A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Cruises
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cozumel Anchor Ahoy



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 15th, 2005, 02:15 PM
Reef Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy

Today (Nov 15) is the second day the port is re-opened to cruise ship,
requiring all ships to be anchored or moored because all the cruise
ship
piers had been severely damaged by hurricane Wilma.

Four cruise ships are in Cozumel today, and tomorrow -- the most this
week, with only one ship scheduled to come in on Thursday, Friday, and
Saturday, according the Festival annoucement on Nov 11:

http://www.cometocozumel.com/english/wilma/default.asp

The Star Princess anchored at approximately 7:15 am (local), and
passengers are being tendered to shore by boats I've not see in Cozumel
before -- several identical blue-and-yellow ferry size boats, with
capacity
of 400-500 passengers (according to the Princess patter briefing)
instead
of the much smaller tenders of the cruise ship.

These must be ferry boats brought from Cancun, for the tendering tasks
this week. Even with those large special tenders, the transfer of
2,600
passengers to shore is expected to take 2-3 hours.

The Star Princess is anchored at a distance of between 1/2 and 3/4
miles
from shore -- a surprisingly long distance away, possibly as a special
rule for the week that anchoring must be outside the boundry of the
marine part, It's directly off the shore of the Puerta Maya Pier where
the
ship would have docked had the pier not been destroyed by Wilma.

For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever
seen by any diver in Cozumel, nor could it possibly make any difference
to the reefs south of the Puerta Maya pier.

So, that's good news. Reefs and diving will not be adversely affected
in
any way by the presence of the cruise ships, provided the DIVE SHIOPS
themselves have sufficiently recovered (or survived) from hurricane
Wilma's physical and economical impact.

This is the first time in 18 years that we are in Cozumel WITHOUT our
dive gears, because it didn't appear that Cozumel could handle the
cruise ship traffic by yesterday, when we left home 10 days ago. We
had already written off Grand Cayman as a port to dive since we had
already done all the sites that are worth diving there (within striking

distance of the cruise ship) and we were already sick of diving
Stingray
City (having done it more than a dozen times, and sat out the last
two).
None of the other ports of call is worth the trouble of getting wet.
:-)

So, we are not in any hurry to get into the long line of passengers to
scramble ashore, and plan to go as soon as the crowd clears, two to
three hours from how, and still have all afternoon to re-visit the
town,
for the third time this year.

-- Bob.

  #2  
Old November 15th, 2005, 03:43 PM
Grumman-581
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy

"Reef Fish" wrote in message
oups.com...
For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever


Just curious... Could you find out what's the depth of the water where
they're anchoring...


  #3  
Old November 15th, 2005, 03:47 PM
Jer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy

Reef Fish wrote:


For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever
seen by any diver in Cozumel, nor could it possibly make any difference
to the reefs south of the Puerta Maya pier.


What about the reefs north of the damaged pier? We can't not consider
those - they're the mating areas of eagle rays. I realize not a lot of
divers go there, but that's beside my point. Everything matters, not
just the parts most divers see. Out of sight != out of mind.


So, that's good news.


Cruise ships are always bad news.



--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
  #4  
Old November 16th, 2005, 01:52 AM
Reef Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy


Grumman-581 wrote:
"Reef Fish" wrote in message
oups.com...
For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever


Just curious... Could you find out what's the depth of the water where
they're anchoring...


I would guess that it's in excess of 400 ft, from my vague recollection

of the depth chart on my Cozumel map. I'll ask the ship captain when
I'll have lunch with him (invited among the "most frequent Princess
cruisers" on board.)

-- Bob.

  #5  
Old November 16th, 2005, 02:12 AM
Ron Lee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy

"Reef Fish" wrote:
of the depth chart on my Cozumel map. I'll ask the ship captain when
I'll have lunch with him (invited among the "most frequent Princess
cruisers" on board.)

-- Bob.

And he continues his self-aggrandizing comments. Hey look at me. I
am wonderful. Cruise ship captains request my audience. I am Bob
Ling...most exalted of all in my presence.

Ron Lee

  #6  
Old November 16th, 2005, 02:26 AM
Reef Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IDIOT Ron Lee is the Anal Fixation Poster Boy of the Year in rec.scuba


Ron Lee wrote:
"Reef Fish" wrote:
of the depth chart on my Cozumel map. I'll ask the ship captain when
I'll have lunch with him (invited among the "most frequent Princess
cruisers" on board.)

