Jump to content

Breydon A New Era


Recommended Posts

I thought this was perhaps the more appropriate forum to discuss this one.

As I understand it the BA are to take over from Marina Keys through to Goodchild from the 1st June. The BA have ordered a new upgraded design of launch more suited to all year round patrolling on Breydon and with a bigger engine to cope better with the tides. The plan is to patrol all year rather than just the tourist season.

Any thoughts on how this is going to devlop?

Currently the BA have the powers to advise and turn back boats when the conditions are rough, but can not shut Breydon becasue it is under the rules and regs of GYPA. In practice this seems to mean that hireboats do get turned back, but private boaters can heed the advice or make their own decision based upon their experience and design of boat. From the 1st June will the BA have the powers under the recent act to close Breydon to all boats in adverse conditions? How will it affect boat traffic into and out of Goodchild and the lower Bure that perhaps didn't need a toll as they didn't previousely enter the BA area? I understand that a few boat owners in the region have been sent letters regarding BSS, third party insurance and tolls etc.

Finally will the status quo remain regarding speed limits or will we evetually see one applied? I understand the BA stated aim at the moment is to allow boaters to continue to test their engines, as long as regard to safety of other boaters is maintained, but could the odd few end up spoiling it for everyone, or could a limit never be applied anyway. interesting that the new launch will have a bigger engine, don't suppose it will catch some of the big boys though :naughty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good post but a little too much 'hearsay' from another place in it. Goodchilds will not be restricted at all and neither will anyone else in a privately owned craft. The navigation will remain under COLREGS and under the auspicies of GYPA for all of their directed traffic, however, as you have correctly mentioned BA will be taking over the safety and therefore navigational responsibility for all other traffic that GYPA do not have responsibility for (Slight ammendment to the original plan I understand) IF final approval is granted and the date becomes set in stone - 1st June was proposed but has not been accepted by all parties I understand.

Unless you have a different official documentation..... in which case I would be grateful to receive it..., however, under the documentation forwarded, taking this waterway under the 'Norwich Navigation' and controlling within the 1988 act is not fully rubber stamped as the minutes of the October meeting of the Nav Committee were not wholly accepted by either GYPA or Goodchilds Marine.

To that end, what has not yet been settled is also how much of the Toll account will be given back to the GYPA commissioners as a the final annual cost of maintenance from which that percentage is determined has not been calculated, nor what ammendments will be required in order to take this peice of water on where the Broads have responsibility but still do so with COLREGS in force as it remains a commercial waterway. Therefore one of the main questions is that of annulling COLREGS and taking it under the Broads Navigational act, this is not as easy as has been speculated and vessels crossing Breydon will still have to maintain these rules rather than the rules of the Broads Authority Bye Laws.

These are the most recent details issued regarding the 'state of play'


Also just to get into the nitty gritty, here are the minutes of the 09 bill to which section 35 refers

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... cba602.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ba won,t be doing the nav markers...... (1) Substitute for paragraph 1(3) the words—

“1(3) Subject to sub-paragraph (4) below, the Authority shall provide

and maintain buoys, beacons and such other aids to navigation as

it thinks necessary within the Norwich navigation and the

Lower Bure.â€.

(2) Substitute for paragraph 1(4) the words—

“1(4) The Authority shall not provide, alter, discontinue the use of or

remove any buoy, beacon or other aid to navigation for the

purposes of the Norwich navigation and the Lower Bure without

the written consent of Trinity House

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Norwich is a port as decreed by

Parliament in 1827 and before that by King James not even the BA can impede passage

to Norwich unless they get in touch with King James and ask his permission.

So if that includes crossing Brayden then they don't have a hope in H**l

I'm sure i will be corrected if i am wrong.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand about Norwich being a port, but I thought under the new BA act the BA could issue special directions to close parts of the navigation on the grounds of safety?

The recent oil spill excercise that took place near Postwick closed the Yare with notice for a period of time.

http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/news ... ccess.html

In addition is there not another route into Norwich via the Cut if Breydon was closed on the grounds of safety?

The 1st June takeover date came from a reliable source, and not from another forum. I don't have any documentation and I won't name the source, so I guess time will tell and I don't mind being proved wrong. Will be interesting to see how things pan out though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be wrong but I do not think the BA would be able to close Breydon.

Not sure whether it is even classed as a river as I was under the impression it was deemed an estuary.

Whichever, it is still an official route from the open sea and as such would be denying passage, which as far as I am aware is illegal.

Advice to unsuitable boats should still be heeded on safety grounds and it may be that hire yards make it a condition of hire to comply with this advice but for privateers it will remain their call and for Sea capable boats Breydon at its worst will never be more than a little bumpy.

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure I know where the 1 June date came from as this was the original date put forward to the Nav Committee as preferential by those at Dragonslayer House I believe. The cannot 'close' breydon' as there are boats which are capable of transiting in any weather conditions, and also the GYPA transits are outside the BA juridiction and will remain so. They have already covered this as 'toll paying and non-toll paying' - Goodchild marine for instance wil not have to put toll plaques on any craft they are testing or transiting - nor BA trade plates. They recently closed a stretch of the river using completely different legislation http://eastcoastboating.co.uk/wordpress/?p=1709 however this was done as a navigational stoppage and done so under the statute of notification laid down within the Bill, ie NtM produced http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/boating/navigating/bulletin-board-for-mariners/notice-02-2012.htmland necessary period of consultation allowed as well as maintenance for emergency access. Interestingly it was discussed after the event and I believe that there were a number of hire craft who subsequently made transits during the exercise taking place!

