|
|
News
Topic has 1390 replies.
  
|
|
Sort Posts:
|
|
|
|
 13/10/2007, 7:06 AM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps Pat or Celia could inform us if the EDP are going to the public meeting of the Broads Authority.There are lots of people living outside Norfolk who are really interested and read these forums and news and will find it impossible to attend a mid-week meeting.John
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
13/10/2007, 7:22 AM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I must admit I missed the poll on the Norfolk Broads.It is interesting to note that the majority felt that it was the Broads Authority who was at fault for the neglect and decay.The Broads Authority is made up of all the local councils,English Nature,RSPB,National Trust and various other organization.So which ones are doing the work and which ones are not?Who attends the meetings and who can't be bothered?Who has cleaned up the rivers,maintained the river banks and moorings etc? To say the Broads Authority is at fault is really putting the blame on each and every one of them.What the poll suggests to me is that the Quango as it is at the moment is not working.john
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
13/10/2007, 7:59 AM
|
Jamie Campbell
Joined on 08/10/2007
Posts 76
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you. I obviously missed it. I went back to find the results and it seems that two thirds of respondents felt the Broads Authority was responsible for the current level of 'degradation'.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
13/10/2007, 8:53 AM
|
Web Team - Pat
Joined on 31/10/2002
Posts 121
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect it would depend on the agenda. If it's a routine meeting, probably not. However, the latest developments suggest there may be increased interest in covering it. Up to the Newsdesk, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
13/10/2007, 9:31 AM
|
keith gerrard
 
Joined on 16/04/2004
Posts 11,198
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13/10/2007, 10:57 AM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I understand it Pat,it is a public meeting solely to discuss and reply to the report that was given to the press by the R.S.P.B and should dicuss questions put by members of the public.i have been to the open meetings at Acle and found them very informative.John
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
15/10/2007, 9:33 PM
|
Mardler
Joined on 15/11/2006
Posts 11
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John, the BA meeting on November 28th starts at 19.30 in The Marquee (yes, a tent in winter!) at Sprowston Manor Hotel.
The meeting is NOT solely about the RSPB report. It is a requirement of a QUANGO that (in lieu of being elected and accountable) it holds an annual meeting to inform the public of progress in the preceeding year and expected progress for the following year. If you were at Acle last year you would have observed that procedure. You would also have observed:-
1. A time wasting and expensive movie.
2. Many frustrated navigators.
3. Jamie Campbell asking searching questions about dredging.
4. Mr. Campbell receiving a quite unfortunate response from the then Broads Forum Chairman (and now Broads Authority member) and receiving the reply he deserved.
5. The ovation given to Mike Evans' passionate plea for the Authority to wake up, listen, consult properly and be reasonable, especially over the Broads Bill.
This year's meeting should be interesting; some, or all, of the Bill's petitioners will be there.
It is notable that the Broads Authority does not publicise the meeting on its website's homepage but buries it so far that you have to know about it to find it.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
15/10/2007, 9:39 PM
|
JennyMorgan
Joined on 08/10/2007
Posts 54
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The highlight of last year's BA public meeting was the excellent presentation by the the then chairman of the Broads Forum, showing that, in my opinion, the whole damn thing is an ineffective talking shop for suitably chosen 'yes men'. The make up of some BA committees is surely to be questioned.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
15/10/2007, 11:54 PM
|
nemesis
Joined on 15/10/2007
Posts 3
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you'll find the meeting is the annual meeting that is called every year by the BA, whereby us masses can put our questions to them (as long as they are suitably vetted before hand).
The meeting was originally planned for October until the BA moved it to Nov with less than 14 days notice, in either case the date of the meetings was set before the RSPB report came out.
I hope that as many as possible attend, it might make for an interesting evening.
