Re: [bolger] Martha Jane
Martha Jane #1 is available. She has not been sailed for about 7 years, kept under a temporary shed roof until it collapsed under snow load and cracked the wooden mast. Repairs necessary: new mast, 1/2 of bottom needs outer 1/2" sheathing and fiberglass, some painting. Comes with trailer & motor & jib. Mice got to main, so it needs replacing. Price negotiable after your inspection. Located 25 miles north of Washington, DC in Gaithersburg, MD. NormWolfe3@...
Details?
tapped, not typed
On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:57,norman.wolfe@...[bolger] <bolger@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Martha Jane #1 built by Cullison Small Craft is available. Motor, trailer, etc.
sample photos. I do not know if this is the same hull:
Martha Jane / bolger sailing mj 2_jpg.jpg
Martha Jane #1 built by Cullison Small Craft is available. Motor, trailer, etc.
sample photos. I do not know if this is the same hull:
Martha Jane / bolger sailing mj 2_jpg.jpg
sample photos. I do not know if this is the same hull:
Martha Jane / bolger sailing mj 2_jpg.jpg
Norman.wolfe@...
Bob,
Am I too late?
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Robert Chamberland<chamberlands@...>wrote:I have a set of plans for MJ. This is the set without any updates. No boat has been constructed from these plans. Free to the first call. Send Email to me.
Bob Chamberland
>MJ plans
have been spoken for. Anyone for "Badger"?
For how much?
Michael Allison
MJ plans have been spoken for. Anyone for "Badger"?
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Chamberland" <chamberlands@...> wrote:
>
> I have a set of plans for MJ. This is the set without any updates. No boat has been constructed from these plans. Free to the first call. Send Email to me.
> Bob Chamberland
>
I have a set of plans for MJ. This is the set without any updates. No boat has been constructed from these plans. Free to the first call. Send Email to me.
Bob Chamberland
Bob Chamberland
I also prefer the look of the original Martha Jane, maybe because I studied the plans and photographs for so long having come close to building her. A simpler and cheaper build too, capable enough for most conditions. I was lucky enough to sail on Graham Cheers Martha Jane in a race in light conditions, she overtook most boats in the fleet and pointed into the wind supprisingly well. And what a big boat feel. Does anyone know what became of the "Shirley Valenine?" I'd heard she was for sale a couple of years ago.
Col
Col
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "proaconstrictor" <proaconstrictor@...> wrote:
>
> I always thought that the MJ was pretty handsome from some angles. The newer version is a hodgepodge, and very clumped together. With a few more variations, it would make a nice trimaran, but so far it falls short. The original intent was to make it what the original plan delivered. If I built one, and I have certainly been tempted, I would learn to live within it's capabilities. I can go camping pretty much indefinitely on a bike with 40-60 pounds of gear. Admittedly a boat also adds it's own needs. A small boat is a small boat, they can be wonderful. But load is everything.
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:13 PM, prairiedog2332 <arvent@> wrote:
> >
> > > The question I have is how much weight will MJ hold and stay on her
> > > lines? Especially if you add a steel bottom plate??
> >
> > Be sure to look up the article in MAIB V20 N09 "Martha Jane upgrade",
> > where PB&F discuss the various load configurations, including the
> > stability curves with and without sponsons and steel plate ballast.
> >
>
I always thought that the MJ was pretty handsome from some angles. The newer version is a hodgepodge, and very clumped together. With a few more variations, it would make a nice trimaran, but so far it falls short. The original intent was to make it what the original plan delivered. If I built one, and I have certainly been tempted, I would learn to live within it's capabilities. I can go camping pretty much indefinitely on a bike with 40-60 pounds of gear. Admittedly a boat also adds it's own needs. A small boat is a small boat, they can be wonderful. But load is everything.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:13 PM, prairiedog2332 <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> > The question I have is how much weight will MJ hold and stay on her
> > lines? Especially if you add a steel bottom plate??
