CHESTER AND THE DEE 251 



that looking out for them would be part of a 

 riparian owner's duty. I regret to say that in 

 places these proprietors seem pleased if, through 

 a tree's falling or by other cause, navigation near 

 their banks is made dangerous. Anyway, I note 

 places where, as the tree falls into the water, so 

 it lies — at least, the part calculated to do the 

 damage does. The bulk is cut off and removed, 

 but the snag part remains, clearing it being 

 nobody's business except for the unfortunate 

 boating party who discovers it, to his craft's 

 injury. If owners ought to keep their shores 

 clear of such articles, why do not the Con- 

 servancy wake them up ? Their men know 

 every yard of the river, and could almost make 

 out a catalogue of all standing or fallen trees, 

 bushes, loose camp-shedding, old projecting rails, 

 etc. On these items reports should be made to 

 headquarters, and notices issued accordingly. If 

 the business really lies with the Conservancy 

 itself, that institution would make a large 

 constituency feel grateful if they did their work. 

 It seems impossible to believe that because you 

 happen to own a bit of land fronting the river 

 you are at liberty to let anything you don't want 

 slide into it. For instance, the other day, up 

 Sunbury way, I came on to a lump of concrete 

 which had been a river wall before it was under- 

 mined and tumbled into the stream. If the bank- 

 holder had not put it where he meant it to be on 

 land, it couldn't have got into the water. He is 

 responsible for its being there, and ought to be 

 made to get it out. 



Between art and nature, Chester's river is 

 certainly a comfort and joy. Let me have one 

 of the remarkably pleasant easy-moving skiffs 



