{"id":2175,"date":"2022-06-29T11:42:22","date_gmt":"2022-06-29T10:42:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/peterboroughramblers.co.uk\/?p=2175"},"modified":"2022-06-29T11:49:39","modified_gmt":"2022-06-29T10:49:39","slug":"the-lound-walk-in-pictures-june-2022","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peterboroughramblers.co.uk\/?p=2175","title":{"rendered":"The Lound Walk in pictures: June 2022"},"content":{"rendered":"

Pictures by Jonathan Bridgland and “commentary” (for want of a better word) by Sir Hardly Anyone.\u00a0 Owing to the absence of any Committee Members to edit this piece it must be said that it may not reflect the opinions of Peterborough Ramblers, its committee, its members or indeed the author.<\/p>\n

Having given that disclaimer, here we go…<\/p>\n

\"\"Perspective is of course everything, so is the white object seen here an intricate bee hive, a child’s toy or one of the residences of the Lord High Executioner of Cambridgeshire?<\/p>\n

The matter was indeed debated vigorously on the walk, but no conclusion was reached beyond the comment that “these photographic chappies can turn day into night and a viper into a politician,” although by and large most agreed that little work was needed in some instances of the second example.\u00a0 Not that any of us are against politicians.\u00a0 Perish the thought!<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Yet such was the heat of the debate on the topic that we decided to rest, and of course hatwear is often donned at such moments by those who can afford it.<\/p>\n

At the same time the Philosophy Wing of Peterborough Ramblers took up a favoured position to consider the topic of the day: “Gravity: good or bad?”<\/p>\n

The debate was indeed fast and furious and our walk leader was hard pushed to bring back order and continue with the walking arrangements.\"\"<\/p>\n

But not of course before a vote was taken on the second topic of the day: Cambridgeshire Grass: is there enough?<\/p>\n

So heated became the debate on that issue that a number of members of the Debating Wing of Peterborough Ramblers were forced to retire to the shade of a nearby tree.<\/p>\n

Eventually, the motion was carried nomcom dem although no one was quite sure what that meant either.\u00a0 A telegraphic message was sent to Mr Jacob Reed Mogg.\"\"<\/p>\n

Beyond this point we found that there was not much more to say as we moved on in our grouplets each discussing the issues of the day as can be appreciated.<\/p>\n

There was also representation made by some local farm inhabitants who felt that the Ramblers should be open to all creatures great and small, and not just humans.<\/p>\n

We have forwarded this point to HQ and await their comment.\u00a0 But there was certainly no doubt as to what the view of the local population was, and being a democratic group we shall be taking this into account.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

First, however, there was quite a debate on the topic and the beasts of the fields made their thoughts quite clear.\u00a0 But it was felt to be too early to have a vote on the issue, and so we will be referring it on to head office for their views.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n

I am sure we will be hearing back from them in a matter of days.\u00a0 I think the cows understood that these things take time.<\/p>\n

Perhaps at this point, I really ought to say that the opinions and views in this article may not always fully reflect the views of the Committee of Peterborough Ramblers, nor indeed anyone else.<\/p>\n

Apart from the author.<\/p>\n

And we’re not always too sure about him.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Forthcoming walks<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n