Boater's Interest Organisation

[dom]

Having worked in a yard in the distant past, been a private boater and even had forays into living aboard, returning to the broads after quite a few years, I'm struck by the fact a lot seems to be changing. In particular, there seems to be a need for a bit of a fight back from the boating side before we're completely marginalised by the national park movement and unreasonable charges.

From what I can see of things, there doesn't seem to much happening in the way of a unified organisation on the boating side. In theory, RYA should be helping, but I've not seen any evidence of this. NSBA describe themselves as "Guardian of broads boating", but seem more focussed on sailing and publishing the Green Book. Is that all fair comment? Is there anyone else I should be considering?

I keep pondering a thought about a hypothetical organisation. Let's say that this was set up as a charitable trust, with the intended purpose being to protect the future of navigation on the broads (both private and charter). The trust collects funds by annual subscriptions, ad hoc donations and legacies. The trust does little or nothing in return for its members, other than accrue funds with a single goal, buying waterside land. As and when the opportunity arises, the trust buys up the land, then either makes it available for wild mooring, or leases to the BA for a peppercorn rent on the basis that no mooring charges will be levied.

It's obvious from recent discussion that the wrong type of liveaboards could raise issues, as could overstaying in general. If land was leased to BA, this would obviously be less of a concern.

If the land was wild moorings and effectively common land, I suspect public liability insurance would be necessary, but possibly not prohibitively expensive. It'd be really interesting to know if the church specifically insure the Horning church mooring and, if so, at what cost - or if anyone knows of other comparable situations.

Finding land might be difficult initially, but with a rising reserve every year, I suspect sooner or later land owners would start to be tempted into selling off otherwise unused strips of land.

Aside of trying to improve availability of public moorings, I think holding land at the extremes of a navigation and the need to retain navigation rights between them could also increasingly give the trust authority and influence in wider decision making processes.

Can anyone else add any more pros and cons to this? I'm not about to start putting this into practice any time soon, but think it's something worth wider discussion.

 

 

[MargeandParge]

First  reaction from Marge and Parge is similar to GOBA on The Great  Ouse

Please explain the difference 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

 

[dom]

30 minutes ago, MargeandParge said:

First  reaction from Marge and Parge is similar to GOBA on The Great  Ouse

I actually live just up the road from the Great Ouse. I quite regularly bike down and have a look at Earith Sluice, or West View marina, but have never really taken an active interest in boating in this area, as I always thought it was quite flat and uninteresting compared to the Northern Broads, especially heading in Denver direction.

I think the main difference is that GOBA seem to be providing moorings on a large scale via leasing to address a shortage - but what I'm suggesting is a slow, progressive gaining of ground on a more permanent basis, purchasing rather than leasing.

If you got £10 a year for every boat on the broads, you're talking about £120k a year. You'll never get anything like 100% subscription, but if you add in legacies, corporate membership, donations from visitors, etc, it should still be viable to raise sizeable amounts. You can then either accrue funds over a number of years and aim to buy back recently lost moorings, or buy up larger tracts of land not currently used for mooring and do the minimum work to allow them to function as wild moorings.

[MargeandParge]

Another thought is that BA control planning applications and at the moment they seem to defend total control of the system. 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge 

[marshman]

Beware the rule of unintended consequences - set yourself as a separate organisation looking for moorings and the landowners will be rubbing their hands with glee! Two competing sides and the price will go up even higher - also as M and P suggest, formal moorings will require planning consent I guess. Cost of constructing the moorings would have to be taken into account, and you may need someone to maintain them? How many ladders are replaced annually and mooring posts as well and then you have to have a maintenance/replacement fund as well I guess.

The EA would also want their sticky fingers in the pie too. Set up a charitable trust and you will need people to run it - it won't run itself! Why do you think the Wherry Trust is run by volunteers - start paying anyone and it would become a veritable minefield.

Who is going to collect the "subscription"? No easy task!

I think I would just settle back and enjoy the Broads - I have been around them for some long time, and IMHO there is not a lot wrong. Others think differently of course but I still like them as they are - we all have niggles with those in control, like everyone likes to blame someone for everything, but I can think of a lot worse places to spend my days!!

[Cheesey69]

Sometimes I see the boiling frog syndrome at work. 
Me? since the early 90’s I’ve zoned in and out of the Broads and can see the changes especially as the tide of hirers goes out and the different practices of private owners effect the surrounding areas

we can’t be united because we all want something a little different and we all use the Broads in a different manner. 
take me for instance, an owner who never eats at a pub, brings his own food and diesel. Mainly to keep costs down but because I can’t guarantee mooring near big centres. At least up north. 
so my push would be for more moorings and off the wall ways to achieve this. 
Others do the exact opposite and are happy as is

i feel once we start to feel the water boiling it will be too late to effect anything 

[oldgregg]

I think in general, the idea is a good one.

But as MM has alluded to, if it gains traction and becomes known as an organisation that one can always flog a spare bit of land to then it could achieve the opposite of what is intended.

But in principle, I do think a lot of Broads land (including riverside pubs) should be in the care of some sort of trust. The problem is you have to stop it being run by yoghurt-knitters and those 'committee' folk who have as much common sense and knowledge of commercial matters as a tea leaf does of the history of the east india co .

[ExSurveyor]

Isn't this similar to Blake's purchase of the lease at Ranworth, not sure that has fulfilled its original intention.

The non tidal area of the river Medway has a couple of plots of land owned by cruising clubs, paid for by members, cared for by volunteers. Moored on only by members.

If the suggested plan happened on the Broads, would anybody be allowed to use them, in which case why would anyone make an annual subscription. If it was limited to subscribers what is the point of doing it.

[dom]

21 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

Isn't this similar to Blake's purchase of the lease at Ranworth, not sure that has fulfilled its original intention.

