The Broads National Park? Time to decide!

[JennyMorgan]

I totally agree, but you can not take anything for granted these days. We do not seem to have men and women of principle in control any more, rather they bend like reeds in the wind if expediency dictates it.

Problem is that we have an executive that is adroit at manipulating the meaning of both words and committees. The BA is suggesting that in being required to promote the enjoyment of Broads is key to calling the Broads a national park, even though it isn't one and both DEFRA & Parliament say it isn't. Just how many ways are there of saying 'no' yet Dr Packman ploughs on?

[Soundings]

Whilst Sandford may be unknown to most of the electorate, conservation is. It is also a good vote grabber.

Away from this interest group, if asked, most people would say conservation is far more important than boating. 

And I am inclined to agree with them. I love Broadland, I live here, but as I see more and more boats with less and less moorings combined with tv advertisements depicting the Broads as something of a Disney theme park, complete with funfares etc., I fear for the future, I really do. 

[Guest]

Whilst Sandford may be unknown to most of the electorate, conservation is. It is also a good vote grabber......

 

It's a very two-faced ambition for the electorate then....

 

Everyone seems to want the whole country paved in motorways, cheap fuel, and lower road tax.

 

As I said before, the weakness of democracy is that people can vote for what appeals to them personally, not always what is best for the populace as a whole.

[Guest]

And I am inclined to agree with them. I love Broadland, I live here, but as I see more and more boats with less and less moorings combined with tv advertisements depicting the Broads as something of a Disney theme park, complete with funfares etc., I fear for the future, I really do. 

 

 

I fear for the future of Broadland too, Broads forums have contained many posts where people want Potter bridge removed and I seem to remember calls for pontoon moorings at Ranworth too....

 

The ideal goal is a careful balance between navigation rights and conservation, and not by giving away too much to either single resource.

[Soundings]

I fear for the future of Broadland too, Broads forums have contained many posts where people want Potter bridge removed and I seem to remember calls for pontoon moorings at Ranworth too....

 

The ideal goal is a careful balance between navigation rights and conservation, and not by giving away too much to either single resource.

I agree....if only eh

[JennyMorgan]

As both an angler AND a boater I would not be happy to see any loss to the navigation area whatsoever. Beyond that I am entirely in favour of conservation of flora and fauna but I would extend conservation to include the Broads in the wider sense. We have to protect / conserve our culture, ethos and traditions just as we have to protect our reedbeds and spotted, lesser breasted whatsits. When we sailed in this year's Three Rivers Race, as dawn broke, with the mist on the water turning an ethereal pink, mauve and orange, we could hear the magical 'boom' of the bittern, several infact. That is the Broads, worth conserving.

 

For the record I am in favour of the Broads being a National Park, provided that in being one we don't loose the Broads as we know it. Unfortunately I do not trust the Authority one iota when it comes to that wider conservation. The conservation of the Broads for what it is is surely the holy grail that we should be seeking. By that I don't mean that I want time to stand still, just that the ethos and spirit of the Broads is maintained. Unfortunately I do not believe that the BA's executive really appreciates quite what the Broads actually is. In the meantime I not believe that we can take the risk in supporting Dr Packmans ambitions. All a question of trust.

[Soundings]

A

 

For the record I am in favour of the Broads being a National Park, provided that in being one we don't loose the Broads as we know it. Unfortunately I do not trust the Authority one iota when it comes to that wider conservation. The conservation of the Broads for what it is is surely the holy grail that we should be seeking. By that I don't mean that I want time to stand still, just that the ethos and spirit of the Broads is maintained. Unfortunately I do not believe that the BA's executive really appreciates quite what the Broads actually is. In the meantime I not believe that we can take the risk in supporting Dr Packmans ambitions. All a question of trust.

With you 100% there, Peter. BUT, it is a two edged sword - on one side we have the BA with, what some believe to be, their extreme conservationist agenda, whilst on the other we have businesses who just want to milk the area in the quest for profit (or greater profit). As Strowager says, there has to be a balance. Perhaps what we really need is a BA that enforces that balance.

[Guest]

With you 100% there, Peter. BUT, it is a two edged sword - on one side we have the BA with, what some believe to be, their extreme conservationist agenda, whilst on the other we have businesses who just want to milk the area in the quest for profit (or greater profit). As Strowager says, there has to be a balance. Perhaps what we really need is a BA that enforces that balance.

 

I've taken the liberty of highlighting a sentence in Sounding's post.

