Broads Future

[ChrisB]

4 hours ago, BuffaloBill said:

height Gauge.bmpheight Gauge.bmpheight Gauge.bmpheight Gauge.bmp 1.37 MB · 41 downloads

Back in the sixties, there was a height gauge just inside Herbert Woods entrance which you swung out and could check for yourself if it would pass under the bridge.

This was us on September Dawn in '66 (from Dawncraft Wroxham). The gauge is the wooden post on the right of the photo which when swung out, was a bit like a 'hanging scaffold' which you could then pull your boat along with ropes to check the clearance. As Maurice said, no pilot in those days but there usually was more clearance.

 

p

[Turnoar]

The rain has certainly eased, just done a taxi run to Aylsham via Dunkirk and there is plenty of water in the Bure upstream of the mill still but the flow to the mill from the bridge isn’t as noticeable as it was for most of the winter.

There’s been an estate or two of development west of Aylsham and in Briston over the last dozen years or so, I wonder where Holt drains to, the number of chimney pots there must have more than doubled in half the time.

[MauriceMynah]

Holt???  Who goes there??

[CambridgeCabby]

“Dont tell him Pike”

[MargeandParge]

HOLTS

Used to be rattle spray cans turned the rusty marks on my Morris Marina to a brighter shade and always lasted at least 18 hours. Time enough to impress ole Marge. Or so I thought. .

KIndest Regards Marge and Parge 

[Vaughan]

4 hours ago, Turnoar said:

There’s been an estate or two of development west of Aylsham and in Briston over the last dozen years or so, I wonder where Holt drains to,

Sorry, but if we don't understand where Holt drains to, then we don't understand where all this floodwater that we have been bemoaning over several months, has come from.

4 hours ago, Turnoar said:

There’s been an estate or two of development west of Aylsham and in Briston over the last dozen years or so,

And all this just creates run - off into the river system, from what what used to be absorbed into traditional Norfolk Farmland.

[ChrisB]

North & East Aylsham The Bure , West & South The Mermaid a tributary of The Bure.

[Wussername]

28 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

 

And all this just creates run - off into the river system, from what what used to be absorbed into traditional Norfolk Farmland.

Don't forget the sewage, the sewage which flows into our rivers due to a neglected drainage system which simply does not cope. Years ago there was a concern a justified concern with regard to toilets being flushed into the river, the broad, wherever you were moored. On Malthouse Broad, for example, twenty boats on the quay. Twenty boats on the broad itself. Then, between the hours of 7am and shall we say 9am the Great Relief. 

Then became the introduction of the boat toilet system as we know it. With of course The Pump Out. It does not come cheap. 

And then, and only then, after due process, it comes back into the river. Exactly the same as it entered it.......as raw sewage.

May I suggest that we cut out the middleman, what is the difference, what are we paying for? 

 

[kpnut]

9 minutes ago, Wussername said:

And then, and only then, after due process, it comes back into the river. Exactly the same as it entered it.......as raw sewage.

May I suggest that we cut out the middleman, what is the difference, what are we paying for? 

A very good point. 

[hungryhippo]

Just back from our annual week on the Broads, once again with the excellent Bridgecraft. (Tower Bridge this time)

We have seen plenty of the pictures over recent months of much higher tides. We've never ventured under PH Bridge, but Wroxham and Wayford Bridges have been unchieveable for most of the past 5 years at this time of year. Even Ludham Bridge had a lot less clearance this year.

I think the Broads authority and anyone else with influence on attracting visitors on the Broads needs to do some serious thinking though. We've been coming for 25 years now. This year, we came over the Easter Bank Holiday weekend (we got our dates mixed up when booking!) Given the last time we happened to be on the Broads over the BH Easter Weekend, we feared the worst - limited mooring, pubs/restaurants fully booked, etc, etc.

Well, pleasantly (for us) there was hardly anyone about. Not so good for the boating companies and attracting money into local businesses, though. I would say that perhaps almost half of the boats we saw this week were private. Very few cruisers and I am sure the increasing cost of hiring a boat, eating & drinking out and paying for mooring will have influenced that. We moored up at Neatishead for the first time in a good few year on Thursday - we were one of only two boats there until mid afternoon! That used to be near impossible to get a space at.