I think it probably did and probably would have continued to do so, if Blakes had continued on their original trajectory, rather than struggling commerically and being bought out. Obviously with Blakes, their contributions to the community were always going to be a balancing act between public/industry benefit and commercial gain.

Quote

If the suggested plan happened on the Broads, would anybody be allowed to use them, in which case why would anyone make an annual subscription. If it was limited to subscribers what is the point of doing it.

That's an interesting point. The original thought was that the reason for making the subscription would be purely philanthropic, helping to protect the interests of boaters (and people's valued hobbies - fishing could potentially also play a part) into the future and allowing access for all. I used the example of £10 a year, as it's really a throwaway amount these days. I donate similar amounts monthly to several charities, and rarely give any thought to the ongoing cost once a direct debit is set up.

The thought now occurs to me that it could be a mutual organisation. Pay a certain amount a year for membership and use the mooring(s) for free. Others could use the moorings, but are required to pay a charge per night (maybe just on an honesty basis). This becomes much more of a commercial enterprise (which may introduce greater liability issues), but could drive revenue faster.

My gut feeling is that @Cheesey69's use of the boiling frog analogy is very pertinent. If you're constantly exposed to what's going on, it's very easy to overlook an insidious decline. If you're away for a while and return, the changes are much more stark. It seems to me like there's an awful lot of complaint around chargeable moorings, loss of moorings, generally increasing costs, etc yet no-one's actively doing much. The one I obviously missed from my original post was the Broads Society, but they seem if anything to be wavering around the middle ground to opposition - especially in regard to liveaboards, which seem to get tarred with a broad negative brush. There also seems to be a fair bit of conflict of interest with its members too.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, ExSurveyor said:

Isn't this similar to Blake's purchase of the lease at Ranworth, not sure that has fulfilled its original intention.

Of course it has!  That is why we can still cruise on Malthouse Broad.  If Not for Blakes, the landowner would have maintained the Broad closed, as it had been during the War.  Ranworth Inner Broad remained closed, simply because it did not contain a public staithe, so no right of navigation could be proved by Blakes.

 

1 hour ago, ExSurveyor said:

If the suggested plan happened on the Broads, would anybody be allowed to use them, in which case why would anyone make an annual subscription. If it was limited to subscribers what is the point of doing it.

So how come the Norfolk Broads Yacht Club have maintained a lease on Wroxham Broad, from the Trafford estate, for what must be over a hundred years now?  I am told  that the Snowflake Sailing Club will also be joining them there this coming winter.

[ExSurveyor]

Vaughan, sorry, I should have made my point clearer. I was only referring to moorings rather than access.

I doubt that I would be welcome on either clubs moorings without being a member.

[Vaughan]

3 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

I was only referring to moorings rather than access.

There would be no moorings without access to the broad. 

 

4 minutes ago, ExSurveyor said:

I doubt that I would be welcome on either clubs moorings without being a member.

But I seem to think that is the thrust of Don's suggestion.  In this sense, is there a difference between a "member" and a "toll payer"?  Not forgetting that "in my day" there was no requirement for a river toll on Wroxham Broad as it is private. All the same the NBYC (and not the landowner) have always maintained the broad open and welcome to other river traffic.

[Vaughan]

44 minutes ago, dom said:

I think it probably did and probably would have continued to do so, if Blakes had continued on their original trajectory, rather than struggling commerically and being bought out.

Just to be a bit pedantic, everyone was struggling commercially in the late 70s and early 80s and the Broads tourist industry has never been the same since.  I was there and I have got the tee shirt.  A co-operative of boatyard owners, such as Blakes, cannot be "bought out" as it had no real assets of its own and its members' shares had no monetary value.  Hoseasons was, and is, simply a travel agent, charging a flat rate commission.

 

49 minutes ago, dom said:

Obviously with Blakes, their contributions to the community were always going to be a balancing act between public/industry benefit and commercial gain.

It is most refreshing to see someone here who appreciates what an organisation such as Blakes was all about. 

The member boatyards always knew and maintained that the Norfolk Broads were our "stock in trade".  If the Broads were not a beautiful (indeed magical) place to come and enjoy an adventure holiday, there would be no point in trying to sell boating holidays!  And so every effort was always made to try and maintain them as such.

Nowadays, we are left to rely on the BA and the EA and (God forbid) the RSPB to do what the River Commissioners and the boatyards made such a good job of.

So, by recent showing, are they up to the task?

[dom]

7 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

It is most refreshing to see someone here who appreciates what an organisation such as Blakes was all about.

My mum worked as a booking agent for Blakes for 30 or so years (so lots of holidays on various waterways as I was growing up). A lot of the boating industry families around Wroxham also tended to have offspring around the same age as me, so I grew up socialising with Funnells, Bunns, Kings, Thwaites, etc.

I "turned traitor" and went and worked for Dick Sabberton at Summercraft in my late teens, which was always a Hoseasons yard. I could very easily have stuck with the industry, rather than chasing money elsewhere. Half of me wishes I had.

[Vaughan]

2 minutes ago, dom said:

My mum worked as a booking agent for Blakes for 30 or so years

Her name would not have been Cilla, or Hazel, by any chance?

[dom]

31 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Her name would not have been Cilla, or Hazel, by any chance?

Carol. I think she worked with Hazel for quite a few years.

[MargeandParge]

Dom reading through your ideas and aspirations We would contribute and think it should have a  charitable status as it is conservation in the truest form and would keep the Broads a special place for so many including those that protect their environment and everything that lives within it.

Our reactions at the start of this thread were just reactions to the way it is and not the way it should  be 

By being a stake holder you take pride as do community shops and pubs.

Maybe you have a way forward. 

Kindest Regards Marge and Parge