On 23 Sep 2008 at 12:28, Adrian Stott wrote: > But increasing the supply of moorings at honeypots is typically very > expensive. So reducing the demand is usually the better alternative, > at least in the short/medium term. I think that the fairest way to > reduce demand, and to help fund an increase in supply, is to charge > for the moorings.
I don't see anything "fair" in this. In the extreme case, it would mean only the well-to-do could justify mooring at a honeypot site. Free market pricing is fine in commercial business, but not when imposed by an organisation you've already identified as a monopoly, and not when it applies to property theoretically "owned by the public". Instead, strictly enforce short stay requirements. If demand is way too high, allow pre-booking with a possible lottery component.
