[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 8, Oct 2006, at 8:28, Will Chapman wrote:
>
>
> But I suppose some of these folk will be overjoyed if BW default on
> maintenance and create navigational issues because that will arguably
> improve enjoyment for several sets of canal users.
>
Someone else has evoked that scenario but I can't really
see much fishing going on in a dried up canal. OK, sure,
I'm exagerating the point but who knows how far this could
go. The principle that preventive maintenance (pm) is always
cheaper than repair comes to mind; that is, if we don't
keep the canals in good condition with pm, it will soon all
start to need repair and so the downward spiral starts ending
up (once again) with dried up canals.
> The most perverse situation to my mind is all the cash being put
> forward to restore and re-open canals and yet our masters can't manage
> the ones we've got already. Surely restoration needs to be sidelined
> while money is used for preservation.
>
That's not a bad point but surely it's a question of balance.
if BW don't restore as well as maintain won't there will always be
twice as many people complaining?
> And as for the wide gauge Midland link from Leamington to Startford . .
> .. . well really . . . what is that all about ?
>
Well, somebody must want it so I expect they will come along
soon to state their case.
Cheers
Will Chapman
nb Quidditch
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/