>
> Be sure to look up the article in MAIB V20 N09 "Martha Jane upgrade",
> where PB&F discuss the various load configurations, including the
> stability curves with and without sponsons and steel plate ballast.
>
Thank you for that input Bruce. To Nels point about sailing characteristics of MJ, it makes sense to me that using it as a motor sailer, I would be less sensitive to such problems.
I am aware of the passage by the AF-4B, and don't intend to be that lonely. ;-)
Don
I am aware of the passage by the AF-4B, and don't intend to be that lonely. ;-)
Don
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <hallman@...> wrote:
>
> Be sure to look up the article in MAIB V20 N09 "Martha Jane upgrade",
> where PB&F discuss the various load configurations, including the
> stability curves with and without sponsons and steel plate ballast.
>
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:13 PM, prairiedog2332 <arvent@...> wrote:
where PB&F discuss the various load configurations, including the
stability curves with and without sponsons and steel plate ballast.
> The question I have is how much weight will MJ hold and stay on herBe sure to look up the article in MAIB V20 N09 "Martha Jane upgrade",
> lines? Especially if you add a steel bottom plate??
where PB&F discuss the various load configurations, including the
stability curves with and without sponsons and steel plate ballast.
I think this is the post that sparked the idea of towing a boat behind a
MJ to obtain extra stowage.
I really don't see how this would solve the issue of deteriorating
performance if the hull is overloaded. In fact I would think it might be
worse than just overloading it. In any area with strong tidal or river
currents or in a canal with locks, I don't think I would want to be
towing a loaded boat behind a MJ. Nor when I wanted to tack since a MJ
carries very little momentum to carry itself through stays.
I would either stay within load limits or look for a hull with a higher
displacement. At the same time that sailing rig and shallow draft would
be a real advantage on that trip. One fellow did it in a Michalak AF4B
and will be publishing a write-up in Duckworks in January. He traveled
solo using a 9 hp Tohatsu 4-stroke, but tells us there is not enough
room in that boat for 2 people.
The question I have is how much weight will MJ hold and stay on her
lines? Especially if you add a steel bottom plate?? Two people, motor
and fuel maybe 500 lbs. Then there is all the other sailing stuff like
ground tackle etc. How much weight allowance for food, clothing and
living stuff is available?
Nels
MJ to obtain extra stowage.
I really don't see how this would solve the issue of deteriorating
performance if the hull is overloaded. In fact I would think it might be
worse than just overloading it. In any area with strong tidal or river
currents or in a canal with locks, I don't think I would want to be
towing a loaded boat behind a MJ. Nor when I wanted to tack since a MJ
carries very little momentum to carry itself through stays.
I would either stay within load limits or look for a hull with a higher
displacement. At the same time that sailing rig and shallow draft would
be a real advantage on that trip. One fellow did it in a Michalak AF4B
and will be publishing a write-up in Duckworks in January. He traveled
solo using a 9 hp Tohatsu 4-stroke, but tells us there is not enough
room in that boat for 2 people.
The question I have is how much weight will MJ hold and stay on her
lines? Especially if you add a steel bottom plate?? Two people, motor
and fuel maybe 500 lbs. Then there is all the other sailing stuff like
ground tackle etc. How much weight allowance for food, clothing and
living stuff is available?
Nels
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> When I look at the specs for Martha Jane it seems to me it might be
> quite easy to overload it in which case its performance would
> deteriorate significantly. (You have to keep that bow and stern above
> the water a bit unless heeled.)
>
> EMPTY WEIGHT : 1400 lb.
> BALLAST: 500 lb. (water)
> DISPLACEMENT.: 2350 lb.
> POWER: 5 to 7 1/2 hp
>
>http://mkstocks.tripod.com/boats/martha_jane/
>
> I would certainly not want to carry fuel in the sponsons but I think
> their is space for a couple extra fuel containers in the bow well. But
> there is not a lot of extra weight capacity for fuel and a heavy
motor,
> plus living necessities on a long trip.