-- Bob.

And he continues his self-aggrandizing comments. Hey look at me. I
am wonderful. Cruise ship captains request my audience. I am Bob
Ling...most exalted of all in my presence.

Ron Lee


IDIOT Ron, I was merely responding to Grummy on his question. What's
so self-aggrandizing about stating that own a map with depth chart (at
home but not with me) and that I would ask the captain about it, when I
have lunch with him with a small group?

You cannot let an ordinary discussion of Cozumel, diving, or cruising
with you making your anal-fixated NOISE!

Grow up, little Poster Boy!

-- Bob.

  #7  
Old November 16th, 2005, 03:01 AM
Reef Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy


Jer wrote:
Reef Fish wrote:


For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever
seen by any diver in Cozumel, nor could it possibly make any difference
to the reefs south of the Puerta Maya pier.


What about the reefs north of the damaged pier? We can't not consider
those - they're the mating areas of eagle rays. I realize not a lot of
divers go there, but that's beside my point. Everything matters, not
just the parts most divers see. Out of sight != out of mind.


First of all, you have to know a bit more about the geography and
current of the island.

The mating areas of eagle rays are in the upper NORTH (near the
East side) of the island. Even if there is constant excavation of sand

and silt at the spot the cruiseship was anchored, the direction of the
current will likely NEVER get there!

It takes MILES before it reaches the San Juan Reef north of the
Square. Then the 3-4 knot current of San Juan goes WEST when
it meets the current of the Barracuda Reef.

Besides, what make you think that the eagle rays would be affected
by a few drops of sand. They stir up more sand looking for food than
the cruise ships!

Eagle mating season in Cozumel (Dec - Mar) was a relatively new
phenomenon discovered by some locals where dive shops DON'T
go. I was diving with those eagle rays in 1998 before any dive shop
even knew about the eagle ray mating in the North. I posted this
in March 2000, when someone reported that Blue Angel was taking
divers to the spot between downtown and San Juan reef where
eagle rays visit regularly from the North:

From your description, I think you were at the site where I dived, a
ledge
at 75 to 90 fsw of very swift current. I am curious as to what profile
you
did with Blue Angle (depth/time). When I did it privately, we were
always
small groups of air-misers and we dived with EAN36 and were able to
stay
at 80 fsw for nearly an hour, hanging near the ledge while watching the

squadrons of rays pass by over and over again. That was a couple of
years
ago, before any dive shop took divers out there.

That put my first encounter with those squadrons of eagle rays back
to 1998, before the new cruise ship piers were built. The arrival of
the cruise ships, as much as 10 on some days, did not affect the
annual mating of those eagle rays one whit.

The marine animals are much smarter and can adapt to changing
environments (as "survival of the fittest") much better than homo
sapiens, or the myopic give them credit for.


So, that's good news.


Cruise ships are always bad news.


Only to the myotic and prejudiced.

-- Bob.

  #8  
Old November 16th, 2005, 05:21 AM
Jer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Cozumel Anchor Ahoy

Reef Fish wrote:
Jer wrote:

Reef Fish wrote:


For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever
seen by any diver in Cozumel, nor could it possibly make any difference
to the reefs south of the Puerta Maya pier.


What about the reefs north of the damaged pier? We can't not consider
those - they're the mating areas of eagle rays. I realize not a lot of
divers go there, but that's beside my point. Everything matters, not
just the parts most divers see. Out of sight != out of mind.



First of all, you have to know a bit more about the geography and
current of the island.

The mating areas of eagle rays are in the upper NORTH (near the
East side) of the island. Even if there is constant excavation of sand

and silt at the spot the cruiseship was anchored, the direction of the
current will likely NEVER get there!

It takes MILES before it reaches the San Juan Reef north of the
Square. Then the 3-4 knot current of San Juan goes WEST when
it meets the current of the Barracuda Reef.


I know some things about the geography and currents of the island too,
but I'm not going to get into a ****ing contest about it. Yes, I know
where eagle rays mate, we've been filming them off and on for 20 odd
years between the marsh and San Juan.


Besides, what make you think that the eagle rays would be affected
by a few drops of sand. They stir up more sand looking for food than
the cruise ships!


True, but they're just doing what comes natural to them - you're not.
Therefore, what they do is inconsequential to us and expected - the
reverse of that is inexcusable.