The BA have been made to look poor in a poll (2 thirds think a bad job done by the BA)
The RSPB are not impressed with the BA
combine that with the concerns over wakeboarding and one could say the camp is not too rosy at the mo'
But no, as far as I am aware the meeting is the std annual event run by the BA where by the plebeians can ask the Ceasars questions and hark to the wise words of the senate
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
16/10/2007, 6:41 AM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I think that this coming week will be an example of why the Broads should be saved.From what I can gather from the various boating brochures,I don't think that there is hardly a boat not been hired out.This also applies to all of the letting properties in Norfolk.Thousands of people from all over the country will be coming to Norfolk for their holiday.it is not only motor cruisers that use the Broads,you have got the yachtsman,dinghy sailors,fishermen etc.ect.Is anyone telling me that there will be no twitchers in Norfolk next week because of the boats,I don't think so.John
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
16/10/2007, 10:46 AM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re Mardler.No I am sorry could not get last year.I was on holiday the week before the meeting and could not do both.It is a long journey to make ,250miles in a night,and if the meeting is as boring as it would appear last year it is just a waste of time and petrol.Obviously you,Jenny and others are far more clued up on the goings on than I am,but there are people like me that have been coming on the Broads for years [48] and we do take a genuine interest as to what is going on.John
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
16/10/2007, 9:28 PM
|
JennyMorgan
Joined on 08/10/2007
Posts 54
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have read the RSPB’s document titled ‘A Greener Future for the Broads’ with more than a hint of concern.
It is only fair that the RSPB has a voice, or voices, within the Broads Authority. Unfortunately the RSPB has seen fit to act, in my opinion, outside of its remit. In doing so I firmly believe that the RSPB has severely damaged the tenuous relationship that exists between the navigation and conservation fraternities. Unfortunately the RSPB has created a regrettable air of distrust.
I agree with the RSPB that a far more effective effort should have been made to tackle very many decades of damage and neglect. Wouldn’t it have been good if the output of those behind their comfy desks had been matched by the output of those behind their spades and shovels. Perhaps then the problems that have long been recognised would now be behind us.
The RSPB has shown a lamentable lack of knowledge in its report. Go to page 13 of the report, under the heading ’Debating point: do we waste money on dredging Broadland Rivers?’ The RSPB states that traditional Broadland wherries were able to carry tons of materials along shallow, undredged rivers. This is completely wrong, totally wrong. The rivers had to be dredged, canals, dykes and cuts were created. They had to be, the wherries, when laden, needed at least six feet of water at low water. Coincidently the navigation lobby is also asking for six feet of navigable water. The wherry created the Broads.
Go to page 11 where it is suggested that one major river is left undredged. There is no surer way of alienating conservation and boating interests than by this suggestion. It can not happen without a major change to legislation, not least the Broads Bill now fumbling through Parliament. So why have we not seen the RSPB petitioning the Broads Bill? Perhaps there is a realisation that the proposal is untenable?
Page 14 carries the interesting suggestion that there be a footbridge over the Yare at Whitlingham. I really can not believe the sheer stupidity of this suggestion! The ’greenest’ form of boating is that that takes place under a sail, and a bridge is directly counter to that. The idea of a ferry might have been more acceptable.
Page 12 brings the subject of the Sandford Principle to the fore. There are few other topics more guaranteed to create division between those who boat and those who don’t. It must not be allowed to enter the statute books. Yes, like many Broadlanders I would like to see the area designated as a National Park, but Sandford is too great a price to pay. The RSPB’s report adds considerable weight to the very realistic fears of Sandford‘s opponents.
Tell us, why has the RSPB not actively opposed the Broads Bill? If the RSPB really wants Sandford then now is the time to fight for it. Words, rather than action, is the easy option. It might look good in their report, but the suggestion is shallow if not backed by practical action, such as petitioning the Bill. What credence can we put to the report if the RSPB is not actually fighting for its stated beliefs?
Page 7 highlights the water skiing issue. Fine, it makes good reading, but the reality is that we have the Broads Bill which will legalise the activity on the Broads. So why then is the RSPB not actively petitioning the Broads Bill?