>
> Maybe I am reading the figures incorrectly?
>
> Nels
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "daschultz2000" daschultz8275@
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I remember the video from the memorial. The MJ was gonna overhaul
that
> "real sailboat" in short order, with a fraction of the sail square
> footage deployed, AND a fraction of crew hands on board. Very very
cool.
> >
> > I think MJ gets ignored simply because it is homely, especially the
> original version.
> >
> > The newer version with the Navigator style cabin added is much
better
> looking and no doubt much more comfortable. I would like to do the
> Great Circle trip in a few years, and do it in a homemade boat that
> moves at a leisurely pace. An MJ seems to the the boat best suited to
> that mission. I anticipate having to tow a fuel tank in the form of a
> June Bug to get the motor range I'd like to have. I would have a
15-18hp
> 4 stroke on the stern. Good to have the HP if needed.
> >
> > IMO the double stern mounted rudders are easier to build and
maintain
> than the original design.
> >
> > I have original version plans but would upgrade with the latest from
> PB&F to build. I would make a steel shoe to clad most of the bottom
for
> protection AND the extra ballast the design needs. I can't see hauling
> weight just for the sake of weight if I can get more advantage from
it.
> >
> > I've yet to accept the sponsons Bolger added with the cabin mod,
both
> part of an effort to make the design self-recovering from a knockdown.
> They look tacked on. But I'd guess it would be a bad idea to skip
them.
> I suppose I could make something out of big PVC pipe and bolt them on.
> Somehow that seems more acceptable to me. Hmmmm, maybe they could
double
> as fuel tanks?
> >
> > You are very right about the 25' Chebacco w' a cabin as a
> motorsailer/canal cruiser. The third choice, if PB&F sill has the
> plans, is the original FMS of which there is a picture in "Boats with
an
> Open Mind". That hull is pretty much a 26' Diablo. Should be an easy
> build.
> >
> > Don
> >
> > --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "hobyarr" knic0014@ wrote:
> > >
> > > This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are
> ideal
> > > trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and
> much
> > > ignored for some reason.
> > >
> >
>
Oh, and last. The Great Circle is coastal, river, and canal travel. One need never lose sight of land, and not need more than a few days provision. Some safety margin would be wise during the ocean coastal portion but you can reprovision every couple of days on the rivers and canal portion.
Don
Don
Nels,
Yeah you are certainly right about problems in using the sponsons for anything but flotation. Bad idea on my part. A June Bug as a tanker is probably not a bad idea though, and I'm not sure a 15-18hp is a huge amount heavier than a 9.9 so I'm still comfortable with that.
Building according to plan, Keeping the glass cladding to a minimum, and especially not exceeding the scantlings specified should result in a light boat which has more useful load. I would include an electric pump to empty for ballast for better motoring.
MJ is a big box and could be readily overloaded I'm sure, but that's not, IMO a design flaw, just something an owner needs to watch.
Don
Yeah you are certainly right about problems in using the sponsons for anything but flotation. Bad idea on my part. A June Bug as a tanker is probably not a bad idea though, and I'm not sure a 15-18hp is a huge amount heavier than a 9.9 so I'm still comfortable with that.
Building according to plan, Keeping the glass cladding to a minimum, and especially not exceeding the scantlings specified should result in a light boat which has more useful load. I would include an electric pump to empty for ballast for better motoring.
MJ is a big box and could be readily overloaded I'm sure, but that's not, IMO a design flaw, just something an owner needs to watch.
Don
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> When I look at the specs for Martha Jane it seems to me it might be
> quite easy to overload it in which case its performance would
> deteriorate significantly....
When I look at the specs for Martha Jane it seems to me it might be quite easy to overload it in which case its performance would deteriorate significantly. (You have to keep that bow and stern above the water a bit unless heeled.)
