Geese Hartje, Deckers isn't that bad. You just have to pretend that the flakes of toilet paper are flower peddles, car parts are the remnants of past civilizations, the smell of human fecal matter comes from the nutrient rich soil, and the AMD is just rare mineral deposits on the river bed. I mean come on, what did Deckers ever do? Although walking into class smelling of decaying processed matter is annoying.
Anyway, I have to agree. There are so many good boofs on that creek that one more isn't going to make that much of a difference. And if your creative you don't even have to get out of your boat.
Thanks for the input guys. I deffintly dont wont to create another hazard or anything. It was just an interesting thought. 2nd week of may is when it seems to run the best.
Sorry TG--you set yourself up too nicely for that one. I agree though, good posts, and if anything you are responsible for making people think before going out and acting on an impulse--this is good no?
Bigboater why are you and I always discussing poo on this board?
I like all of the posts, and I don't really have a one solution fits all answer.
I would leave the Escalante sieve alone because it is not a major danger, and if you remember back to the mid 90's through 2001 the sieve has filled in and cleared out 3 or 4 times. Nature tends to change that creek fairly quickly. The land at leap of faith is also private I think.
I'm hypocritical though, because I have considered moving a pile of rocks on Yule creek that are also not an unavoidable danger. I hate to say it, but moving the rocks there would make one drop only slightly easier (a difference of 5+ with consequences to 5+ with slightly less consequences). The argument to move them is that it rids the drop of a somewhat unnecesary risk, making it so more people are able to paddle the run. This is especially true from an access point of view because if you portage that drop then you walk out on private property. So, is moving a pile of rocks that doesn't affect the difficulty (only the consequences) the right thing to do if more people are able to enjoy the run because of it and it may create less injuries of those that attempt that canyon? I don't know... Side note, the river isn't entirely natural since it has an old road which created a massive scree slope on one side of the river.
Yes, I'm talking about the wall check rapid where I smashed my back. Maybe someone that has been there can comment...
yea-wallslammer... we got through that one, but not without a bunch of pain. luckily our only injuries were russell's [rip] cracked rib. but the leap of faith situation.. it seemed to me that not only did the sieve wash out, some big rocks seemed to have moved as well, anyone agree?
If you reduce consequence doesn't that insinuate a loss in difficulty
Quote:
When GOD - LIKE Odysseus returned from the wars in Troy, he hanged all on one rope a dozen slave girls of his household whom he suspected of misbehavior during his absence.
I use more of a Corran Addison type of rating when I look at rapids. There are other posts on this in the past, but basically a rapid has three ratings. The first is technical difficulty, the second is consequence, the third is remoteness.
For example, a narrow manky creek may be tough to paddle cleanly but it might not have huge consequences because the water is too shallow and not powerful enough to really do any damage to a boater. It's technical with light consequences. Yet, go to Washington and you will find numerous drops above 20 feet, like 30 ft Big Brother. The drop is super easy to run clean. You paddle towards the lip and boof off of a flake. Yet, well known boaters have died there, and the consequences are notable on both sides of the falls.
In my opinion the two elements can be seperated when describing a drop.
I probably could have chosen a better example. But in all reality that drop is easier to have a clean line on than Adrenaline Falls, the meat of SSV, and almost all of USB. Reason being that you have one key move to make, not 3 in a row. You will see what I mean if you paddle it.
I'm not saying a whole lot about this topic, but I will go as far as to say I try and keep things simple. I'm no Coran out there but if a serious threat is removed from a drop ( IE> Sieve, Manky trees, rocks, Etc.) then the consequence has been reduced. I feel in most cases a bit more at ease and so don't fear a rapid as much making it seem bit less difficult for myself. I get your point of view and your right, a sick hairy drop, will remain a sick hairy drop in most cases. Good Luck and Be Safe, Remember I was entertained by the way the statement read and felt like posting.
Quote:
Scientists have an epigram: ontogeny repeats phylogeny.
Sorry TG--you set yourself up too nicely for that one. I agree though, good posts, and if anything you are responsible for making people think before going out and acting on an impulse--this is good no? 
If you reduce consequence doesn't that insinuate a loss in difficulty 
I'm not saying a whole lot about this topic, but I will go as far as to say I try and keep things simple. I'm no Coran out there but if a serious threat is removed from a drop ( IE> Sieve, Manky trees, rocks, Etc.) then the consequence has been reduced. I feel in most cases a bit more at ease and so don't fear a rapid as much making it seem bit less difficult for myself. I get your point of view and your right, a sick hairy drop, will remain a sick hairy drop in most cases. Good Luck and Be Safe, Remember I was entertained by the way the statement read and felt like posting. 
Linear Mode
