I play boat, therefore, I am

[benrodda]

So with all of this talk of Confluence park it has me thinking. Currenlty I am working with Denver Mountain Parks to open up some areas on Denver Mountain Parks Land for Climbing. They have just recieved a grant ($11 mil) to revisit land use and are actaully very very interested in opening up new areas for climbing. We are preparing a proposal with the access fund. This will be thrown into the mix and debated this summer. I feel A bid for the whitewater park is in order for them.

So.... does confluence fall under Denver Mountain Parks Jurisdiction? Maybe they would be a really good source at this point for gates and such.

One point that was emphasised by someone here was that confluence is a great location to give exposure to the sport as well as Denver Mountain Parks so it may be worth the investment.

Is there enough flow there to look at the possibility of changing the top or bottom rapid to make it even more suitable for playboating? The Mclaughlin group which is the firm the developed the original park and has also desigend the bladder wave in Idaho is Denver based.... Maybe they might have some ideas to improve this park.


http://www.mclaughlinwhitewater.com/...confluence.htm

http://www.mclaughlinwhitewater.com/..._horseshoe.htm

[Phillips]

I personally have no problem with gates at confluence. Gates have never bothered me. As long as you can swing em to the side, its not a problem. After FRPA 1 mentioned all the good reasons for gates at confluence, I have to agree that its a good idea.

I just don't wan't to see more drama, especially at a place like confluence which is the antithesis of the play kayak scene. Now that we've agreed that Confluence is great place for slalom, I think gates are a good thing.

[FRPA1]

Thanks for piping in.... I would love to see more sports coming together and creating a ~Denver Outdoors Coalition~ or something of the sort.
There is currently a large Stake Holders Group that is made up of Shops (Don and Jon at Confluence), Risa Shimoda, REI, McLaughlin Engineers, myself and many others that have the best interest of not only redoing and the bettering of Confluence but also improving the vision and water quality of the Platte River.

The City has recently given way to dredging the Confluence course because of this group and has began to look at large scale rebuild options to the site, including the lengthening of the course and "changeable structures" that accommodate water flow per desired feature.

The goal is to stretch the course down to the bottom bridge and create channels that attract slalom and/or play boaters in different areas.

There are so many opportunities for growth and development once we overcome the underlying issue of water quality.

I am looking forward to seeing the continual interest and growth in our Stake Holders Group as well the further collaboration of all paddle sport users and outdoors enthusiasts.

Lets start brainstorming together and screw the flaming of the typical web posts and find something big and make it happen.


If anyone wants to know more of the Stake Holders group, contact Don/Jon or me for further info.

Chris
http://www.whitewaterracing.org
chris@whitewaterracing.org
720.205.9092

[kakahead]

Originally Posted by PhillyBoop

. The river is for all, not your closed minded breed.

I dont agree with what they did, but theres no need to sterotype. Jerks are jerks, regardless of what plastic flotation device they are sitting in.

[mvhyde]

Probably they'll need to raise the dam on river left by a few feet...6 ft to 8 ft would be nice, reconfig the island and raise it. probably get another 3 drops in, maybe 4. But they should space them out a bit more. Down to the bridge would be nice. They'll lose part of the boat landing, but that thing needs serious cleanup. there's a bunch of rebar around it that's scary and sharp and rusty.

[paddlingfool]

Well, one of the sad things about the comment that confluence park is "for play boaters" is that the person making that statement doesn't know the history of that section. Ron Mason was one of the people who designed it and got it built in the 1970's - Mason was one of the premier slalom and play boaters in Colorado of that era (back "in the day" most boaters did both!) and the confluence section was first used for slalom training and slalom races. The frustration that slalom racers tend to have (other than that so few appreciate the history) is that there aren't that many places where gates can be hung - lots of places where holes can be played and waves surfed - and when some thoughtless buffoon strikes something in a few minutes that can take hours to construct - we wonder what is happening to the sport we love.

[bailito]

you guys are all pussies
straight up.
Deal like real humans.
communicate.
dont cry.
dry your eye.
worse than frat boys

thats almost a haiku

word to your mother.

[RDNEK]

Not sure if it is the 4 or so burbon drinks but .....

that haiku has me rollin

[BastrdSonOfElvis]

The traditional hokku consisted of a pattern of approximately 5, 7, 5 "on". The Japanese word "on", meaning "sound", corresponds to a mora, a phonetic unit similar but not identical to the syllable of a language such as English.

So, a more traditional "haiku" -- as we have adapted the word -- might read:

Slalom gates come down
Race boaters cry like bitches
Buzz flaming ensues.

another to be fair:

Lame play boater brahs
Destroy public property
Like gaping assholes.


Discuss.

[rhm]

first off i am probably more of a playboater than anything else, i like creeking, and have never sat my butt in a slalom boat once. however, i have never felt the need to tear down any slalom gates that were in my way. probably because i have never encountered any gates that were in my way. but even if they were in the way i would probably just get annoyed and go on to the next play spot. that being said, can we get past this playboater vs. slalom boater crap.

Originally Posted by Spank McDogal

Think about who actually put man made obstructions in the river channel, vs. who just showed up to boat in the rivers natural coorador. Would you put a couple of ski race gate in the middle of a superpipe and make such a stink when they get pulled by a couple riders.

spank here seems a little angry toward our friends the slalom boaters. somebody correct me if i am wrong, but isn't this section of river a man made area anyway. if so, then this is the perfect place for slalom gates. if spank really wants to go boat in "the rivers natural coorador" then he needs to go somewhere else to begin with. somewhere where the rapids were made by mother nature.

if we are going to develop the rivers for our uses, then we need to try to keep any new development inside these areas that have already been altered. a play park/slalom course leaves more river untouched for those who want to use the river to get away from the real world. i dont want to see slalom gates put up on one section, then a play park bulldozed into the river bed a mile down stream.

spank needs to compare apples to apples. all skiiers are not made to do the same run together. every ski area that i've been to has multiple areas for different things. slalom courses, half pipes, bunny slopes, and expert terrain. there would be no need to set up a slalom course in the halfpipe.

when you go boating, everyone has to do that run together. it is inherent in the sport. therefore a slalom course may have to overlap a play park.

although i have never been to the park in confluence, it sounds to me like this is the case. there isn't a huge area to space these things out when it comes to a river. if you want play features, and a slalom course on the same section of river, then they will need to overlap. it sounds like the slalom gates are going to be put up in a more permanent fashion, and hopefully they will be easier to pull to one side or the other. hopefully then people can just move them to where they want them without doing any damage to the gates.