The Broads National Park? Time to decide!

[BroadScot]

Frank!

 

You want my job here? lol Well said sir

 

 

Iain.

[JennyMorgan]

 

What will be, will be and that will be the end of it.

 

Geoff and Wendy, it needn't be, and if it is we shall all be the poorer for it, of that I'm sure. Paladine, especially, has presented the case for the prosecution so to speak, it is hard to argue with his very sound input, not that that is dissuading one tenacious gentleman! However and whatever, what threatens to be musn't be, and especially not be the end of it, for the sake of the Broads.

[littlesprite]

I guess for this particular thread I will be one of the "BA bashers" though I find it unfair as on the whole I think they are doing a good job. I don't trust them on this particular point because they have made it clear in the past that full national Park status is their goal.

My concerns would be greatly diminished if the Executive where more evenly split between the 3 area's of conservation, public enjoyment (tourism) and boating, as most members come from the background of environment/conservation I feel justified in my suspicions.  

[JawsOrca]

I can see what Geoff means, if you just scroll back at this there's lots of regulations being quoted back and forth which can look like a bit negative but totally agree that this is how discussions happen and there are lots of very well informed people here hence we come to get our broads news!

 

As we currently don't visit the broads that frequently I don't quite understand this discussion.. Perhaps someone could help explain what's happening (treat me like I'm blond!).. here's what I understand:

 

The broadland area is governed by the BA which are a independent organisation whos job is to promote and protect, the broads in general, tourism and the navigational rights. The broads have their own unique law which provides the right to navigate (which is nice ) I guess the BA aren't popular and I understand sometimes they mess up (as we all do!). The BA for some reason (perhaps to increase investment) have decided to rebrand to the "broads national park" which is part of the "National Park" group. But they have been part of the "National Park" group for sometime? The BA agreed (For some reason?) not to become fully park of the national park group?! for now? Several people are worried if the broads did become a full member of the national parks group then the Sandford principle may come into force which would remove/restrict our right to navigate the broads and rivers?? Have I got it?!

 

If I've got it?! surely at present we are ok because the BA have said we won't become part of the National park group.. i.e still managed by the BA (and the laws)? and surely the broads main income and interaction is from the boaters so removing that would be suicide for the area and surely no one in their right mind would do this? which is why the BA said no? 

 

(If anyone tries to restrict me navigating the broads I'll be one at the front of any protest movement).

[JennyMorgan]

Alan, I'm reasonably sure that there is no way that will we be banned from the main navigation channels but I can see us barred from waters outside those channels, as happened at Horsey Mere for example. Part of the joy of boating is the ability to roam around the margins of a broad for example. Others of us enjoy taking our boats up minor rivers, to Geldeston for example, might that beat risk? The other risk is that waters might be allowed to silt up as a means of excluding boats, and saving on dredging costs, the excuse being that it is in the interests of conservation.

[JennyMorgan]

Add to the above:

All guess work but I was once told by the BA CEO that boaters and anglers would eventually have to accept the loss of some waters.

[JawsOrca]

Ok thanks Peter.. That's certainly very disappointing. I hope we have a decent way to fight such decisions.  

[GeoffandWendy]

I can fully understand the concerns of members, as to what is going on regarding the Broads becoming a full National Park and the effect it could have for boating and the livelihoods of residents of the area. I am as much concerned as everyone is, about this issue. There seems to be that much legal jargon involved with all this, I find it all a bit mind boggling (to fully understand). I respect all your views and apologise if some of you took my post to be negative.

I am very passionate about protecting wildlife as much as I am passionate of protecting the Broads for recreational and pleasure purposes, the very reason I stated that both could live in harmony with each other. The powers that be (the various organisations involved) don't always agree with each other, which raises concerns for the general public to have there say over such matters. But are the general public listened to in such matters? Protecting wildlife and the environment is a very delicate issue in this day and age, but to restrict recreation and pleasure, to protect it, should not take second place. Without it, the Broads would not survive.

[Paladin]

I agree completely with Paladin and Lucky on this. Personally, I found reading about Paladin's change of heart on the issue more chilling than anything I have heard for quite a long time. Paladin, if you are able to share more details I for one would be most interested.

Spider, it is not something I want to go public with at the moment. I've sent you a pm.

[Guest]

Spider, it is not something I want to go public with at the moment. I've sent you a pm.

 

Thank you, Paladin. I will read it properly tomorrow. Too well wined and dined at present

[BroadAmbition]

I'd like to see that PM if you would be so kind

 

 

Griff

[Wussername]

Don't you just love it when the flow of the thread, the disruption of the very core of a discussion, which is what forums are all about, is disrupted, by " I will pm you"

When I was a teenager my mother had the Women's Own. The last page was always devoted to the agony aunt. From the contributers, and indeed the agony aunt herself I learnt many things. Some, very informative to a 13 year old. I became quite

knowledgeable.