EMPTY WEIGHT : 1400 lb.
BALLAST: 500 lb. (water)
DISPLACEMENT.: 2350 lb.
POWER: 5 to 7 1/2 hp
http://mkstocks.tripod.com/boats/martha_jane/
I would certainly not want to carry fuel in the sponsons but I think their is space for a couple extra fuel containers in the bow well. But there is not a lot of extra weight capacity for fuel and a heavy motor, plus living necessities on a long trip.
Maybe I am reading the figures incorrectly?
Nels
EMPTY WEIGHT : 1400 lb.
BALLAST: 500 lb. (water)
DISPLACEMENT.: 2350 lb.
POWER: 5 to 7 1/2 hp
http://mkstocks.tripod.com/boats/martha_jane/
I would certainly not want to carry fuel in the sponsons but I think their is space for a couple extra fuel containers in the bow well. But there is not a lot of extra weight capacity for fuel and a heavy motor, plus living necessities on a long trip.
Maybe I am reading the figures incorrectly?
Nels
--- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "daschultz2000" <daschultz8275@...> wrote:
>
>
> I remember the video from the memorial. The MJ was gonna overhaul that "real sailboat" in short order, with a fraction of the sail square footage deployed, AND a fraction of crew hands on board. Very very cool.
>
> I think MJ gets ignored simply because it is homely, especially the original version.
>
> The newer version with the Navigator style cabin added is much better looking and no doubt much more comfortable. I would like to do the Great Circle trip in a few years, and do it in a homemade boat that moves at a leisurely pace. An MJ seems to the the boat best suited to that mission. I anticipate having to tow a fuel tank in the form of a June Bug to get the motor range I'd like to have. I would have a 15-18hp 4 stroke on the stern. Good to have the HP if needed.
>
> IMO the double stern mounted rudders are easier to build and maintain than the original design.
>
> I have original version plans but would upgrade with the latest from PB&F to build. I would make a steel shoe to clad most of the bottom for protection AND the extra ballast the design needs. I can't see hauling weight just for the sake of weight if I can get more advantage from it.
>
> I've yet to accept the sponsons Bolger added with the cabin mod, both part of an effort to make the design self-recovering from a knockdown. They look tacked on. But I'd guess it would be a bad idea to skip them. I suppose I could make something out of big PVC pipe and bolt them on. Somehow that seems more acceptable to me. Hmmmm, maybe they could double as fuel tanks?
>
> You are very right about the 25' Chebacco w' a cabin as a motorsailer/canal cruiser. The third choice, if PB&F sill has the plans, is the original FMS of which there is a picture in "Boats with an Open Mind". That hull is pretty much a 26' Diablo. Should be an easy build.
>
> Don
>
> --- In bolger@yahoogroups.com, "hobyarr" knic0014@ wrote:
> >
> > This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
> > trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
> > ignored for some reason.
> >
>
I remember the video from the memorial. The MJ was gonna overhaul that "real sailboat" in short order, with a fraction of the sail square footage deployed, AND a fraction of crew hands on board. Very very cool.
I think MJ gets ignored simply because it is homely, especially the original version.
The newer version with the Navigator style cabin added is much better looking and no doubt much more comfortable. I would like to do the Great Circle trip in a few years, and do it in a homemade boat that moves at a leisurely pace. An MJ seems to the the boat best suited to that mission. I anticipate having to tow a fuel tank in the form of a June Bug to get the motor range I'd like to have. I would have a 15-18hp 4 stroke on the stern. Good to have the HP if needed.
IMO the double stern mounted rudders are easier to build and maintain than the original design.
I have original version plans but would upgrade with the latest from PB&F to build. I would make a steel shoe to clad most of the bottom for protection AND the extra ballast the design needs. I can't see hauling weight just for the sake of weight if I can get more advantage from it.