BA will however, once the final date is agreed, take Breydon under their navigational control, but will not have control over transiting traffic leaving or entering the system through GYPA, however, they may and would be within their right, as you say, introduce a mandatory speed limit and enforce it as they see fit once the navigational responsibility is handed over. Far more worrying.

One thing that you may not be aware of is the fact that Breydon Water is specifically listed as an open water tidal estuary under the EU transit agreement - this is why COLREGS would have to be maintained over and above any existing bye laws of the 2009 act.

A few descrepencies, and I don't think the introduction of a larger vessel is that daft at all, after all, it is the hirers who often end up in trouble on Breydon, either up on the mud or just way out of the channel.

Personally, I feel the BA would be better off buying a hovercraft for that stretch!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been following this post, as I am trying to find the bye law which states that river traffic has priority over road traffic and that both Haven and Breydon Bridge must lift for vessels transiting the port. If any one knows of that by law I would be most grateful for any information.

On the topic of the collision regulations I would offer the following.


These rules apply to all vessels upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels.

It goes on to mention that local bye laws may apply but must not vary greatly from the rules.

Now, in my veiw, the above applies to the majority of the No0rfolk Broads, including Breydon and beyond. The BA cannont deviate too far from the Coll Regs.

When I am in the rivers I hoist a black Cylinder, the WAFFI's mostly have no idea what it means but I am satisfying the collision regulations .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breydon water would not be a half the problem if the bridges on Yarmouth side where made higher, one of which serves no purpose. the Acle new road bridge was built far to low and much lower than a former bridge which allowed small ships safe passage even to Wroxham.Great Yarmouth has had many chances always wrongly looking to the Sea Front as folk like the Richardsons have proved the rivers have a potential lets hope B A make full use of their chance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said interesting times ahead. I've still to be convinced that the BA won't or don't have the power to close that part of the navigation on the grounds of safety. They do and can on the rest of the Yare, as well as the rest of the network. To be honest I see Breydon as a hot potato that the GYPA were only to glad to pass across to the BA without wanting to be seen to be too keen. ;) Although Norwich is a port, the main focus for the GYPA has for some time been south of Haven bridge. Anything above was just a financial and maintenance headache, and then along came the BA looking to expand it's patch. I think the GYPA might be doing a little dance after the 1st June :party2:

I know it's been discussed many times before, but if you come into the port from the sea, the first sign you see is a 7 knot speed restriction. The next ones you see are the 5mph ones on the Bure, Waveney or Yare, so I believe there is already technically a speed limit on Breydon. Going the other way you see 5mph signs until you enter the port and see 7 knot signs. Why would the GYPA be bothered to patrol or police it for little gain. Could that be about to change? I honestly believe that the behaviour of the faster boats on Breydon will have a lot of sway in this. Providing no one rocks the boat (literally) the BA will probably let sleeping dogs lie, but a few ignorant people refusing to slow down for slower boats could spoil it for everyone. Don't forget one of the BAs remits is promoting tourism. Give a few hire boaters a high speed scare on Breydon and the BA are likely to try and protect them, through speed limits if required.

Perhaps more importantly of all, how much is this all going to add to the overall cost of the tolls? All year round patrol, new launch, dredging, desparately needed new markers. I personally think the "motorway style" new signage is a bit over the top though. A height guage at the top end of Breydon makes sense though. I've always been surprised that The Berney Arms and The Fishermans Rest haven't installed some. Might presuade a few more people to stop and wait for the clearence in the pub, rather than go across just to find the clearence is too tight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly won't be long before the rumblings based on H&S are murmured from Miss Wakelin.

Fairly sure that the outcome of previous speed limit discussions were that the 6 Knots is the port speed limit, the 5mph signs refer to the rivers as they are actually placed on the rivers not Breydon. Once past the port limits the 6 knot limit no longer applys, think that is somewhere around Breydon Bridge and you don't then get a speed sign until you have crossed Breydon.

It is very concerning that they now have control especially as the BA are not known for being sensible, or for that matter having any knowledge of what they are meddling with.

Illuminated boards to warn of fog? is that so that you can see them when it is foggy?

Height gauges at Berney Arms so that you can see what clearance there will be at the other end (not sure how they are going to add or subtract the hours water that it takes to get across). Did they have to bring consultants in for that little pearl or was it something they just couldn't afford before they took on the extra costs of Breydon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have a feeling the answer to that, after a feasibility study costing more than the markers would, would be you can see the markers at 6mph as long as it is not foggy and you can see if it is foggy by the illuminated signs. On the grounds of safety, 6mph.

Not helpful I know but I am under no illusion that the BA will listen to anybody that they have not paid and that they will do whatever they feel like as there is no one to stop them.

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Sponsors

    Norfolk Broads Network is run by volunteers - You can help us run it by making a donation

  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.