Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

How about sharing your alternative plan with the rest of the members ? How do you know who among them "think like you" ? You have been asked a number of times by posters on here who identify as members of the L&B Trust to explain your ideas but you refuse to answer, only making vague allusions to hidden "goings on", and then attacking their credibility. It's called "playing the man and not the ball" and by doing so you are only diminishing any chance of getting support for your proposals.

 

I certainly would not provide this information. Whilst there might be an interest in how long someone has been a member - but how would knowing a person's membership number be of any benefit unless you had access to the members register - what would you do with this information.

 

Perhaps it’s a game of inverse ‘Top Trumps’ - “my membership no.’s lower than yours”?

 

I’m with @Miff; the membership numbering system (letter of surname plus a 3 digit number) allows assessment of how long standing a member is.

And therein lies my problem. If I join a society, I join as a member, as an equal of all others. While I respect the experience of others, I don’t accept that I’m less than others.

Unfortunately, some of the replies on here seem to suggest that as a newcomer who hasn’t lived the history, I’m less worthy of consideration than others. Or that a long standing member whose maybe been at arms length has less standing.

There is clearly - as with almost every society I’ve ever come across - an issue of membership engagement. If it’s true that there’s a problem with a leadership who are entrenched and acting in a closed way, it seems strange to be acting in ways that discourage members from engaging.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

100%

Add to that, those who like to give the impression that they represent the wider railway membership and/or have some authority from the railway and the usual childish 'I know something you don't' posts, then the supposed supporters on here are doing a pretty good job of driving potential members/volunteers away.

 

Aside from all the mudslinging, I think the fundamental problem here is that following the expiry of the ENPA planning permission, the L&B Board has asked members to vote for four alternative plans, all of which are unacceptable. They are clearly not prepared to back any attempt at extension in the Bratton Fleming or Lynton directions and the only plan they are prepared to support ultimately leads us back into another battle with Parracombe landowners and a messy situation with two operational railways. I didn't feel comfortable with supporting any of the options on offer and I believe a re-think is required.

 

>>>.....the membership numbering system (letter of surname plus a 3 digit number) allows assessment of how long standing a member is....

Not entirely true. I wonder, for example, how many members we have whose surname begins with (say) X or Z? If we assume just one, then that person will be X001 or Z001 - but they could have joined 20 years ago or just last week.

 

While I would agree that Lynton is definitely worth looking at, it does provide a major problem (among others!) of where to site the terminus. I would assume that is why the board has suggested the 'easier' option of Wistlandpound

 

Exactly. I like your phrase 'supposed supporters'.

 

I think the problem is that whichever direction you want to extend you are likely to encounter a landowner who doesn't want to sell.

 

Caffyns would be a 'temporary' terminus, perhaps operated like KL. There would then have to be a vision of where the Lynton terminus would be. And then a plan as to how to get to Kibsworthy over the gap of Dean Steep and the rock excavation and/or viaduct that might entail. It will require dedicated management with the ultimate goal in prospect.

 

Completely agree - and, unfortunately, how that question will be resolved is intimately linked to the questions about governance and people.

 

Perhaps its the other way round, I keep reading the continued negativity of how the current trustee's are useless and some new blood is needed, maybe the fresher member is seen as the saviour of the planning conundrum as they may be more capable of coming up with a solution no one else has thought of up till now!? Perhaps it could be argued that the purported glacial rate of progress over the past 50 years can only be attributed to those older, wiser, members. Perhaps the older member's could even have fingers pointed at for not acquiring strategic land assets that are currently causing headache's for the extension, surely they should've had the foresight to acquire those land parcels when they had the opportunity! (And those opportunities have existed!)

I jest of course, the suggestion that an older member is of higher seniority and is assumed to be wiser than any newer member is incredibly patronising! Especially when it's those newer members that are likely to come with enthusiasm, potentially relevant and more up to date skills, and lets face it, the odds are that as long as you can keep them, those newer members are highly likely to outlive the senior members and be the ones that will need to be relied upon to carry forward the legacy of all this hard work to date.

So as a relative youngster myself, rapidly heading to middle age, I think that the work to date is very impressive and should be congratulated. The regular acquisition of strategic assets is particularly exciting, as is the restoration and recreation of locomotives and rolling stock. My general observation of the railway is one of success with much achieved over the last 25 years and great anticipation as to what will be achieved over the next 25 years.

One thing's for sure is that belittling any persons efforts and pointing out the error's they've made that are of so obvious in hindsight is not the way to go. Defamation or forceful removal of member's who are dedicating their time, knowledge and resource will only slow down the rate of progress or redirect effort that will be counter intuitive to the railways development. Every single persons efforts towards the creation of the railway that exists today should be suitably recognised and everyone's enthusiasm for continuing to take this forward should be encouraged. Now is the time to rally together and bounce back, not to point fingers and bemoan being ignored or knowing better.

 

The L&BR website have published a news page regarding the construction of the new access road at Rowely Moor Farm.

See >>> https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/news/view/rowley-moor-farm-access-road

 

Forgive me, I'm confused by this piece.

As I understood it, the sheds/works illustrated in this release were amongst the things for which planning permission expired last month. Have I missed something?

 

I believe the access road was a different planning application and is still valid. The permission for the works has expired.

 

Maybe it is just me but I find it annoying and frustrating when, as has happened on this link, relevant maps and plans are posted on a website at such a low resolution that the text is unreadable, even when enlarged by various means.

 

Hmm, might not even be just you, might be just your tech. I've just read it on my phone and it was absolutely fine/legible...

 

Possibly. But also, in many cases it might not be the actual solution that is the problem but rather the way in which its implementation was/is approached.

One might put the KL-PE Sec 73 application in that category. At face value, having owned all the necessary land and making steady, if rather slow, progress on the appeal for money, then trying to go at least part of the way southwards from KL does not seem too bad an idea IMHO, especially as Parracombe does present something more of a 'destination' than the 'platform in the middle of nowhere' at KL (likewise Caffyns ) On the other hand, trying to do almost the same thing again under Option C - without apparently any indication of how it is more likely to be successful 2nd time around - strikes me as definitely NOT a good idea and a failure to 'learn from experience'..