I've yet to accept the sponsons Bolger added with the cabin mod, both part of an effort to make the design self-recovering from a knockdown. They look tacked on. But I'd guess it would be a bad idea to skip them. I suppose I could make something out of big PVC pipe and bolt them on. Somehow that seems more acceptable to me. Hmmmm, maybe they could double as fuel tanks?
You are very right about the 25' Chebacco w' a cabin as a motorsailer/canal cruiser. The third choice, if PB&F sill has the plans, is the original FMS of which there is a picture in "Boats with an Open Mind". That hull is pretty much a 26' Diablo. Should be an easy build.
Don
I think MJ gets ignored simply because it is homely, especially the original version.
The newer version with the Navigator style cabin added is much better looking and no doubt much more comfortable. I would like to do the Great Circle trip in a few years, and do it in a homemade boat that moves at a leisurely pace. An MJ seems to the the boat best suited to that mission. I anticipate having to tow a fuel tank in the form of a June Bug to get the motor range I'd like to have. I would have a 15-18hp 4 stroke on the stern. Good to have the HP if needed.
IMO the double stern mounted rudders are easier to build and maintain than the original design.
I have original version plans but would upgrade with the latest from PB&F to build. I would make a steel shoe to clad most of the bottom for protection AND the extra ballast the design needs. I can't see hauling weight just for the sake of weight if I can get more advantage from it.
I've yet to accept the sponsons Bolger added with the cabin mod, both part of an effort to make the design self-recovering from a knockdown. They look tacked on. But I'd guess it would be a bad idea to skip them. I suppose I could make something out of big PVC pipe and bolt them on. Somehow that seems more acceptable to me. Hmmmm, maybe they could double as fuel tanks?
You are very right about the 25' Chebacco w' a cabin as a motorsailer/canal cruiser. The third choice, if PB&F sill has the plans, is the original FMS of which there is a picture in "Boats with an Open Mind". That hull is pretty much a 26' Diablo. Should be an easy build.
Don
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "hobyarr" <knic0014@...> wrote:
>
> This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
> trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
> ignored for some reason.
>
Sorry -Forget the query. Searched mods FSM nothing came up, then read your previous post and there it is - Darrell
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "hobyarr" <knic0014@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Nels - What are the mods you refer to for FSM. - Thanks - Darrell
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@> wrote:
> >
> > Woodenboat Magazine's 2011 Small Boats issue has a really nice write-up
> > on Martha Jane.
> >
> > Like FMS MJ has received some significant modifications. The one I was
> > not aware of was the change to dual transom hung, shallow draft
> > rudders, of which the author shares that Mr. Bolger "admitted that the
> > new dual rudders offered superior virtues."
> >
> > This would make a nice motorsailer for a couple expecially with the
> > optional higher house like the one Mick Stockstill changed his over to
> > and which it is quoted, "uses this boat mostly for motoring." (I believe
> > he lives on or near a river?)
> >
> > This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
> > trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
> > ignored for some reason.
> >
> > Greetings of the season all!
> >
> > Nels
> >
>
Hello Nels - What are the mods you refer to for FSM. - Thanks - Darrell
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "prairiedog2332" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> Woodenboat Magazine's 2011 Small Boats issue has a really nice write-up
> on Martha Jane.
>
> Like FMS MJ has received some significant modifications. The one I was
> not aware of was the change to dual transom hung, shallow draft
> rudders, of which the author shares that Mr. Bolger "admitted that the
> new dual rudders offered superior virtues."
>
> This would make a nice motorsailer for a couple expecially with the
> optional higher house like the one Mick Stockstill changed his over to
> and which it is quoted, "uses this boat mostly for motoring." (I believe
> he lives on or near a river?)
>
> This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
> trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
> ignored for some reason.
>
> Greetings of the season all!
>
> Nels
>
A Martha Jane may be good under power but any body that watched George
Broadlick at the memorial knows that they sail fast also. Very deceptive
because there is no wake.