Everything costs more everywhere - I get that. And I don't doubt that in the warmer weather, it's busier - we try to avoid those times of year. But unless there is some coherent thinking, the Broads as a holiday destination is going to price itself out of many people's budgets, when compared with other possible destinations.

Oh - and charging £4.00 to fill up with water at Ludham Bridge. Not happy! Especially when compared with the excellent facilities at Neatishead, where there is a lot less demand, I imagine. We've stopped mooring at Ranworth as well overnight, since the £10 blanket charge was brought in.

[Turnoar]

I’d overlooked the Glaven when I mentioned Holt. I’d also overlooked the Hor draining Horstead. From what I’ve seen of them these recent large scale Norfolk developments lack attenuation eg in the form of ponds with reed bed to allow the water to eventually transpire and dewater without simply passing the problem elsewhere. About 20 years ago I was involved in a project on a new town, not in Norfolk, and met with the infrastructure rep. Turned out he was an engineer who grew up on a farm on the broads. Lots of water features, almost a mini broad, in the master plan and no problems even this past winter.

Natural England have seemingly put the brakes on development in areas affecting our rivers for the time being; I just hope real solutions are forthcoming and money doesn’t do the talking!

 

[PaulN]

On 05/04/2024 at 12:45, dom said:

They give the largest tidal range, but the larger spring drop is coming at a time when average levels are remaining high, so it's not translating into a meaningful increase in air draft. I've yet to see much over 6'3" on the "new" gauge, which is nearly a foot off what a normal spring should look like. The more time passes, the more it feels like something is restricting the ebb.

The opposite is however happening - higher spring tidal flow on top of record levels seems to be resulting in ever lower clearance.

Agree with what you say Dom. I looked just now, with 2½ hours to go to LW it's reading very slightly over 6' will try to remember to look later at LW, but I would guess about 6'3". Will also try to remember to look at 9:00 on my Birthday next Thursday which it's the next Spring. If it's 6'9" I will give it a go! 

[TheQ]

We've just had the wettest month ever recorded and the wettest 18 months ever recorded. It's not surprising the water levels are high, even though the majority of effects are often to do with air pressure and wind direction.

That being said there have been more  storms over this winter than in many years each bringing low air pressure and a raised north sea.

[Smoggy]

3 hours ago, PaulN said:

Will also try to remember to look at 9:00 on my Birthday next Thursday which it's the next Spring. If it's 6'9" I will give it a go! 

If aiming to get under a bridge and get back aim for a couple of days before full spring tides as the chances are return clearance will get better, push your luck at full springs and the next tide might not let you get through again and could be a couple of weeks away assuming no rain, it's called getting neaped.

[catcouk]

On 06/04/2024 at 18:46, hungryhippo said:

This year, we came over the Easter Bank Holiday weekend (we got our dates mixed up when booking!) Given the last time we happened to be on the Broads over the BH Easter Weekend, we feared the worst - limited mooring, pubs/restaurants fully booked, etc, etc.

Oh - and charging £4.00 to fill up with water at Ludham Bridge. Not happy! Especially when compared with the excellent facilities at Neatishead, where there is a lot less demand, I imagine. We've stopped mooring at Ranworth as well overnight, since the £10 blanket charge was brought in.

Firstly - shhhhh. The wife and I are both teachers. The Easter break is the only time we can afford to come and the quiet levels are great. The tourists should stick to the nice weather in the very expensive summer holidays...

Secondly - you are absolutely right. Salhouse Broad offers you free water and, for £2.50, somewhere lovely to chill out for an hour. Also, Ludham Bridge will be the first refill point fur so many hirers - it sets a bad impression really.

[dom]

Metered tap water costs around £1 per 1000 litres. I suspect there's probably not a hire boat on the Broads with a tank that size - most aren't even half that. Applying a typical retail markup to that £1, you'd be well under £2. £4 is just blatant profiteering. I'm surprised there aren't regulations to prevent this type of thing, as there are with electricity.

Between that, and £30+ pumpouts, people are going to be killing the market.

I noticed a comment on Facebook earlier from someone who'd taken up the 50% off deal from Ferry Marina. Someone else followed up to say they were apparently the only Ferry boat on hire this week.

[CambridgeCabby]

Whilst I agree that £4 for water top up seems excessive I can understand why the current owner feels the need to charge this much , firstly the cost of purchasing the equipment which was made necessary as the previous honesty box payments were far less than the actual water costs and the need to recoup monies lost by previous non payment.

