Posted by Jock on October 05, 2005 at 20:41:49 from 84.69.115.112 user Jock.
In Reply to: Re: Church Beck as the River Amazon? (was, Re: Lakeland Cam posted by John Nichols on October 05, 2005 at 18:42:20:
I would have thougth the mines should be sealed shut if they are dangerous.
You raised a related question in another thread.
Better drowned than duffers if not duffers will not drown.This is a simple statement of fact and direction. It leaves it to John and Susan to decide what is dangerous.
Whereas the Mother is providing rules.
No sailing at night.
I would hate to live an environment where the nanny state decided what was and what wasn't an acceptable risk. Disused mines are entered and explored every weekend for the purpose of fun or serious study (often both at the same time). There would be a justifiable outcry if the Coniston Mines were sealed off. On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is 'very safe' and 10 is 'extremely dangerous" the Miner's Bridge trial rates at about level 2. One point because you could twist your ankle scrambling down to find the entrance and another point because there is no air circulation and there's just a possibility that, on the day you decide to go, there could be a build up of methane.
However, there are many other levels in the area which though much easier to find and enter and are extremely dangerous.
So I feel duty bound to post the health warning. I don't want Dan's family taking me to court and citing Tarboard to prove that I encouraged him to enter this or any other mine.
Having posted the health warning I then referred him to the field guide which gives enough information on the hazards of the various levels for Jon to be able to make the appropriate decisions hfor imself.
Regarding my trials and tribulations with CSS. Look under the CSS thread heading.