1st ade

I feel another caption competition coming on!

Don't confuse me! (Easily done I know)

Nonetheless - Jane being able to say (and it might be today...) "and a number of your constituents agree with us" will add weight?

Very tentative investigation and overlaying a modern overhead with the OS six inch of the 1900's; the canal is between the 50 foot contour and the river, there is a range of spot heights around 31 foot to the east of the river --> The canal was no more than 20 foot above the river and possibly less? Link http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17&lat=51.8773&lon=-2.2680&layers=6&b=4

My auto-response from the MP for South MK (where said link road is located) includes the following Are you a constituent? Please note, there is a strictly-adhered-to Parliamentary rule within the House of Commons that MPs only act upon behalf of their own constituents. Whilst I see the logic I can't help but see a subtitle of "... and visitors or potential visitors can *** off" Any CWF members living in south MK?

This. Virtual Greenie Emails sent to an MP and Ward Councillors from two districts. One can but try.

HE (the developer) or Highways England?

In cynical mode (after years of dealing with developers in North MK) the two statements are not completely mutually exclusive: - [Developer] "...the new canal will pass under the new A421..." (because the alternative is to go over or use some form of teleportation) [Bedford - MK Trust] "...will block the route..." (because tunnelling under a live dual carriageway post construction is way over our budget) It's the kind of statement where, if it was in our neck of the woods, we'd be watching the building works daily to make sure the culvert went in and that the developer didn't attempt to add a few grand to their profit margin by "accidentally" leaving it out*. If the latter, they'd probably only get fined if there was a complete canal in place and the missing culvert was the only blockage between MK and Bedford. [ * - In a development in Wolverton, the developer "accidentally" demolished a building adjacent to their site which might have been part of their next development. They were told to ask for retrospective planning permission for the demolition; which they were granted]

But we could post to Grayling asking why, having spent money on a culvert under the A421 near Marston Mortaine, the expenditure is rendered null and void by not making the same expenditure on the new works. In both cases, the argument should be that a (relatively) tiny sum spent during construction removes the need for a much larger expenditure later if the canal link is actually built.

Sorry - my mistake - I'll report it and see if a helpful mod will merge...

Looks like the proposed new canal link between Bedford and MK is under threat as part of the by-pass work on the A421 link road. A shame if so as the A421 near Marston Mortaine had a culvert built into it specifically for the new canal.

From experience (as a SCUBA diver) they opened the hatchback and the spare floated out. Reasonable semi-submerged as here. Less amusing totally submerged in low visibility (especially when you forget that the gas struts will overcompensate for the weight of the hatch under water - press the boot release and get a swift uppercut from the hatch followed by a second one as the spare wheel makes a break for freedom)

You've met MP's practical skills then?

Looking at the location of the isolator switches, if you secure the deck boards to prevent further theft do make sure you can still turn the juice off..... quickly....

Do you mean you did both in the same week? Bruceinsanity may have a point - many years ago a group of us (all in our Mid Twenties) hired a boat and planned the Four Counties in a week; the hire company suggested this was ambitious - we proved them wrong by doing the ring twice in the week... Probably taking risks that would be seen as unacceptable today.

Mmmmm - would reduce progress to zero in the 1st Ade household - I don't think we've ever agreed on anything (except that the other is wrong!)

Ah! that's why "view latest post" has gone back to number 1...

The skin off the turkey (after cooking before anyone starts...) was one which surprised us.

And a plentiful supply of dog biscuits. Very "treat" oriented is this particular animal!

Full marks (and a Greenie) to GRLMK38. Local fishing tackle shop said exactly the same. Also said it was a regular occurrence - now slightly puzzled that we've lived near the canal for over twenty years (six of them dog walking on the towpath) and never seen it before. Shows how much we run (or walk) on autopilot i suppose.

Mrs 1st Ade was walking the Staffie along the Grand Union through New Bradwell yesterday. She came across a small inflatable boat with three men on board. They were wearing dry-suits but no life jackets; neither boat nor men had any form of name or identity displayed (CRT lifejackets and overalls tend to have their logo on) The boat seemed to be full of batteries with two electrodes dangling in the water. Around the boat, fish, apparently stunned, were on the surface and being "scooped" into keep nets. Mrs 1st Ade (politely) asked their business and one responded that they were doing a fish survey! She asked who they worked for and was given a name (which she now can't remember but wasn't CRT, British Waterways etc) and contact number (ditto). They were polite enough but it sounded a bit, well, fishy... I asked if she got a photo of them and got a lecture on having her hands full of over excited Staffie and in any case it was raining! Thoughts?