Ranworth Mooring Fees?

[Meantime]

24 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

The local businesses , ie The Maltsters , Ranworth stores and the Granary have all seen an increase in footfall and income since the introduction of the fees

And how much toll do they pay towards the upkeep of the mooring?

Boaters pay toll towards the upkeep and provision of moorings. Most also spend money in local businesses, but that is not a pre requisite of using a mooring. 

How much do the businesses at Ranworth contribute to the BA's coffers? 

I see on Faceache that the BA have withdrawn the electric post facilities at Sutton due to misuse!! For that you can probably read overstaying and being permanently plugged into the post. How long before charges are imposed there under the heading of mooring usage management? OK it is not staffed, but there is easy road access for a ranger to pop by a couple of times a day when doing other mooring checks in the area.

[dom]

1 hour ago, CambridgeCabby said:

The local businesses , ie The Maltsters , Ranworth stores and the Granary have all seen an increase in footfall and income since the introduction of the fees

I'm curious as to how that would come about. The charge causing people to leave in a timely manner, where previously there was an issue with overstaying?

[CambridgeCabby]

According to Steve , there is a greater change over of boats during the day 

[Broads01]

15 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

According to Steve , there is a greater change over of boats during the day 

I get that. Again this week, I arrived during the morning and there was plenty of space because overnight moorers are kicked off at 10 unless they want to pay another £5. Also, I think people who aren't sure about whether to stay the night or not pay the £5 fee and go whereas previously they might have eventually decided to stay.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, Meantime said:

I see on Faceache that the BA have withdrawn the electric post facilities at Sutton due to misuse!!

That is astounding.

How can the BA possibly sell their green agenda for boats to go electric, when they start withdrawing what few charging points exist, because people are actually  using them??

 

[Vaughan]

54 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

According to Steve , there is a greater change over of boats during the day 

Just asking, but who is Steve?

Does he also quote statistics as to what extent "footfall" translates into gross income for the businesses themselves?  We have heard a lot of different versions of that this year.

Footfall, to my way of thinking, is about as vague a calculation, as "carbon footprint".

[Meantime]

4 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

That is astounding.

How can the BA possibly sell their green agenda for boats to go electric, when they start withdrawing what few charging points exist, because people are actually  using them??

 

I suspect the problem is "who" is using them! Which in that case it might have been better to have implemented the policy during the busy part of the season, rather than when we are approaching the quieter colder months

[CambridgeCabby]

Steve is the operator/owner of the stores (and the granary) 

[Vaughan]

9 hours ago, andyholt77 said:

i fear more moorings will follow suit as the great British public once again roll over and pay! 

This is what really matters. Here is a holidaymaker, on his first post on the forum, and this is what he thinks of Ranworth moorings.  He has said that he would not pay to stop there.

While others seem content to roll over and pay, while they quote "more footfall" for the shops.

This is exactly what the BA knew would happen this year, since Ranworth moorings are a "captive audience".  If they can turn round and say "There you are, we knew people would not mind paying"  then there will be charges for what is left of their public moorings, all over the Broads next year.

This is what a National Park means, folks!  If you visit a national park in a camper van or a caravan, there is no question of "wild moorings" : you are not allowed to park except in organised sites where you pay extortionate fees for the privilege.  Wild moorings on the Broads are a thing of the past since landowners have learned how to grab money - and I suggest they were taught how to do that by certain pubs, back in the late 70s.

If the BA now want to "Rake in the Shekels" on moorings that are already maintained by river tolls, then the Broads are going to be effectively, a private, fee paying holiday park.  No longer a place where you can cruise the countryside in freedom.

If there are those here who really can't see this coming, I certainly can!

[Broads01]

 

33 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Wild moorings on the Broads are a thing of the past since landowners have learned how to grab money

I disagree, Vaughan, at least in part. I accept wild moorings may be fewer but nevertheless they are still available on the north Broads. Long may that continue.

[dom]

1 hour ago, Meantime said:

I suspect the problem is "who" is using them! Which in that case it might have been better to have implemented the policy during the busy part of the season, rather than when we are approaching the quieter colder months

Or just to take enforcing action against the "who", rather than punishing all for a few individual's actions. It can't be that hard to deal with overstayers. The CRT seem to deal with it, so BA ought to be able to deal with the same on a much smaller scale than the canals.

[dom]

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

This is exactly what the BA knew would happen this year, since Ranworth moorings are a "captive audience".  If they can turn round and say "There you are, we knew people would not mind paying"  then there will be charges for what is left of their public moorings, all over the Broads next year.

This point probably needs picking up on by bodies acting in boater's interests. If the tightly controlled and monitored moorings are having a higher turnover of boats to the benefit of the local economy, there's a clear inference that people were previously overstaying and BA was not doing enough in the way of enforcement. The correct action in this case is better enforcement, not more charging.

[CambridgeCabby]

“Another place” has alleged that an unknown has circumvented the payment on the posts and has been receiving free electricity , I reiterate  that this has not been substantiated at all.

[dom]

I'd assume that's probably a criminal offence which could be reported to the Police?

[MauriceMynah]

3 hours ago, CambridgeCabby said:

“Another place” has alleged that an unknown has circumvented the payment on the posts and has been receiving free electricity , I reiterate  that this has not been substantiated at all.

I think that it is most unlikely that anyone has been stealing electricity. Much more likely that this is to discredit liveaboards and to stir up opinion against them.

I shall try to find out if the leccy has been turned off rather than the posts just tripping out, which is quite a frequent occurance. 

[Meantime]

7 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

I think that it is most unlikely that anyone has been stealing electricity. Much more likely that this is to discredit liveaboards and to stir up opinion against them.

I shall try to find out if the leccy has been turned off rather than the posts just tripping out, which is quite a frequent occurance. 

There is a BA statement saying they have been temporarily withdrawn due to misuse and I've also seen a picture of the posts covered by a black plastic bag and tape and with a BA notice on them.

[MauriceMynah]

Thanks matey, that saves me a job.

Personally I see this as an action against liveaboards rather than against misuse. 

I know that some are mooring on the green and Sutton Broad alternate days and that as such the BA can do BA about it, but I can't see that warranting the action taken.

Perhaps if the BA took a less vitriolic attitude to liveaboards and started to provide more residential moorings (or at least didn't block others trying to provide them) the situation would improve. 

[Meantime]

This is the BA wording from their post on Faceache.

Boating News - Please be aware that our electric charging posts at Sutton Staithe moorings have been temporarily withdrawn due to misuse. We will issue a further update in due course.

I cannot find the picture anymore, I think it may have been in the comments section for their post, but they have now chosen to limit commenting on that particular post, make of that what you will!

 

[Vaughan]

Oh dear me. Someone must have been putting Spanish Pesetas in the meter again.     But I  suppose you have to be of a certain age, to remember that!

That video of Neil's reminds me of the old joke about how many *****men it takes to change a light bulb.

[Hylander]

Poor chaps I feel sorry for them being filmed like that.       They are only do what they are told to do.    I thought we could not show faces.    I wonder what has gone on to warrant this action.

[Vaughan]

12 hours ago, Broads01 said:

 I accept wild moorings may be fewer but nevertheless they are still available on the north Broads. Long may that continue.

Just for fun Simon, I wonder if we can name more than 10 places left on the North Rivers (downstream of Potter) where you can just moor on the bank in the trees and stick your rhond hooks in the grass?

[Smoggy]

13 hours ago, Broads01 said:

I disagree, Vaughan, at least in part. I accept wild moorings may be fewer but nevertheless they are still available on the north Broads. Long may that continue.

The big difference between wild moorings and ba moorings is that we have already paid for the ba moorings and they are charging again.

[MauriceMynah]

There are 5 or 6 on the Ant alone. On the Bure there are two near Thurne mouth, at least two on the dyke leading to South Walsham broad, and a few before you get to Horning. 

They are still about.

[vanessan]

Earlier this year, the two electric posts at Hardley Mill were ‘re-wired’ during the night to provide free electric. Maybe the Sutton post has been tampered with in the same way. It’s quite a drastic measure to put the post out of commission if it was just because of the over-stayers. 

[MauriceMynah]

If the facility has been withdrawn because of misuse,  I wonder if, as toll payers, we have the right to have details of the nature of this "misuse".

If however the reason is to make the mooring less attractive to liveaboards,  why does the BA not have the whatsits to say as much.

It's not that long ago that the BA was instrumental (allegedly) in getting the RSPB to take action against those moored in the reeds just away from Sutton Staithe. 

Just how long will the BA hide behind mummy's apron before they admit that liveaboards are not part of their plan and that they want rid of them.

Oh and just a quick point to Hylander. I think the filming you wrote of was more about what was being done rather than who was doing it. Difficult to do one without showing the other. Hmm  sorry if that reads as condescending,  just meant to give my opinion.