Dangermouse wrote:I cannot believe that anyone calling themselves a "Director of Conservation" would authorise something so daft.
It's mind boggling isn't it. If they have so much money to spare...
Dangermouse wrote:I cannot believe that anyone calling themselves a "Director of Conservation" would authorise something so daft.
Dangermouse wrote:They're basically exposing part of the hull (which is by all accounts very fragile in places) to an mildly acidic substance for no reason whatsoever.
Mike Bull wrote:Dangermouse wrote:They're basically exposing part of the hull (which is by all accounts very fragile in places) to an mildly acidic substance for no reason whatsoever.
Ridiculous as the idea is, the jelly at least won't be touching the actual ship- there's a big seal around the hull, as seen here in a pic of mine from a few years back-
Mike Bull wrote:Jelly doesn't splash, it wobbles!
Renegadenemo wrote:Considering all the crazy rules for disposing of this and that - how d'you get rid of 50,000 litres of unwanted green gunk? I bet it attracted every fruit fly and wasp for a hundred miles around too...
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests