Legal challenge seeks to quash Broads National Park name change

[JennyMorgan]

Paul, that is the very one. Do know that it cost the RSPB a goodly number of Broads based members. The suggestion that you have aluded to, that the sea should be allowed/encouraged to break through to Potter was an ill-considered and unpopular suggestion! Potter by the Sea!!

[Paul]

following on from that JM, far be it from me to suggest that the Authority has to raid tolls for an unrealistically large portion of it's over heads as conservation and recreation generate little or no revenue. Now that might be seen as a disadvantage by most boaters, but in reality is their trump card. A future vision of Broadland like that put forward by the RSPB, with much reduced boating activity and conservation projects on every muddy puddle that they can find would be financially unsustainable.

[Paul]

I do recall, during my "debate" with that afforementioned suited wonder, and his quizzing me as to why I was so hostile to the Sandford Principle being enacted on the broads he gave me some figures about how many times it had been invoked in other national parks. I forget the actual figures but it was along the lines of twice in all the years of the Peak District, never in the Brecon Beacons, Pembrokeshire, here, there and somewhere else and eight times or something like in the Lake District.

 

I asked that if it was so rarley needed why bother with it at all. He shut up and moved on to somebody else.

[JennyMorgan]

Paul, I think that that is already happening, and not just for boaters. Not so long ago the Authority wanted the Potter Bungalows removed, now they are seeking to have them protected.

[Timbo]

'Promote' the Broads? I took the word the word 'promote' in the legislation governing the Broads Authority to mean 'extend the navigation' not 'waste money on re-branding or marketing campaigns'. Could my english be so poor that I have misunderstood...innit tho m8? 

[C.Ricko]

promote the broads? one way would be to reduce the hire craft toll, this way the area would appeal to more people as holiday costs would be comparable to other areas of the UK. 

 

who got my soap box out

[MauriceMynah]

Clive for PM

[Soundings]

'Promote' the Broads? I took the word the word 'promote' in the legislation governing the Broads Authority to mean 'extend the navigation' not 'waste money on re-branding or marketing campaigns'. Could my english be so poor that I have misunderstood...innit tho m8? 

 

I am a boater but the Broads and the promotion thereof is not just about navigation and extending it.  In any event any improvement to the Broads (no matter in which way) requires money. That has to be raised somehow - that is unless you want your toll account to be raided even more with obvious consequences.

 

The Broads are for a cross section of the public and no one part should be more important than the other. Share....please!

[JennyMorgan]

As the Broads is for everyone then everyone should pay towards it, rather than depending on the boating fraternity for finance.

[Baitrunner]

How do we charge the twitchers?

£5 for a warbler, £10 for a great tit?

Where do I pay my £20?

Sorry!!

[Paul]

 

£10 for a great tit?

 

thats the going rate

 

[JennyMorgan]

Paul, don't they come in pairs?

 

Re finance, visitor tax? Increase the NP Grant? Whatever, the solution needs to be fair, at the moment it's not.

[Soundings]

As the Broads is for everyone then everyone should pay towards it, rather than depending on the boating fraternity for finance.

Agree 100% and that means usage/development has to be balanced, must not be skewed either way.

[smellyloo]

I won't get involved in the National Park debate as there are far two many complicated words and phrases for me to comprehend however ......

 

It seems to me that all this cuffuffle started when it became obligatory for all children to be educated to degree level.

 

To accommodate this many "new" degree courses were created mostly ending in "isms".

 

This led to armies of "qualified" graduates with "ism" degrees seeking employment and many found their way to careers in conservation and as planning gurus.

 

So surprise surprise (sorry Cilla) we have beurocratic edifices whose sole intention seems to be to create jobs for more "ism" graduates.

 

Would that we could go back to a time when people actually had useful jobs, then we could go about our lives not caring about what people called things and when the term park meant a place for people to enjoy and play.

[BroadScot]

Well said Smellyloo     

 

 

Iain.

[JennyMorgan]

We all have our views Paul and I respect but do not share yours. I really do not buy into these conspiracy theories. Maybe someone from the RSPB would like to speak up? They seem to get "slagged" off a lot but I never hear their side of the argument or any real specifics. Until I do I will stay where I am on this.

 

Incidentally, I have seen many instances where some boaters and anglers have displayed less that acceptable levels of conservation awareness, so the argument goes both ways. I still believe working together is the right thing to do. 

Soundings, the RSPB's vision for the Broads, in all its glory, is here:

http://www.brga.org.uk/files/Download/RSPB_Broadsvisionfinal.pdf

[smellyloo]

JM Thanks for posting that .... always good to see how some see the future.

[JennyMorgan]

JM Thanks for posting that .... always good to see how some see the future.

Some might say alarming!

[smellyloo]

I'm probably being naive but I always assumed that as the broadland rivers were traditionaly trading routes that navigation rights had to be maintained?

 

Even the rail companies have to acknowledge this with their swing bridges .... when they work that is.

 

I guess that's why the Sandford principle can't apply here.

[JennyMorgan]

Loo, got it in one.

[jillR]

i

[Soundings]

Soundings, the RSPB's vision for the Broads, in all its glory, is here:

http://www.brga.org.uk/files/Download/RSPB_Broadsvisionfinal.pdf

Thanks JM, I shall read with interest. I suspect there should be a balance stuck but whilst most on here will probably disagree, I do view boating as having too high a priority in terms of how the Broads is managed. Irrespective of what is was like in the 60s/70s I do believe it is hell out there in peak season.

[JennyMorgan]

Soundings, if you don't like hell afloat then come South! If you are South already, and think it hell, then don't even think of going North, unless you are going through Potter. 

 

The largest proportion of funding comes from boats. Basically all users should all get what they pay for, if you get my drift. 

 

Problem is that we are all part of the overcrowding. Who do we send home, everyone wearing white socks or sling-backs? Everyone except you and I plus a few good friends? Should boatyards target a different market?  

 

Re that last question, I rather suspect that we may not be a million miles apart on that one!

[Soundings]

That is my point JM, too much funding comes from boats, it sort of creates a monopoly. It needs to come from elsewhere as well and then the books and the management (of the Broads) can become more balanced.

 

I am no longer North. I tried South but that was pretty bad too. So, gave up the Broads and went elsewhere. I say gave up the Broads, which is not quite correct. I gave up cruising on the Broads but now sail above "that bridge" and thank the Lord for it

[JennyMorgan]

Have a read of this:

https://home.bt.com/news/uk-news/norfolk-and-suffolk-wetlands-rebranding-bid-faces-challenge-11363997515223

Cat amongst the pigeon time!