Eagle mating season in Cozumel (Dec - Mar) was a relatively new
phenomenon discovered by some locals where dive shops DON'T
go. I was diving with those eagle rays in 1998 before any dive shop
even knew about the eagle ray mating in the North. I posted this
in March 2000, when someone reported that Blue Angel was taking
divers to the spot between downtown and San Juan reef where
eagle rays visit regularly from the North:


I don't need no stinking dive shop to take me anywhere I want to go - I
use my own boat any time I want. And some locals have known about the
eagle rays for a lot longer you - some tried to keep a lid on it until
Cousteau opened his mouth long before you did.


From your description, I think you were at the site where I dived, a
ledge
at 75 to 90 fsw of very swift current. I am curious as to what profile
you
did with Blue Angle (depth/time). When I did it privately, we were
always
small groups of air-misers and we dived with EAN36 and were able to
stay
at 80 fsw for nearly an hour, hanging near the ledge while watching the

squadrons of rays pass by over and over again. That was a couple of
years
ago, before any dive shop took divers out there.

That put my first encounter with those squadrons of eagle rays back
to 1998, before the new cruise ship piers were built. The arrival of
the cruise ships, as much as 10 on some days, did not affect the
annual mating of those eagle rays one whit.


That's an opinion which some locals don't share. When we were filming
up there, we routinely ran the magazines dry. Now? what's the point?
There's not enough to bother with. Don't presume to tell me the eagle
ray population is the same today as it was in '98, or long before that.
That's an opinion that is shared by some locals, and me.


The marine animals are much smarter and can adapt to changing
environments (as "survival of the fittest") much better than homo
sapiens, or the myopic give them credit for.


You can try shopping that crap around with your pod friends, but for all
the areas of the world that have been adversely affected by coastal
development and the pollution from it, you're an idiot, and we know it.
Now you do too.




So, that's good news.


Cruise ships are always bad news.



Only to the myotic and prejudiced.

-- Bob.


Imagine that... a pod person calling me myotic and prejudiced. How
quaint.


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
  #9  
Old November 16th, 2005, 05:44 PM
Reef Fish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Eagle Rays in Cozumel


Jer wrote:
Reef Fish wrote:
Jer wrote:

Reef Fish wrote:


For those divers who are concerned with the anchoring cruise ships
damaging the reefs of Cozumel dive sites, I can say positively and
unequivocally (based on my well over 1,200 dives in Cozumel) that there
is NO WAY in Hell (ooops, that's in the next stop at Grand Cayman) that
the anchoring at that distance from shore in the channel that it could
damage any coral (if there's any at that distance and depth) that is
ever
seen by any diver in Cozumel, nor could it possibly make any difference
to the reefs south of the Puerta Maya pier.

What about the reefs north of the damaged pier? We can't not consider
those - they're the mating areas of eagle rays. I realize not a lot of
divers go there, but that's beside my point. Everything matters, not
just the parts most divers see. Out of sight != out of mind.



First of all, you have to know a bit more about the geography and
current of the island.

The mating areas of eagle rays are in the upper NORTH (near the
East side) of the island. Even if there is constant excavation of sand

and silt at the spot the cruiseship was anchored, the direction of the
current will likely NEVER get there!

It takes MILES before it reaches the San Juan Reef north of the
Square. Then the 3-4 knot current of San Juan goes WEST when
it meets the current of the Barracuda Reef.


I know some things about the geography and currents of the island too,
but I'm not going to get into a ****ing contest about it.


So far, you're the only one ****ing in this subthread. I gave you some
straight and factual answers telling you that there is no way that the
Star Princess cruise ship anchored half a mile off Puenta Maya could
in any way affect the eagle ray mating site/season 15 miles NORTH
of the anchoring spot and OFF the path of the current.

Those are FACTS -- anyone familiar with the geography of the island
of Cozumel could have told you the same thing.

However, I welcome any disagreement from anyone, and I am glad
to respond to your post, point by point, since this a a RARE case in
the past two weeks (where the signal to noise ratio is at most 1 to 20,
no thanks to the idiots of rec.scuba.* and the one-and-only-idiot of
rec.travel.cruises in this thread) that you have at least some opinion
and facts about crusing/scuba relative to the eagle ray mating site
and season in Cozumel.

So, on with my rebuttal and question of the credibility of some of your
points.

Yes, I know
where eagle rays mate, we've been filming them off and on for 20 odd
years between the marsh and San Juan.


