging over us is still to come, in the shape of all their threats about green initiatives and carbon neutrality.  With all sorts of chair-bound officers "working in partnership" with similar officers from other Quangos. In other words, holding expensive meetings and conferences.

Maybe their new carbon reduction expert ought to be "recycled" and taught how to drive a dredger?

[PaulN]

On 22/02/2023 at 18:43, grendel said:

the ten foot draft wouldnt help a lot- the modern road bridge is only about a foot higher then the old bridge.

OK, that was a random guess. we are only 6'3", but its the width that's the problem. "Never mind the Quality, feel ...."

[MY littleboat]

There is a known correlation between dredging and salination - where dredging is reduced, flow rates increase, salination also increases - but more worrying is the water quality and phosphorous and other nasty 'blooms' (sometimes called 'plumes' which result from overflow discharges from our wonderful water companies. BA as well as the government, have slept whilst the recording of these discharges have increased. The result is large algae fields which also kill waterlife, make the water less safe for those who venture in it - including swimmers, canoeists and paddle boarders. It has also been reported in credible scientific journals, that there is a possible link to the high numbers of Avian Flu cases in that the algae may be harbouring the viral spores

EA employ a raft of scientific experts to monitor water quality however, I have never seen an EA tester around the Broads and, being devolved, like everything else is, I wonder if the BA are actually really worried about water quality or just happy to pull up boat yard barriers as a quick fix when fish float around dead on the surface leading to outrage from the public in the press?

[marshman]

Well - it would help if all boats had grey water tanks and people didn't insist on showering so often!!!!!!

The causes of pollution are many and varied and you should remember too, the the rivers drain a huge agricultural area, much of which is fed by rivers that accept runoff from many many fields fed with fertiliser granules.

But take some comfort from the fact that there are now many more white water lilies around and they, to me, are an indicator of better water quality - yellow ones are more tolerant of  dirtier water. 

Perhaps you should remember what the rivers were like before holding tanks and with many many more hire boats! I am sure Vaughan will confirm that situation!!

Kids used to swim in that then and I frequently see kids still swimming today  - most seem to survive!

Incidentally the Potter barrier is not controlled or operated by the BA but the raising and lowering is controlled, or otherwise by the EA

[MargeandParge]

Marshman we have sat next to people that don't shower so often and the air pollution is horrendous. 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

[OldBerkshireBoy]

1 hour ago, MargeandParge said:

Marshman we have sat next to people that don't shower so often and the air pollution is horrendous. 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

A friend of mine who drove a bus out in the countryside used to say such people used "Instead of wash" sprays. 

[Smoggy]

1 hour ago, MargeandParge said:

Marshman we have sat next to people that don't shower so often and the air pollution is horrendous. 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

I'd much rather smell someone with bad bo than someone drenched in spray on smellies, unfortunately the younger generation and a few oldies seem to think it normal. 

No one ever died from sniffing a turd or bo, lots have died sniffing aerosols.

[Wussername]

Oops!

We seem to have gone off piste!

This must be a classic!

Let's hear it for the bridge, no.......all bridges.

Norfolk and Suffolk has an ambarresment of bridges. From Beccles, to Norwich. From Norwich to Great Yarmouth. From Great Yarmouth to Wroxham, to Stalham, to Potter, to Coltishall. 

It is what it is. Rivers and bridges. 

If an issue. Buy a caravan. Hire a riverside cottage.

Old Wussername. 

 

 

[FlyingFortress]

1 hour ago, Wussername said:

Oops!

We seem to have gone off piste!

This must be a classic!

Let's hear it for the bridge, no.......all bridges.

Norfolk and Suffolk has an ambarresment of bridges. From Beccles, to Norwich. From Norwich to Great Yarmouth. From Great Yarmouth to Wroxham, to Stalham, to Potter, to Coltishall. 

It is what it is. Rivers and bridges. 

If an issue. Buy a caravan. Hire a riverside cottage.

Old Wussername. 

 

 

But it isn't.

The point some of us are trying to make is that with 6' 8 " showing on Potter Bridge I and many others were good to go. 

Now we don't see even 6'6" that I would still go at 😫

[Wussername]

58 minutes ago, FlyingFortress said:

But it isn't.

The point some of us are trying to make is that with 6' 8 " showing on Potter Bridge I and many others were good to go. 

Now we don't see even 6'6" that I would still go at 😫

The thing is, you mustn't blame the bridge.

[MauriceMynah]

I don't know  !

Blaming the bridge seems a better option over blaming the BA, 

 

At least the bridge might listen.