Until, at the very end she would write:

Dear worried from Birmingham. Please contact me and if you wish I will reply in a plain brown envelope. WHAT THE.....WAS THAT ALL ABOUT??

I did learn a little more when my daughter subscribed to Cosmopolitan.

Old Wussername

PS in conclusion, I am mindful that some things are better left out of the public domain. For the time being anyway.

[Paladin]

My apologies, Wussername, if I have disrupted the flow of the thread. I was asked a direct question, which I felt would be impolite to ignore. By mentioning the pm, everyone reading could see that I had responded and that I wasn't totally without social graces. I have very good reasons for not wishing to make the content of the pm public at this state, as the subject of the content is not yet resolved, so I think I will simply withdraw from this discussion rather than cause any further disruption.

 

Thank you.

[Gracie]

PM's, emails and texts are the brown envelopes of the modern day I'm afraid. Alan (Jaws) post sums it up for me, Like Alan I am only an ocasional visitor (for now) but love the Broads with a passion. Also like Jaws I have been confused at times but I have also learned so much more, it would be a shame if someone with such knowledge as Paladin was to withdraw from this thread

 

I will not post on this topic anymore, just carry on quietly reading it, I may be a bit of an airhead but I do understand the passion you lot have for the beautiful place that is the Broads and with the knowledge and passion of some of the posters on here, long may our Broads as we know it continue

 

Grace

[JennyMorgan]

I hope that Paladin won't now totally withdraw from the debate! There is no question that the forums are watched by the BA so, on occasions, suitable prudence is obviously prudent. At this point in the debate there is nothing to be gained by revealing all one's cards. 

[Maxwellian]

I am with you on this one Peter and hope that Palidin continues to contribute. I love visiting the Broads and learn so much more about them and the community within from these discussions. Facts are facts and opinions are opinions, all contributions are worth while if we keep them as such and avoid taking things personally. We can only be insulted by something if we let ourselves be insulted, and I am very impressed with the way enthusiastic and committed people are putting their points forward in a mostly clear and interesting way. Please keep it up.

[Guest]

......Facts are facts and opinions are opinions, all contributions are worth while if we keep them as such and avoid taking things personally.......

 

Yes indeed, the ultimate prize for a genuinely open forum.

 

Balanced debate without personal attacks, and no call for moderation or stealthily deleted posts.

 

The difficult trick is to retain a balance of posters with differing opinions, and not becoming overly influenced by one side, like most national newspapers' political allegiances.

 

The whole perspective then becomes distorted and gives (intentionally)  misleading impressions to the readership.

[BroadScot]

As I said earlier, I live a long way from the Broads (Eric/Riyadhcrew) a hellova lot longer! I am sure he like me is reading this thread with interest and some!                                              

 

Paladin, please don't disappear into thin air on this thread, your input as well as all the other scribes who know the Broads better then any of us ever will, so keep posting on it, thank you.

 

Iain.

[Guest]

Don't you just love it when the flow of the thread, the disruption of the very core of a discussion, which is what forums are all about, is disrupted, by " I will pm you"

 

 

I simply asked Paladin if he was able to expand on his post (I used the word "able" deliberately). He did not feel able to do so publicly, but did me the courtesy of replying by pm and for that I am grateful. To criticise him for being polite is out of order.

[Wussername]

Spider.

It was not a criticism and neither was it meant to be. It was purely a light hearted comment using the Women's Own as I hoped an amusing example.

If you note I did state that I was mindful of the need not to publish some matters in the public domain. Your request, Paladines reply, was in my opinion correct.

[JennyMorgan]

Whilst Old Wuss was reading Womans Own others of us read Light Craft, or Health & Efficiency!

[MauriceMynah]

H&E taught me everything I know!

[JennyMorgan]

H&E taught me everything I know!

Surprise, surprise, it's still being published! 

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.pdfmagaz.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/12/he-naturist-january-2013/HE-Naturist-January-2013.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.pdfmagaz.in/01124122-he-naturist-january-2013/&h=262&w=192&tbnid=KbFofZ_BeT-mMM:&zoom=1&tbnh=186&tbnw=136&usg=__1tloy9JrxGFGU9rsS0RbYCwM4CI=&docid=Cd4kRHUngkjb9M&itg=1&ved=0CJABEMo3&ei=cpHWVIy1H-vW7QaB7ICoDg

[MauriceMynah]

That's good, I've still got a lot to learn.

[LondonRascal]

So here is the new branding logo.

 

It is the same, and features both the old and new branding - so it is a National Park and Britain's Magical Waterland.

 

All rathering confusing...