 

You're absolutely right with that statement, and it could be just as bad as the much feared Sandford, nibbling away at Navigation rights.

 

We are indeed between a rock and a hard place, and any wholesale replacement of the BA could be disastrous for Peter's "Culture, Ethos, and Traditions", that are the very reason why so many of us enjoy and support the Broads.

 

I'm still rather disappointed at how the NSBA strongly promoted the re-adjustment of the toll multiplier for the Hire Boat Federation. I thought their primary support was private owners/hirers and clubs.

[ChrisB]

The last three posts really sum up what most of us who love the Broads really want. That is an Authority that is seen to be impartial and can, if found necessary, impose balance should any single interest group be found to be out of step with the rest. Maybe full National Park status with powers to cap boat numbers, protect heritage, landscape and traditions is the sensible or only way forward. It would be the selection of the board members that would require the wisdom of Solomon.

[Guest]

...... It would be the selection of the board members that would require the wisdom of Solomon.

 

If only...

 

Power and control wielded by wise public-minded people with no personal or political deviation.

 

The perfect way to run organisations, businesses, or countries.

 

....and utterly impossible to achieve.

[JennyMorgan]

I am in no way suggesting a wholesale replacement of the Broads Authority. Who ever is in charge needs to be Broads orientated, to understand the Broads for what it is. For Broads sakes we need a change at the top but we must keep the Authority. It's not perfect but rather than changing the Broads to suit the executive's narrow vision we need to change the Authority to suit the Broads, to regain the trust of the 'little people'.

[Polly]

Public sector organisations should be set up in such a way that no one person can apparently set the agenda, OFSTED comes to mind in this context as a problem in this respect so concerns about the BA are not unique.

[JennyMorgan]

The Broads Authority is a rum set-up. The Broads Authority itself is allegedly lead by a committee of wise men whilst the Broads Authority that we see on the bank is managed by the executive. Unfortunately the committee is seen as being lead by the executive, in other words the tail is wagging the dog. The Broads needs an executive that is lead by the committee that is the actual Broads Authority. The executive appears to have forgotten that it is a public servant. The Authority is not there just to rubber-stamp the agenda of the executive, as has clearly happened in the past.

[Soundings]

We all agree - is that first do you think So, how is change brought about? And that is a question I bet has been asked 100s of times before.

[Soundings]

Should have asked - are not the BA reliant on businesses for funding? If so they do rather have a conflict of interest. Perhaps that is why they allow boat numbers to increase whilst reducing moorings and encouraging us to double up!

[marshman]

I do not agree that the BA are reducing moorings nor that they "allow" boat numbers to increase - the Broads are  quieter than they were in the 60/70's . Yes there are many more private boats but a large proportion of these are at best only used once a year or so, often in school holidays but bigger boats and the increasing trend to "moor" in the centre of vacant spaces thereby limiting the remaining available space, all add to peoples perceptions!!.

 

Wild moorings are fewer following the BESL flood alleviation changes and that is still going on - redundant piling along banks often provided convenient additional mooring but maintenance is expensive and landowners less inclined to foot the bill. But where there is real pressure on moorings, new wild moorings open up,( look down the Ant) and that will continue but more moorings do no alwayst depend on the BA, but on the consent of the landowner and there is the real issue. There has definitely been an increase in the " whats mine is mine" attitude of late and you have only to look at the Boundary Farm situation, to see this rear its head!!

 

I still find plenty of room for myself, except on the very busiest weekends and rarely when i mudweight am i disturbed. But five abreast at GY Yacht Station was definitely a different kettle of fish!!!!

[BroadScot]

 

 

I still find plenty of room for myself, except on the very busiest weekends and rarely when i mudweight am i disturbed. But five abreast at GY Yacht Station was definitely a different kettle of fish!!!!

I have only ever seen double mooring at GY Yacht Station in the 70's and 80's. Don't recall ever seeing five abreast!

 

Iain

[Soundings]

In the 70s the Broads were, imo, the worst place in the world unless you liked cruising in a crowd - just like the M25 only worse. They improved and are now getting worse again and the number of boats appears to be growing and certainly their average size is. Peak season is horrendous and I do not really care about how that sits with the 70s - that was then and now is now. Sorry, but I hate this perpetual comparison that goes back 30 odd years.

 

It is difficult to moor after about 3pm in the peak season and especially so if you want to moor outside or near an eatery. The most popular moorings and those with leccie are probably gone well before then. And no matter for what reason, I really do believe mooring locations  are decreasing.