HJ
Broadlick at the memorial knows that they sail fast also. Very deceptive
because there is no wake.
HJ
On 12/14/2010 12:04 PM, prairiedog2332 wrote:
> Woodenboat Magazine's 2011 Small Boats issue has a really nice write-up
> on Martha Jane.
>
> Like FMS MJ has received some significant modifications. The one I was
> not aware of was the change to dual transom hung, shallow draft
> rudders, of which the author shares that Mr. Bolger "admitted that the
> new dual rudders offered superior virtues."
>
> This would make a nice motorsailer for a couple expecially with the
> optional higher house like the one Mick Stockstill changed his over to
> and which it is quoted, "uses this boat mostly for motoring." (I believe
> he lives on or near a river?)
>
> This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
> trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
> ignored for some reason.
>
> Greetings of the season all!
>
> Nels
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - NO "GO AWAY SPAMMER!" posts!!! Please!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, respamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
Woodenboat Magazine's 2011 Small Boats issue has a really nice write-up
on Martha Jane.
Like FMS MJ has received some significant modifications. The one I was
not aware of was the change to dual transom hung, shallow draft
rudders, of which the author shares that Mr. Bolger "admitted that the
new dual rudders offered superior virtues."
This would make a nice motorsailer for a couple expecially with the
optional higher house like the one Mick Stockstill changed his over to
and which it is quoted, "uses this boat mostly for motoring." (I believe
he lives on or near a river?)
This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
ignored for some reason.
Greetings of the season all!
Nels
on Martha Jane.
Like FMS MJ has received some significant modifications. The one I was
not aware of was the change to dual transom hung, shallow draft
rudders, of which the author shares that Mr. Bolger "admitted that the
new dual rudders offered superior virtues."
This would make a nice motorsailer for a couple expecially with the
optional higher house like the one Mick Stockstill changed his over to
and which it is quoted, "uses this boat mostly for motoring." (I believe
he lives on or near a river?)
This design, along with the glass house version of Chebacco are ideal
trailerable river and canal cruisers for a couple in my view and much
ignored for some reason.
Greetings of the season all!
Nels
The last set of prints regarding a Bolger design from them was a copy of a copy of a copy.......
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Gentry" <alias1719@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "sirdarnell" <sirdarnell@> wrote:
> >
> > Someone was looking for pictures recently?
> > ************
>
> Let's please not post anything alluding to that company, which was, in my understanding, systematically robbing Mr. Bolger of his due royalties, and is currently doing the same for Ms. Altenburger.
> Thanks.
>
Sorry about that. Just noticed they has a lot of pictures.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Gentry" <alias1719@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "sirdarnell" <sirdarnell@> wrote:
> >
> > Someone was looking for pictures recently?
> > ************
>
> Let's please not post anything alluding to that company, which was, in my understanding, systematically robbing Mr. Bolger of his due royalties, and is currently doing the same for Ms. Altenburger.
> Thanks.
>
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "sirdarnell" <sirdarnell@...> wrote:
Thanks.
>Let's please not post anything alluding to that company, which was, in my understanding, systematically robbing Mr. Bolger of his due royalties, and is currently doing the same for Ms. Altenburger.
> Someone was looking for pictures recently?
> ************
Thanks.
Will you be stopping in Albany, NY?
You don't have to go to FL for a Martha Jane
http://www.alaska.net/~mzeiger/Boat_Building.html
HJ
jrozman1 wrote:
http://www.alaska.net/~mzeiger/Boat_Building.html
HJ
jrozman1 wrote:
>Hello from Alaska,
>I'll be in Fl. later this month. Does anyone know of a MJ I could
>take a peek at.
>
>
>
Hello from Alaska,
I'll be in Fl. later this month. Does anyone know of a MJ I could
take a peek at.
I'll be in Fl. later this month. Does anyone know of a MJ I could
take a peek at.