If you have been filming them for 20 odds years, then they are NOT
the recent phenomenon, of a much larger scale, discovered at a site
DIFFERENT from your site. This is not to question your statement
above, but to suggest that before 1998, you've been filming different
eagle rays at different locations.


Besides, what make you think that the eagle rays would be affected
by a few drops of sand. They stir up more sand looking for food than
the cruise ships!


True, but they're just doing what comes natural to them - you're not.
Therefore, what they do is inconsequential to us and expected - the
reverse of that is inexcusable.


First of all, you are making the ERRONEOUS assumption that that the
few grains of cruise ship stirred up sand could even REACH the eagle
ray mating location.

Next, you're talking about Man interfering with the natural environment
of marine animals as being "idiots", your ****ing, hypocrisy, and
shallowness of knowledge about marine animal showed. This is
the passage in our later exchange:

The marine animals are much smarter and can adapt to changing
environments (as "survival of the fittest") much better than homo
sapiens, or the myopic give them credit for.


You can try shopping that crap around with your pod friends, but for all
the areas of the world that have been adversely affected by coastal
development and the pollution from it, you're an idiot, and we know it.
Now you do too.


Have you ever been to Coco's Island? It's not a costal development,
but it's a marine park besieged with illegal shark poachers for sharks
fin. Hundreds and thousands of sharks were illegally killed by
Japanese
fisherman for fins, throwing the rest of the body back into the ocean.
This caused international outrage by the marine scientists, ecologists,
and scuba divers who take tortuous 36 boat rides (on 110 ft or smaller
liveaboard dive boats, the only way to get there) to dive with the
hammerhead and white tip sharks there.

The shark population was not affected in the slightest by the shark
poachers in the past 15 years since I first dived there in 1992.
That's
part of the big picture of the "survival of the fittest".

According to your natural environment theory, nobody should be even
DIVING with those sharks in their natural environment, or in all those
natural environments in French Polynesia where I've dived with
armies of sharks that make the squadrons of eagle rays pale in number
by comparison. Were those sharks adversely affected by admiring
scuba divers diving in their natural environment?

Only the myopic and prejudiced would think so.

But the biggest hypocrisy of all is that you think it's perfectly fine
for
YOURSELF to dive and film those eagle rays for decades, while it's
NOT okay for divers like myself to be diving in their natural
environment and SHARE my experience with them?

Just THINK about your own faulty logic and hypocrisy.


Eagle mating season in Cozumel (Dec - Mar) was a relatively new
phenomenon discovered by some locals where dive shops DON'T
go. I was diving with those eagle rays in 1998 before any dive shop
even knew about the eagle ray mating in the North. I posted this
in March 2000, when someone reported that Blue Angel was taking
divers to the spot between downtown and San Juan reef where
eagle rays visit regularly from the North:


I don't need no stinking dive shop to take me anywhere I want to go - I
use my own boat any time I want.


Did I say I dived with the eagle rays with any dive shop (stinking or
not)?
You are NOT the only local who has boats you know?

For you to be a local, you certainly have posted very little facts
about
diving in Cozumel during the past 15 years or rec.scuba, have you?
I wonder why?


And some locals have known about the
eagle rays for a lot longer you - some tried to keep a lid on it until
Cousteau opened his mouth long before you did.


Your credibility is sinking to a nadir right THERE! The Cousteaus
are not exactly ones shy of publicity of their own discovery. Jacque
discovered the sleeping sharks in Isla Mujeres, and within days, the
entire world (those tuned to marine biology and scuba) knew about
it. Why on earth should Cousteau NOT open his mouth and share
his experience -- except *I* have not heard anything about Cousteau's
discovery of those mating eagle rays in Cozumel.

Why should ANYONE try to keep a lid on the discovery?

That's you supreme selfishness and hypocrisy!

Finally, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the small island of Cozumel, where I
know the most-informed locals about diving, as well as the DMs who
often dived or fished near the eagle ray mating areas on the North
East side of the island NOT to have known about it for 15 years
after you claim you knew. Paul Padilla, Charos, and a few other
Cozumel DMs who know the divable locations throughout the
island like the palms of their hands would have known about it.

Are you affiliated with ANY dive shop? What did you do with the
filming of the eagle rays you did for 20 year?

