"Bob Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ... there is no justification for a >> usage-based charge (toll). Except in dry periods where back-pumping >> is required, when I would support a charge for each time you fill a >> (key) lock on the route concerned. > >Is that logical? Don't all the boats in the upper pound benefit from >the back-pumping? Shouldn't they all be charged for the benefit they >receive?
No. Except for evaporation and leaks, which the non-pumped fixed-cost water supply should be able to handle, the only water leaving the summit is by lockage. The annual charge should cover the non-pumped supply. Since the boats on the summit pound which don't use the locks aren't contributing to lockage, why should they pay anything more? Adrian . Adrian Stott 07956-299966
