On 18 Feb 2009, at 16:29, Nigel Stanley wrote:
> I'm with Glen on this.
>
> It's only going to be used when there's a general problem or a very
> specific incident. Both of these are exceedingly rare on canals and
> most of the other waterways on which we boat.
>
> I might amble along the GU after a beer or two, but I wouldn't enter
> Gloucester Lock when there's some fresh on the river.
>
> You can always argue about definitions in rules as any cut-off point
> is going to be the result of a compromise - and set at some
> least-worst and somewhat arbitrary point. If you are going to argue
> against it, you really need to argue for a different compromise.
>
> There are much more important things to worry about!
I agree with all of that - my post was stimulated by unfinished
elements in the previous discussion as to whether jet skis would be
covered, and if there was a risk of Patrol Officers leaping out from
under bridge holes clutching breathalysers. (Answer, no and no)
Having started the post, I then got carried away (as so often...)
All the best
Bruce
There are no strangers on the cut, only boaters we've yet to meet.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/canals-list/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
