National Trust sparks fury by imposing charges for mooring small dinghies at Manor of Brancaster along waterway used for free by locals for centuries.

[Alan de Enfield]

The conservation charity has slapped a £60 fee on people wanting to chain up their vessel at the Manor of Brancaster. 

The Trust have owned the 2,000-acre wetland since the 1960s, which includes a harbour at Brancaster Staithe. 

The beauty spot on the Norfolk coast is considered one of the most peaceful and picturesque locations for sailors, who make use of a chain that has sat above the water mark since the 1990s.

But notices put up by the National Trust say anyone wishing to secure their dinghy to the chain must now register their vessel and enter a ballot for a place before paying £60.

 

Meanwhile, the Trust has also imposed a four-fold hike for mooring fees for larger vessels kept on buoys.

The charity says the decision was made to combat rising costs and the new measures are intended to make the running of the harbour safer and fairer.

 

More : National Trust sparks fury by imposing charges for mooring small dinghies at Manor of Brancaster along waterway used for free by locals for centuries (msn.com)

[rusty69]

I guess boats will be moving to Blakeney then, which last I looked is a free harbour.

[Alan de Enfield]

Every organisation is desperate for money and raising it from previously untapped sources - boating is a luxury (for most) and if you can afford to run a boat, you can afford a 'little bit more'.

 

What's another £1 a week here and there ?

[PeterScott]

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

... What's another £1 a week here and there ?

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds nought and six, result misery. Micawber

[David Mack]

The headline is somewhat misleading. As far as I can see, the locals can still use the waterway for free, as they have done for centuries. What they can no longer do is moor to private property without paying.

[MtB]

40 minutes ago, David Mack said:

The headline is somewhat misleading. As far as I can see, the locals can still use the waterway for free, as they have done for centuries. What they can no longer do is moor to private property without paying.

 

I was thinking similarly. This chain they all moor onto for free - it presumably grew out of nothing organically, and never needs any maintenance? 

 

Mind you if the NT are now going to charge for using it, I doubt the £60 a year is going to even cover the admin costs of running the scheme. How many boats are involved? 

[Tonka]

19 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

I was thinking similarly. This chain they all moor onto for free - it presumably grew out of nothing organically, and never needs any maintenance? 

 

Mind you if the NT are now going to charge for using it, I doubt the £60 a year is going to even cover the admin costs of running the scheme. How many boats are involved? 

So if the chain now breaks then the moorers can sue them for damage to their boats

[ditchcrawler]

IMO the NT is next to the C of E for hard nosed business 

[Hudds Lad]

19 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

IMO the NT is next to the C of E for hard nosed business 

Slightly less chance of going to hell if you cross them though  

[ditchcrawler]

1 minute ago, Hudds Lad said:

Slightly less chance of going to hell if you cross them though  

Nether will back down

[Mike Todd]

1 hour ago, ditchcrawler said:

Nether will back down

Why should you if you know you are in the right!

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, Mike Todd said:

Why should you if you know you are in the right!

Everybody always knows they are right.

Kurt Vonnegut had, I think, an asynchronistic infandibulum in one of his books, which was the one point in the galaxy where two entirely incompatible facts could be equally true. On this site, it's located in the political ghetto.

[magnetman]

7 hours ago, rusty69 said:

I guess boats will be moving to Blakeney then, which last I looked is a free harbour.

We used to go crabbing at Blakeney with aunt Ann holidays of 1977-1986. 

 

It was Good. 

 

 

Cley, Holkham, Cromer for the flea market and the other one I always forget the name of.

 

Norfolk enchants. 

 

Sheringham! 

 

Baconsthorpe castle! 

 

Holt. 

 

The Marl Pit. I loved the marl pit a hole in the ground used for fly tipping. Always some interesting old mowers in there.

[ditchcrawler]

12 minutes ago, magnetman said:

  

The Marl Pit. I loved the marl pit a hole in the ground used for fly tipping. Always some interesting old mowers in there.

Every village had one let alone small towns

[magnetman]

Yes. It was Hempstead by Holt.

 

Marl at one stage was presumably valuable. 

[rusty69]

40 minutes ago, magnetman said:

We used to go crabbing at Blakeney with aunt Ann holidays of 1977-1986. 

 

It was Good. 

 

 

Cley, Holkham, Cromer for the flea market and the other one I always forget the name of.

 

Norfolk enchants. 

 

Sheringham! 

 

Baconsthorpe castle! 

 

Holt. 

 

The Marl Pit. I loved the marl pit a hole in the ground used for fly tipping. Always some interesting old mowers in there.

Yes, lot of nice places around there.Apparently Einstein spent some time just outside cromer too. Dunno if he was there for the crabbing though. He did like boats though, and probably would have approved of this:

 

https://myelectricsparks.com/yamaha-introduces-worlds-first-hydrogen-powered-outboard-engine-miami-boat-show/

 

 

BTW The PLA is looking for a deputy harbour master. I heard you might be looking for a job, so have put your name forward.

Edited February 18 by rusty69

[john.k]

I d assume if you dont pay ,they would have some historically correct method  of inducement ,like a week in the pillory with ears nailed to the wood?

[Mike Todd]

19 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Everybody always knows they are right.

Kurt Vonnegut had, I think, an asynchronistic infandibulum in one of his books, which was the one point in the galaxy where two entirely incompatible facts could be equally true. On this site, it's located in the political ghetto.

Methinks you are confused: in the political ghetto two incompatible statements can be held incompatibly even though neither are true.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Mike Todd said:

Methinks you are confused: in the political ghetto two incompatible statements can be held incompatibly even though neither are true.

I think I understand that. I've not been there for a while, but it certainly rings... er... true.

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I think I understand that. I've not been there for a while, but it certainly rings... er... true.

Also outside the political section... 😉

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, IanD said:

Also outside the political section... 😉

Ah no, out here it's just normal internet rules.