In what you posted above, I simply question your credibility SERIOUSLY,
on factual as well as circumstantial evidence (that you have offered
NO knowledge about the eagle ray mating season/location BEFORE
or AFTER I made them public by posting in rec.scuba; and that you
have offered NO knowledge about various other dive sites in Cozumel
where the shop I dived with found the sleeping nurse sharks at the
palancar site now known as Palancar Bricks; or all those sites where
I wrote about the abundance of LARGE (six-inch or more) sea horses
of black, brown, striped, orange, and yellow.

I supposed you've filmed all of those 30 years ago, and was trying to
keep the lid from anyone else knowing about it, right?

IMNSHO about diving in Cozumel, you have an abundance of lack of
credibility, and plenty of prejudices.


From your description, I think you were at the site where I dived, a
ledge
at 75 to 90 fsw of very swift current. I am curious as to what profile
you
did with Blue Angle (depth/time). When I did it privately, we were
always
small groups of air-misers and we dived with EAN36 and were able to
stay
at 80 fsw for nearly an hour, hanging near the ledge while watching the

squadrons of rays pass by over and over again. That was a couple of
years
ago, before any dive shop took divers out there.

That put my first encounter with those squadrons of eagle rays back
to 1998, before the new cruise ship piers were built. The arrival of
the cruise ships, as much as 10 on some days, did not affect the
annual mating of those eagle rays one whit.


That's an opinion which some locals don't share. When we were filming
up there, we routinely ran the magazines dry. Now? what's the point?
There's not enough to bother with. Don't presume to tell me the eagle
ray population is the same today as it was in '98, or long before that.
That's an opinion that is shared by some locals, and me.


We weren't even talking about the same LOCATION of eagle ray mating
in the latest (circa 1998) discovery. Marine animals are known to
migrate to other locations at will. That's how they came to Cozumel
(from nowhere so to speak), and they could decide to go elsewhere
for plenty of reasons other than what YOU (an obvious non scientist
and non marine-biologist and non echthyologist) speculated.

If you want to be constructive about your KNOWLEDGE of marine
life in Cozumel, why don't you tell us some of YOUR discoveries or
experiences -- which had been more or less vacuous until the not
credible claim of your in this thread.


The marine animals are much smarter and can adapt to changing
environments (as "survival of the fittest") much better than homo
sapiens, or the myopic give them credit for.


You can try shopping that crap around with your pod friends, but for all
the areas of the world that have been adversely affected by coastal
development and the pollution from it, you're an idiot, and we know it.
Now you do too.


Now you're just ****ing rather than dispensing any KNOWLEDGE, or
even trying to substantiate your OPINION.


So, that's good news.

Cruise ships are always bad news.



Only to the myotic and prejudiced.

-- Bob.

Imagine that... a pod person calling me myotic and prejudiced. How
quaint.


You can call me a "pod person" after you've dived in Easter Island, AND
after you have been the ONLY passenger on the entire cruise ship who
chose scuba diving in Easter Island over gawking at the world-famous
giant statues, the moai.

Half you dived anywhere in the world other than in your own boat
filming
eagle rays the past 20 years?

Myopic and prejudiced -- I think I sized you up pretty accurately, and
this post DOCUMENTED the reason why.

-- Bob.

  #10  
Old November 16th, 2005, 08:20 PM posted to rec.travel.cruises,rec.scuba.locations,rec.scuba
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IDIOT Ron Lee is the Anal Fixation Poster Boy of the Year inrec.scuba

Reef Fish wrote:

IDIOT Ron, I was merely responding to Grummy on his question. What's
so self-aggrandizing about stating that own a map with depth chart (at
home but not with me) and that I would ask the captain about it, when I
have lunch with him with a small group?

You cannot let an ordinary discussion of Cozumel, diving, or cruising
with you making your anal-fixated NOISE!

Grow up, little Poster Boy!


in person, does poor bob ling show signs like these of ESL?


-- Bob.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cozumel Welcomes Cruisers with a Festival! Ray Goldenberg Cruises 3 November 15th, 2005 08:44 AM
Carnival To Cozumel Details! Ray Goldenberg Cruises 2 November 10th, 2005 10:26 PM
Cozumel news George Leppla Cruises 17 October 31st, 2005 06:52 PM
Cozumel report on 8/4/05 Carnival Sensation cruise Andy P. Jung Cruises 1 August 18th, 2005 07:22 AM
Cozumel status Dillon Pyron Cruises 2 July 22nd, 2005 11:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.