Open Wallet Surgery (maybe)

[Vaughan]

How very sad.  I had always hoped for rather more than that from this forum.

I suppose I have been too used in my time, to voluntary service on organisations and bodies which get their voice heard and get things done. The Broads Society used to be like that. In fact a large number of the public staithes that we enjoy today were only re-opened because of their efforts.

So here is where we can have a little gripe among ourselves but with no expectation of achieving anything.  Fair enough.

Full many a flower was born to blush unseen ; and waste its sweetness on the desert air.

[AndyTBoater]

2 hours ago, Vaughan said:

Full many a flower was born to blush unseen ; and waste its sweetness on the desert air.

Did Thomas Gray have a boat on the Broads then? 

[Meantime]

4 minutes ago, AndyTBoater said:

Did Thomas Gray have a boat on the Broads then? 

No he couldn't afford the toll! 

[grendel]

3 hours ago, Vaughan said:

How very sad.  I had always hoped for rather more than that from this forum.

I suppose I have been too used in my time, to voluntary service on organisations and bodies which get their voice heard and get things done. The Broads Society used to be like that. In fact a large number of the public staithes that we enjoy today were only re-opened because of their efforts.

So here is where we can have a little gripe among ourselves but with no expectation of achieving anything.  Fair enough.

Full many a flower was born to blush unseen ; and waste its sweetness on the desert air.

to put it bluntly, If the majority though that a charge was just fine and we represented that view to the BA, would you be happy about that- the answer is probably not, so by not campaigning we allow the discussion to happen and various views to be put forward, without the possibility of upsetting those who disagree, then the like minded individuals all have the opportunity to talk amongst themselves and they can individually (or as a group away from the forum) put their case to the authority.

[Vaughan]

On 20/01/2023 at 12:34, rightsaidfred said:

If you look on the members page their email addresses are there, with the officers names the email is first name and surname separated by a . an example rob.rogers@broads-authority.gov.uk

Thank you Fred - it took me a long time surfing their website before I found the right place, but I have now sent a letter to the Chairman, detailing my objections to the charges, which are for two reasons:

1/. As a private toll payer.

2/. As someone in the business who fears how much such a move will affect the tourism upon which the whole area depends.

I have not mentioned this forum, so that admin need have no fear that their stated wish to be un-involved should be compromised.

I was amazed to see that four members of the navigation committee are boat hire operators and I have copied my letter to them. This means that even if two of them voted against or abstained, the other two must have voted in favour.

So it seem the turkeys really are voting for Christmas!

[Meantime]

You join a campaign group because you support the aims of that campaign, and the moment you don't then you leave it.

You join a forum to discuss topics, ideas, issues or even just to share jokes. You don't have to take part in any debate that doesn't interest you and many will use the forum just as a reference, for entertainment or just to keep in touch with what is going on in an area they love. The moment the forum starts campaigning on any issue it risks loosing members who do not support the aims of that campaign. There are many issues which could split this forum right down the middle if it tried to choose a side to campaign for.

Where would this forum loyalties lie if it had to make a choice on the following,

For or against the continued allowing of water skiing

For or against allowing fishing at all BA moorings

For or against creating more unrestricted areas for the testing of engines

For or against allowing continual cruisers to stay longer than 24hrs at free moorings

For or against supporting the removal of Potter Bridge

For or against campaigning for better facilities for paddle boarders, maybe even restricting motor boats on a part of the navigation for sole use by paddle boarders

If the forum took a stance on each of the above and campaigned for them, there would probably be one or two forum members left happy to support the choices made. For quite a few of the above if the wrong choice was made I'd no longer be a member of this forum.

 

[Vaughan]

2 minutes ago, Meantime said:

For or against allowing fishing at all BA moorings

That reminds me.

I assume all those fishermen who squat on BA moorings and thus prevent boats from mooring there, will now have to pay their "ten quid" as well?

[Meantime]

7 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

That reminds me.

I assume all those fishermen who squat on BA moorings and thus prevent boats from mooring there, will now have to pay their "ten quid" as well?

Firstly though, does the forum support the allowing of fishing from BA 24hr moorings? You can see just how quickly things could unravel if this forum was to start campaigning!! I'll leave it there.

[BroadAmbition]

does the forum support the allowing of fishing from BA 24hr moorings? 

Doesn't matter a jot if the forum does / does not or individuals do or do not as the signs clearly state anglers can but must make way for boats wishing to moor.  Exceptions are Bramerton I think

However I take your point and understand your valid point

Griff

[ChrisB]

As an aside. Those of us that cruise or used to cruise as in my case along the South Coast have never expected free overnight mooring.

Premier Marinas overnight charges start at £4 per metre so my Berwick would be £40 per night on nights when we could not swing to the hook. 

For that you do get a pristine berth not covered in goose and duck droppings, free Wifi, your first £5 of electricity and toilet, shower and laundry facilities. 

I don't think £10 is bad. For one of the most popular spots on The Broads. There is still plenty of free moorings.

[Smoggy]

The point is that we've already paid for it in the toll.

It will cut the pubs trade for sure and many pubs can afford that these days.

[CambridgeCabby]

59 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said:

does the forum support the allowing of fishing from BA 24hr moorings? 

Doesn't matter a jot if the forum does / does not or individuals do or do not as the signs clearly state anglers can but must make way for boats wishing to moor.  Exceptions are Bramerton I think

However I take your point and understand your valid point

Griff

The signs also state Free 24hr moorings 

[CambridgeCabby]

I presume , since the moorings will now be chargeable , that the Dragonfly will also pay a daily rate 

[Lulu]

48 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

I don't think £10 is bad. For one of the most popular spots on The Broads. There is still plenty of free moorings.