The RSPB’s report is, in part, seriously flawed. In my honest opinion it is a great deal of hot air not backed by practical actions. The Broads Bill is a golden opportunity to right many wrongs within Broadland. Yet we have the RSPB intent on widening the voids, an RSPB that many would suggest has shot itself in the foot, an RSPB that is full of suggestions, and an RSPB that is not seeking the compromises necessary to achieve a reasonable relationship with the boating community.
If the RSPB is really intent on seeing an end to water skiing then now is the time to act. This comment applies to much of the Broads Bill. Talking is fine, but doing is even finer. Working with the ‘boating fraternity’, rather than against it, is the way forward. So far all the RSPB has done is to open a vast void.
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
17/10/2007, 10:10 AM
|
nevermind
Joined on 28/05/2007
Posts 1,705
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Broads need a new vision. One that includes rapid flooding, one that prevents flooding.
By introducing new cuts and mooring, housebuilding could be fazed out and replaced with houseboat building and placing along those cuts, a new thriving comunity which can be supportive of the water quality and wildlife in the Broads.
Big decisions have to be made soon, because flooding is a probl;ems and its becoming more frequent with rising sea levels. We might have to bite the bullet of a Yare lock system, but it has to be at the river mouth. Ano0ther close look and money has to be spent on Happisburgh, as well as Horsey and hemsby gaps, then we might be able to buy time another 150 years perhaps.
Flooding of the Broads is inevitable though and we ought to ptrepare for it. Dredging can only be detrimental to the Broads as they are. It has to be carried out during the cold winter month, in cold waters, as to not disturb the lethal legacy within the silt too much. During the 50's 60's and seventies, some approx. 40 tons of methyl mercury was dumped by May and Baker into the Broads via Witlinghams sewage works and it has worked itself around the Broads.
The specific isotopes have even been found in front of North Norways coastline, due to the North seas swirling currents and the nature of the Yare being tidal.
Most of the bends have higher concentrations but it changes from year to year depending on currents and time of year, according to a study of Imperial college London in the seventies and eighties.
Silt has to be dumped in lined dumps, there might be some remedial treatments possible, but it is hazardous waste nevertheless.
Fishing along the Yare comers with a warning for that reason and dredging, as much as I agree with it, should be carried out by specialists, not the usual one man outfits employed by the BA, it needs some serious money and ALL those who enjoy the Broads and use it to run their business, rich charities and tourists alike should pay a nominal sum, this will take at least a ten year roling programm, not just with one but with two or three dredgers.
I agree with jenny, the lack of RSPB nous when it comes to navigational requirements is schocking, that they have asked for a closure of certain stretches of the Broads to boating is manifest to that.
It should be an interesting meeting, because to keep it same as it ever was is not an option. The RSPB should allocate some of their vast sums to the riverbeds, not to buy up more land and ssets which eventually will be flooded anyway, remedial work like dredging has to carried by all, not just the Government, but thats purely my personal opinion. nevermind
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
17/10/2007, 10:51 AM
|
keith gerrard
Joined on 16/04/2004
Posts 11,198
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks again for your well studied posts.
Dredging has to be undertaken if only to allow sufficient drainage for the inevitable flooding from rainwater as the water table rises.
Sea level rise and the inevitable flooding from that is another factor entirely.
The RSPB would seem to be completely ignorant of these facts.
Nothing they suggest is anything other than a complete waste of money and effort and flies in the face of the obvious.
Any attempt to undertake their silly ideas would cost peoples lives from flooding.
Proper large investment must be found for the future of the Broads and it will have to include commercial interest and developments.
Dream on keithgerrard@gerrard24.freeserve.co.uk
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
17/10/2007, 3:20 PM
|
john
Joined on 07/08/2007
Posts 1,218
|
Re: R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would endorse what Keith has said.There has been some really well thought out postings.I was rather hoping by now someone whose main interest is bird watching would join in the discussion.Seems they have all migrated.John
|
|
|
|
|
Report
|
|
|
|
|
EDP24 Forums » EDP24 General » News » R.S.P.B.Broads report.
|
|
|
|