This was told to me by the current owner/operator when he installed the meters.

So yes £4 is excessive but if the end users had been honest and paid the former £2 charge when they used the facilities the meters wouldn’t be in place and the cost would have been lower.

[Happy]

33 minutes ago, CambridgeCabby said:

Whilst I agree that £4 for water top up seems excessive I can understand why the current owner feels the need to charge this much , firstly the cost of purchasing the equipment which was made necessary as the previous honesty box payments were far less than the actual water costs and the need to recoup monies lost by previous non payment.

This was told to me by the current owner/operator when he installed the meters.

So yes £4 is excessive but if the end users had been honest and paid the former £2 charge when they used the facilities the meters wouldn’t be in place and the cost would have been lower.

I agree with everything you have said and to be honest if I had let myself run out of water £4 would not seem a lot to pay and no one is forced to use it are they. 

[catcouk]

All very reasonable points but still a shame to be so expensive. I hope they recover costs quickly and can reduce the fee. Equally, sad that the honesty box wasn't used.

[dom]

1 hour ago, Happy said:

£4 would not seem a lot to pay and no one is forced to use it are they. 

Not strictly true. There are people who rely upon access to a water supply year round, and facilities are limited during winter months. During extreme conditions, people do tend to get left with a very limited choice, if any.

I appreciate the capital investment issue - so let's say £4 represents a £2 surcharge for equipment. If a conservative 8 people use it:

8 x £2 = £16/day. £16 x 7 = £112/week. £112 x 28 weeks peak season = £3136 income.

£400 for a meter, a very generous £1k to install = £1400 expenditure.

£3136 - £1400 = £1736 profit, just in peak season, just in the first year and assuming only 8 users per day. I'd suggest a lot more people use it, others use it all year round, and the water used isn't anything like 1000 litres per user. Year two, the majority of the income will be profit, save for a small contingency for maintenance. We're also making profit of £1 per fill on the water itself.

£4 in and of itself isn't a lot of money - but it's the cumulative effect for both private and hire boaters which is the issue. £4 for water, £30 for a pumpout, £10-15 per night to moor. Add that lot up over a week or two and it can be a significant sum on top of the cost of an already costly holiday.

If you drive an Audi or BMW and hire a 40ft+ boat with 4 berths for 4 middle income adults, you probably won't care. But the hire industry relies upon the working class young family with kids, not only for immediate income, but also to introduce the next generation to hiring.

Unfortunately "only £10 to moor", "only a few quid for water" and "£30 for a pumpout isn't so bad for an unpleasant job" does seem to be creating a death by a thousand cuts for boating.

[Vaughan]

1 hour ago, dom said:

Unfortunately "only £10 to moor", "only a few quid for water" and "£30 for a pumpout isn't so bad for an unpleasant job" does seem to be creating a death by a thousand cuts for boating.

And from what I read on this forum from those who have been out on the water this past week, this holiday season has not got off to a good start!  Everyone is saying there is plenty of space at moorings ; some have suggested there are more private boats out than hire boats and someone even suggested that one yard had only one boat out for Easter.

And don't say Easter is early this year : the beginning of April is a normal time.

I wonder what reason there could be for this, other than cost?

 

[ChrisB]

19 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

 

I wonder what reason there could be for this, other than cost?

 

An unusually wet Winter, too much "Staycation" hype in the Press and on TV.

Cost at present is a real problem for alot of folk and if they are going to spend, then. the warmth, atmosphere, food and ambience of the Med carries a certain guarantee.

[Vaughan]

But isn't the Broads supposed to be a "staycation"?

I suggest the Med has no more or less appeal this year, than it has had for the last 15 years or more.

[OldBerkshireBoy]

46 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

 

I wonder what reason there could be for this, other than cost?

 

The cost of living you mean? Oh and the lousy weather so far perhaps.

[dom]

Beccles mooring fees are now £20 side on, £15 stern on.

Oulton Broad stern on with power £16, side on, up to £30.

The surcharge for power at Oulton is £4.50 - £5.00. I'd question the legality of this, as it's obviously selling electricity on at a vastly inflated rate.

It's not that difficult to come up with a route where a family on a larger boat could incur £112 in mooring fees in a single week.