Steve Haywood wrote: > On 05/01/07, David Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Sue writes: >>> Tut tut don't you know that not showing a licence doesn't >>> mean they haven't got one. >> Isn't the offence "not displaying a valid licence"? >> >> Dave > > > I am always astonished by this tendency among the modern boater to invite > regulation. What would you have them do, Dave? Prosecute you whenever you > get a new licence and you haven't had time to get up to the boat and replace > it? Or when it's dropped off because of condensation? Or because the cat's > scratched it off?
There is hardly going to be a prosecution if BW know that there is a valid license. It would be a simple and inexpensive matter to write to a non-displayer and warn them that it is a requirement. > > Personally I would prefer to see a few licence dodgers get away with it > rather than have to endure any more of this burdensome regulation that > increasingly destroys what we most value about the canals. > If it was really a few Steve I might concede the point. And what increasingly destroys what I most value about the canals is that some people are not paying their way and, to boot, often taking up time-limited mooring spaces that prevent other from enjoying what they have paid for. Will Chapman nb Quidditch
