TrueBlue
regular
Reged: 30/04/2004
Posts: 1207
Loc: Sussex
|
|
Quote:
Why the hell are you, as a member of the E.A, spending your valuable time (which I and other boaters pay for) promoting commercial companies. They can pay for their own advertising. Please go and sort out the many problems that the E.A. have within their own establishment and just maybe then, people will be encouraged to boat on the Thames.
Beryl, you've really gone over the top this time.
VisitThames was set up to be (slightly) separate from EA and independent (my assumptions).
EA could have sat on their hands and done done nothing - after all it's not their bag, but sensibly VT was set up to focus attention on the river, whether it be selling food, or boats, fishing, walking - whatever.
To me that was brave (and a bit overdue).
Angela was just trying to wave their flag a little in the hope that folks visiting this forum might also go to VT.
There are lots of things that EA could and should be attacked for but not this one
|
No_Regrets
regular
Reged: 09/07/2007
Posts: 1388
Loc: Welwyn Garden City, Herts UK.
|
|
I concur.
Although I would be the first in line to hurl a few rotten eggs for the bad things the EA are guilty of, this was a bit of an Olive branch IMHO and should be applauded.
Thanks Angela 
--------------------
The scourge of Windsor, and notorious founder member of the 'Upper Thames Birchwood Massive' now outlawed by the EA and River pressure groups, currently planning a nice comfy retirement in the aft cabin of a Broom.
Now can anybody recommend any non-marking slippers?
|
Chris_d
regular
Reged: 15/06/2001
Posts: 1613
Loc: Oxfordshire
|
|
You are right on that point, but we have to work with what we have got and that unfortunately right now is the EA. The Thames is currently in decline and is in danger of becoming a restoration project in the future if it is not preserved. I don't buy the argument that other rivers have gone the same way and survived, you just can't compare the Medway or Ouse to the Thames.
|
channelyacht
regular
Reged: 25/12/2007
Posts: 730
Loc: Hamble & Audierne
|
|
Chris,
You've hit the nail on the head. Cause and effect - the Thames is in decline because we have the EA, not despite the EA's best efforts...
How about seeing if one of the Thames MPs would back a private members' bill to restore the Thames Conservancy - Boris would look a good bet given his interests at both ends of the river!
Yes, we have to work with what we've got at the moment, but that doesn't preclude working to get rid of that at the same time.
|
Andrew_Fanner
regular
Reged: 13/03/2002
Posts: 5555
Loc: ked into poverty by children
|
|
ISTR there was a move to give all the navigation element to BW and leave EA with other elements but common sense declared that navigation could not be made separate from flood control etc.
EA do get some kudos, not demanding the licence all in one lump anymore, but they still need to grasp the nettle on tenders and make the charge sensibly nominal.
--------------------
Two beers please, my friend is paying.
|
channelyacht
regular
Reged: 25/12/2007
Posts: 730
Loc: Hamble & Audierne
|
|
Quote:
ISTR there was a move to give all the navigation element to BW and leave EA with other elements
Heaven save us...in Gloucs, BW staff on quadbikes follow the boats from bridge to bridge to open it for them...at least they did, until someone rode their quad into the canal...
During the floods, the idea was mooted that the lock gates at Gloucs and Sharpness be part opened to shift the water into the estuary - which would probably have lowered the levels on the plain by around 2 feet. BW refused - apparently last time it cost them a few grand in "damage" afterwards, so of course that was more important...
Both as bad as each other really...trouble is, both funded by the Dept for the Eradication of Fun in Rural Areas
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
