Mountain Buzz banner

Moving Rock In Tunnel, Poudre

11K views 57 replies 33 participants last post by  Camp Falbo 
#1 ·
A potentially interesting discussion I think, a cousin to the chat about dynamiting Frog Rock on the Ark after the girl passed last year.

What do you all think? Is it ethical to move obstacles that are dangerous/challenging/damaging? Myself, I see both sides. It's a slippery slope to start moving things in the river. Rafts are expensive though, and this is not a significant feature. Seems kind of reactionary to immediately say no, based on an inflexible ideology, while altering my home river in any way troubles me.

Does the Wild and Scenic designation have any thing to do with this?

Benson
 
#41 ·
this could be a skit on snl. it's a rock like a million other rocks in the poudre, a lot of which are sharp. leave the damn thing alone and find a way to go around it. tunnel is not that difficult of a rapid.
 
#42 ·
this could be a skit on snl. it's a rock like a million other rocks in the poudre, a lot of which are sharp. leave the damn thing alone and find a way to go around it. tunnel is not that difficult of a rapid.
That would be a pretty dumb skit. Obviously it could not be with the original cast. :rolleyes:
 
#45 ·
This sure has been fun guys. Been up at the Upper C for three days and missed all the fireworks. Just like to thank Randaddy for balancing his experience and thoughtful musings with his usual douchebaggery. Good restraint. Myself, I'm with Big Ben. I am going to break out the disguises and the Zdrag and we'll use Ben's big ass truck to turn that bastard back over again.

Think Ranger Rob will recognize us Ben?
 
#49 ·
whaddup eric!! how's the upper c treatin ya man?!?
...perfect disguise. noone will recognize us in that thing!! yo i guarantee my truck'll tip that bastard back over man. good z-drag practice too (like i needed any more after 5 years at a1!!)
hit me up when you come back to foco man. gotta get some drunken pineview ducky runs in before the water's gone.
peace brotha
 
#56 ·
Actions To Be (And Not To Be) Taken

While scrolling through the six pages of philosophical discussion, mud slinging, ethical questions and insults has been entertaining, there are two things to remember-
1) This new hazard is a Life Safety issue, not a profit issue
2) The ultimate decision of what, if anything, is to be done about this hazard rests with the owner/steward of our beloved Poudre- the USFS

The issue of this new and dangerous feature, as well as this forum, is not only on the radar of the USFS, it has made it to the To-Do list.

A local USFS representative has asked me to post on the various social media forums I am involved with a simple request to those concerned about this rock- Please do not attempt to remove, blast, fill, turn or alter in any other way this rock. The USFS intends to take action to mitigate this new life safety hazard in a safe, controlled and legal fashion.

Nobody said they are “moving” the rock (Gannon). At this point, they may not know exactly how they are going to mitigate the hazard. Knowing the folk at the local level, I believe it will be done in the most ethical and environmentally friendly way, affecting the local habitat, the streambed and the “Line” as little as possible.

As a member of emergency services and an avid boater of this very stretch of river, I support the decision to mitigate this new life safety issue- legally.

So, save your dynamite, big ass trucks, z-drags, concrete and sledgehammers. As for the recommendation of a 12 pack, bring it on up and let’s boat!
 
#57 ·
pwned... the river.

2) The ultimate decision of what, if anything, is to be done about this hazard rests with the owner/steward of our beloved Poudre- the USFS
That makes me wonder... just how will the USFS fine God for moving that rock in the first place?

Your intentions are sound but who ever "asked" you to post can get on here themselves so I can flip out at the idea that the USFS owns the river. Steward, yes, owner... this is the kind of shit that really makes for bad PR from a public entity that is *owned* by the tax payer. This is the kind of language negativity that alters the concept that rivers, at least for now, are public entities.
 
#58 ·
Ease up on bashing the USFS about “ownership”- that was my lingo. The request I post their intentions to fix the problem from an official capacity, legal and safe- their lingo. The request for concerned boaters to not take matters into their own hands- their lingo. The rest of it- my lingo.

The only negativity being slung around here comes from the handle “Hojo”. We can easily get into another 6-page discussion on who “owns” the river, who “owns” the USFS, what a public entity is, etc. I don’t have the time. Call it whatever you want- that particular stretch of river is in the Roosevelt Nat’l Forest, which is owned by the public and administered by the USFS. So as far as I’m concerned they call the shots.

And besides, what’s this I hear about you having problems with your TPS reports…
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top