 

I guess it is all about what people want from the Broads - an overcrowded Disney theme theme park or a natural environment where there is space and room  to move. Bring on the National Park I say, provided it supports a reasonable navigation regime (not that I personally navigate on the Broads anymore). One thing is for sure, the Broads are a finite resource.

[marshman]

i don't wish to disagree with Soundings again but how can you possibly all expect to moor outside an eatery?And yes the popular places do go quickly but to say the Broads are getting worse again, is merely your perception and revolves purely around the amount of space you see as available to youself!!

 

I keep a boat in one of the bigger marinas and you can count on one hand, or perhaps 2 at the most, the number of times the pretty average size car park is full. These times are almost always in the very peak period of the summer school holidays - but that in itself does not make the Broads overcrowded. Neither can the number of boats on the Ant on a Friday and Monday be a key barometer nor between Ant mouth or Wroxham!!

 

As i said i never have a problem mooring and thats because a) i never moor by a pub ( who sleeps in a pub car park? ) and I don't even bother looking for a mooring on Ranworth Staithe in the summer. But I can easily find room for a swinging mooring at Ranworth at any time!!!

 

And far from getting worse, I actually think the Broads are as good as they have been - by and large they attract like minded individuals as myself and there is no doubt that the water quality continues to improve. It clearly  depends on what parameter you choose to judge such a statement and by mine, there are not too many issues that a measure of flexibility in your perceptions, cannot adapt too!!

[Soundings]

A swinging mooring is not a mooring in my view it is an anchorage and does not suit all - especially those with pets or kids.

 

Anyway this has now gone well off topic. I have my views you have yours Marshman. I live here, I see it every day and up until last year we were sampling the rivers extensively. If this is the best it has ever been there is certainly room for further improvement  - but then I expect my expectations are different to yours

 

Bye the way, I never  said everybody should be able to tie up outside an eatery, but I expect many would like to do so. The huge problem is there are probably not enough facilities on the Broads and it is not easy to just moor down/up-steam and walk back.

 

Anyway - the Broads are not just about boats, although there are many who see it that way.

[JennyMorgan]

Marshman, I have been known to sleep in the pub car park. On one occasion even in the landlady's fishpond, but that was in my less responsible, formative years!

[Guest]

......Anyway - the Broads are not just about boats, although there are many who see it that way.

 

Another very pertinent comment from Sounding there.

 

"Conservation" is a dirty word on Broads forums for most of the members.

 

The preservation of every inch of Navigation rights is seen by them as paramount, overriding any other long term consideration.

 

I enjoy everything the Broads provides, boating, fishing, walking, cycling and even bird watching.

 

How many people are selfless enough to appreciate the wider view on this ?

[JennyMorgan]

Another very pertinent comment from Sounding there.

 

"Conservation" is a dirty word on Broads forums for most of the members.

 

The preservation of every inch of Navigation rights is seen by them as paramount, overriding any other long term consideration.

 

I enjoy everything the Broads provides, boating, fishing, walking, cycling and even bird watching.

 

How many people are selfless enough to appreciate the wider view on this ?

Every inch? Yes, because if we give an inch we might just loose a mile, or even miles. Above Potter Bridge for example, the idea has been mooted.

[littlesprite]

Conservation!

 

There will never be total agreement on such a controversial subject, most people will have different idea's or some hidden agenda.

Some think conservation is all about wild life, others about preserving a way of life, and yes, even boating, whether commercial or pleasure is part of the historic use of the broads.

The problems arise when it is felt that one area encroaches on another, should we change, restrict, stop any one thing to preserve another.

Since the world began evolution has changed the face of the planet and seen many species either evolve or die out, when does conservation become playing God.

I don't claim to know what is right or wrong, I do however believe that trying to please all parties is going to be impossible, the broads will continue to change over the years, we will have to live with it or spend our life fighting against the government, broads authority, environmental groups and each other.

[Guest]

Every inch? Yes, because if we give an inch we might just loose a mile, or even miles. Above Potter Bridge for example, the idea has been mooted.

 

"has been mooted".......

 

Interesting choice of word there Peter, "mooted".

 

I dare say many scare stories could be mooted, and  they get more believable the more they are bandied about, without any firm provable substance.

 

Given the two long established hire yards and HBSC and HWSC based up there, how likely is it that the BA would even try to ban navigation above the bridge ?

 

(Especially as the structure itself provides a natural restriction on any excessive traffic up there).

 

Is there any shred of documentary proof to substantiate this "mooting" , or is it based on someone  hearing something that someone overheard ?