Adrian Stott wrote: > "Allan Cazaly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> ****Whatever Next?**** >> >> I think that suggesting to introduce Traffic Wardens and the like for >> boats is sheer nonsense! I thought us boaters took to the canals to >> get away from all the beaucracy (Mis-spelt perhaps?) God forbid, >> don't lets go down this road! >> >> Live and let live, the canals are about the only place left to have a >> bit of freedom away from the "dictatorship" of the rest of the >> country. I know this is creeping into BW affairs but my suggestion >> to them is keep a bit of flexibility. > > When demand for something is hugely less than its supply, then there > is little sense in having a market for it, let alone need for > regulation. Think of how hunting used to be in prehistoric times, > when there was a lot of game in the woods but few people stalking it. > And so it pretty much was on the waterways in, say, the 1960s, when > freight traffic had almost all gone but leisure traffic had just > started to appear. Moorings (e.g.) were readily available almost > everywhere, and they were very inexpensive. > > But nowadays many more people want to hunt and game has become scarce > (as a result), and responsible jurisdictions limit the taking of it > (by, e.g. requiring an ever-more-expensive hunting permit) to prevent > it s being even more over-exploited (aside: too bad most do such a > bad job with respect to fisheries, though). > > And on the waterways, the number of craft is now at an all-time high, > and unsurprisingly moorings are hard to find as mooring rents run > behind market levels. No wonder the demand for, and abuse, of > short-term moorings is rife. And, again, a responsible authority will > increase regulation, or establish a market, in such circumstances. In > this light, fees for short-term mooring (like pay-and-display parking) > as trialed at Llangollen seem highly likely to become more common. > > This isn't dictatorship, or bureaucracy gone bad. It is a reflection > of increasing demand and competition for the valuable and > hard-to-increase-the-supply-of resource of that the waterways are now > being recognised as. > > You want to go back to the "freedom" of the 1960s? Sure. Just come > up with a way to get, say, 2/3 of the current leisure boaters to go > away while having the government still grant as much (or, actually, > rather more) support money to BW. > > Please keep your answer to fewer than 25 words. > > Adrian > > Adrian Stott > 07956-299966
I'll do it in one...but just swap WI for BW IRELAND! :-) Where the British Government (now the NI Assembly) is presently quite happy (but getting less so!) to 15% fund WI. My Shannon Reg is just that, the total number of boats WI (OPW) has ever registered on the Shannon. There are presently around 200 boats on the Grand / Barrow / Royal, which by English standards, could easily swallow up 2000. Actually to answer your qusetion: Remove BW's property portfolio. That should get the canal's back into the crap state they were in the 1960's, with canals closing, no facilities and a feeling of satisfaction if you actually arrived at your destination, having had to winch your way through sections and temp fix lock gear. BTW Adrian, how are you getting on talking with the Tory party? What do you percieve they will be doing with BW? Will they give you a seat on BWB? Should the present "Top Brass" at BW be worried? are they feathering their nests, ready to bale out? -- Neil Arlidge - NB Earnest - Shannon Reg 7410 Read about our Irish travels at: http://www.tuesdaynightclub.co.uk/Tour_07/index.html
