While I was previously content to pay a short-term fee to enjoy the sights and sounds at the water's edge and in the woods I am most certainly not prepared to pay £3 for my every visit and will in future return to the equally impressive and relaxing Burghley Park.

I am sure that the Rutland Water administration will not miss my visits, or the £200 to £300 a year that I pay to assist in the upkeep of the park, but am I alone in vetoing my visits? I think not.

Another example, obviously, of the big company, in this case Anglian Water, hitting on the enjoyment of the individual by pricing those less well off out of the market.

I have taken the time, incid-entally, to air my concerns with both the cycling centre and the cafeterias, both of which were equally embarrassed by my frustrations, pointing out that the ultimate decision was made by Anglian Water and out of their hands.

It was presumably made by persons far removed from the "sharp end" of their business looking solely at higher revenue with a reduced service.

Richard Birch
Water Street,
Stamford


I am writing to complain about the excessive car park charges now in place at Rutland Water.

How they expect people to pay £3 for a short 20-minute visit either for a cup of tea in a cafe or to walk the dog is beyond me!

Other local places like Burghley Park and Ferry meadows are still free to park at. They obviously value local people.

What a shame that Anglian Water doesn't!

Tim Harris
Station Road,
Ketton


I wholeheartedly agree with the letter by Miss Smith regarding the increase in car parking charges at Rutland Water.

Many local people including myself use the facilities for only a short period of time, and would feel aggrieved in paying for a daily charge when only staying for an hour. £3 is acceptable when parking for the day. However in the cooler months the majority of visitors only stay for a short time, why not have differing tariffs dependant upon the time of year?

Anglian Water says that it has overheads in the form of staff, essential maintenance etc and that all profits are ploughed back into car parks.

I would like to point out that the car parks have a ticket machine in the off season and are not staffed so there are minimal costs (the machine can easily accommodate differing charges).

I also wonder just how much revenue the car parks at Rutland generate, and if the monies are reinvested in car parking, is it solely at Rutland or are we subsidising other reservoirs?

On that note what are the charges at their other sites Grafham, Pitsford and Ardleigh?

I also feel sorry for the on-site businesses – they are probably tied into long-term contracts and the drop in visitors will surely affect their trade. If the charges remain the same I will simply choose to visit other local attractions such as Wakerley Woods.

Rob Edmunds
Denford Road,
Ringstead,
Northamptonshire


People will still visit the waters and enjoy the activities, but will park on the road and walk through the gates without paying for the facilities, as a few still do.

As for locals, a season ticket is ideal. They can visit 364 days in a year and have the choice of using all the car parks.

There may be a problem getting the council to put down double yellow lines on the highway and the police to supervise.

NJ Doughty
Walnut Close,
Empingham


I would like to comment on the recent introduction of an all-day car park charge at Rutland Water.

In my opinion, a fixed £3 charge for a short-term stay is unfair, and unreasonably high.

As a local resident, I enjoy the views around the Water, and use both Whitwell and Normanton car parks fairly regularly (about once a month), always for short periods of between one and two hours.

How can Anglian Water justify a 300 per cent increase in car parking charges? I do feel that these new charges for car parking are greedy, and discriminate against "loyal" local residents.

I would need to visit 30 times to get any value from a season ticket as a short-stay visitor, compared to last year!

Ferry Meadows is free midweek and in the winter and Burghley Park is free too. I know where I'll be going on my short walks from now on.

Sally Archer
High Street,
Ketton


I am writing to say I believe the loss of the short stay car parking charge at Rutland Water is unfair and a £3 charge for any period is too much.

I am a local visitor to Rutland Water and the new charges for car parking are greedy. I would need to visit 30 times to get any value from a season ticket as a short stay visitor compared to last year.

How can Anglian Water justify a 300 per cent increase in car parking charges. How typically greedy of these big companies.

It's free to park at Ferry Mead-ows in the week and in the winter and Burghley Park is free too. I'll be heading to one of those places for my short walks in future.

Sharon Watret
Derwent Avenue,
Edith Weston


The car park charges are too high at Rutland Water and we need a short stay option urgently. There's no point going to walk the dog etc any more. I'm not happy.

Steve Gill
Brooke Avenue,
Stamford