But if these two popular moorings are going to be chargeable then there will be no stopping the rest of the free moorings being changed to chargeable so there won’t be plenty of free moorings at all 

[floydraser]

2 hours ago, Vaughan said:

I was amazed to see that four members of the navigation committee are boat hire operators and I have copied my letter to them. This means that even if two of them voted against or abstained, the other two must have voted in favour.

So it seem the turkeys really are voting for Christmas!

It will be interesting to see how hiring companies handle these new charges. Whether the hirer has to pay or if it's included in the hiring fee somehow (refund). Or if there is some arrangement whereby the hiring company pays a set fee and the hirer pays nothing. I guess a couple of nights at ten quid is not much on top of a couple grands worth of holiday.

[Meantime]

14 minutes ago, floydraser said:

It will be interesting to see how hiring companies handle these new charges. Whether the hirer has to pay or if it's included in the hiring fee somehow (refund). Or if there is some arrangement whereby the hiring company pays a set fee and the hirer pays nothing. I guess a couple of nights at ten quid is not much on top of a couple grands worth of holiday.

Thinking about it cynically, which would the hire companies prefer? An above 13% increase in tolls to keep the moorings free, which would hit the bottom line of the hire company, or a 13% increase and a mooring fee introduced at two honey pot moorings which the hirer pays. A bit like the move from gas to electric cooking which saves the hire yard buying the gas, in preference to the hirer burning more diesel which they pay for.

As a hire yard I know which I would vote for, however let's not forget those same hire yards via Blakes took out the original lease on Ranworth and then gifted it to the BA. That must stick in the craw a bit!

[floydraser]

Why has no-one ever suggested charging for fishing on the Broads? 

[BroadAmbition]

Some areas of the Broads do require a day ticket but not many.  Who would it be paid to? The environment agency, local land owners, the Ba?

Griff

[rightsaidfred]

2 hours ago, ChrisB said:

As an aside. Those of us that cruise or used to cruise as in my case along the South Coast have never expected free overnight mooring.

Premier Marinas overnight charges start at £4 per metre so my Berwick would be £40 per night on nights when we could not swing to the hook. 

For that you do get a pristine berth not covered in goose and duck droppings, free Wifi, your first £5 of electricity and toilet, shower and laundry facilities. 

I don't think £10 is bad. For one of the most popular spots on The Broads. There is still plenty of free moorings.

 I think you are confusing privately funded marinas with toll funded public moorings.

Fred

[Mouldy]

1 hour ago, Lulu said:

But if these two popular moorings are going to be chargeable then there will be no stopping the rest of the free moorings being changed to chargeable so there won’t be plenty of free moorings at all 

The BA can argue the case for Ranworth and Reedham, as both are attended.  If thy introduce mooring fees at other moorings, they’d need to employ attendants to collect the the money, so largely offsetting the income they’d generate.

During the winter months, when there are fewer boats about, there’ll be no one there to collect the money at Reedham or Ranworth, so one assumes they’ll be free to those who wish to moor.  I can’t see how they’ll be able to close the moorings, when not manned, as they’d be depriving businesses in both locations of potential custom.

 

[floydraser]

5 minutes ago, BroadAmbition said:

Some areas of the Broads do require a day ticket but not many.  Who would it be paid to? The environment agency, local land owners, the Ba?

Griff

I don't know, maybe that's why no-one ever suggested it. It would probably lead to more bankside conflict too. But it surprises me that it's free to fish a waterway that is maintained. 

[rightsaidfred]

1 hour ago, floydraser said:

It will be interesting to see how hiring companies handle these new charges. Whether the hirer has to pay or if it's included in the hiring fee somehow (refund). Or if there is some arrangement whereby the hiring company pays a set fee and the hirer pays nothing. I guess a couple of nights at ten quid is not much on top of a couple grands worth of holiday.

Tolls will be amortised into hire fees but mooring charges would be personal choice so don't see where hire yards would be involved.

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

20 minutes ago, floydraser said:

I don't know, maybe that's why no-one ever suggested it. It would probably lead to more bankside conflict too. But it surprises me that it's free to fish a waterway that is maintained. 

Day or season tickets are for bankside venues rented by clubs, EA maintained fisheries are funded by license fee much as tolls fund navigation.

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

28 minutes ago, Mouldy said:

The BA can argue the case for Ranworth and Reedham, as both are attended.  If thy introduce mooring fees at other moorings, they’d need to employ attendants to collect the the money, so largely offsetting the income they’d generate.

During the winter months, when there are fewer boats about, there’ll be no one there to collect the money at Reedham or Ranworth, so one assumes they’ll be free to those who wish to moor.  I can’t see how they’ll be able to close the moorings, when not manned, as they’d be depriving businesses in both locations of potential custom.

 

All 24 hour moorings are toll funded so no justification for charges at two, especially when with Ranworth the attendants are as useless as a chocolate teapot with no boat handling skills.

Fred

[Mouldy]

23 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

All 24 hour moorings are toll funded so no justification for charges at two, especially when with Ranworth the attendants are as useless as a chocolate teapot with no boat handling skills.

Fred

I understand that and as a toll payer, just like every other toll payer, I’m not impressed with the dictatorial actions of the BA, but they would surely find justification of imposing mooring fees at unattended moorings far more difficult than at Ranworth and Reedham.  Both locations have a ranger during the day, therefore collecting mooring fees is much easier that somewhere where there is no ranger present.

There is now a FB group called Reform the Broads Authority.  It is public, so the content is visible to everyone who has access to FB.  They have published names of folk who have joined so far and it’s interested to note that several are owners or have connections with Broads hire yards.