stickleback

Moi also skips over most of her posts for the same ickle reasons given above...

Very acute thinking MTB!

Absolutely agree with you on this.

Hope it all improves for you and your family.

Totally agree and was going to make the same comment but you have done it so much more succinctly than I would have managed!

And as well as that, it has had to ensure the integrity of the canal system in order to provide the water to allow the boats in the marina to float / access the canal system. Not a cheap of free undertaking.

The second picture looks like Peckover House (set back) in Wisbech. Lovely buildings!

!!! Thank you...!

And was the sex change done on the NHS??!!

So if the boat was called "Cnut" ...???! I'd opt for something a bit different - perhaps "hazelnut"

I'm glad it was the mugger who drowned and not his victim. And also agree with a previous post about the guy who was found not guilty of excessive force for breaking his would be burglars legs. Should have been his neck.....

I'm sure I read earlier in this massive thread that he trained at drama school ... perhaps that was called "acting" in the promotional film?!

Can you ever be really sure that you have "rehab'd" a biter? I'm not sure. My parents always had dogs from pups which were fine and could be trained ok. My Aunt took on a dog which had to be rehomed for being jealous of a new baby (which it did bite) when it thought IT was the baby - and after being OK for some months it began to get jealous of, and nip, anyone and everyone who seemed to be fond of or loved by my Aunt. It was re- re - homed eventually and I don't think that was a good plan. Unless it went to a sort of hermit where the poor dog felt totally secure. And it had a nasty habit - she used to pick it up if she thought it was about to "nip" - of directing a stream if pee straight at the person it was about to bite!

I think the mods do a good job too. Some unpleasantness could be cut - but isn't that always so?! And back to P L - how pleased I am that my initial response to P L ( person not place) was so negative that I didn't buy a long term lease there. And how sorry I feel for all the moorers involved in this unfolding mess / tragedy (for them) / farce. Unbelievable.

Fascinating! So the sins of the fathers.....!

I am SO sorry to read these threads and find how Pillings is going, and your problems with Paul. I and my partner came to see Pillings when it was still a project and Paul drove us up to show us where everything would be. We were looking to buy a long lease mooring (I think I remember 12 years?) but really I didn't like the guy. Really really didn't. Didn't trust a word he said. We ended up buying an lease at another marina nearby for 30 years for no more money (he had assured us he was the only projected marina offering such a scheme!) and are very happy there John, so sorry to hear that my first opinion if your "ex son" coincides with your last one. The marina and initial plans were great. I just wasn't prepared to sign ANY paper that I guy who I couldn't trust at all put In front of me. Edited to say my partner did trust him. I'm glad I won! Andrrw

I'm almost sure that it WAS the Bollington canoe club and it certainly was a Sunday morning. Reckless in the extreme is right - heart in mouth moments!

We saw a group of canoeists on the Macclesfield in September. Overtaking on both sides as we were approaching a bridge and squeezing through the rapidly narrowing gap as we were going into the bridge hole. It really looked as though one was going to get crushed, but he dropped back at the very last second. I don't think they realise how long it takes a narrow boat to stop and that evasive action just isn't possible... if we had happened to squash one I think I would have been traumatised for life! Do they have to have insurance, just out of interest?

Absolutely. Emotive, inaccurate, one-sided - what in fact WERE the objectives behind it?

So where did I say that a boater in difficulty is no ones problem, or that no one needs to take responsibility? I in fact suggested that local councils, social workers etc help - organisations which DO have the ability to offer real assistance. Not a charity such as CaRT, which does not. NigelMoore's post 208 seems to be the most constructive so far.

Which would lead to more and more people relying on CaRT for welfare assistance which would eventually become seen as being WITHIN the remit of CaRT, which would inevitably lead to soaring license costs etc etc. I think it needs to be made crystal clear at this stage that offering welfare / chaplains etc is NOT a CaRT remit, but local councils, social work teams etc etc could be more involved perhaps?

Good luck with it all!