Mountain Buzz banner
41 - 60 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Any updates on the log situation? Seems kind of tricky what to do to me... fairly easy to get the log off this point, but there are many worse places for a subset of it to get lodged...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,183 Posts
Probably gonna that way for a few years folks looking at the OP’s picture. (Which is awesome by the way, thanks local pilot. Post up more as you get them.). That place burned up bad. Tragedy of the highest order. How many miles of river corridor are toasted like that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I really think its the managing agency's responsibility.

The more the USFS is involved in managing the day-to-day of a river, the deeper we slide into the infernal dog and pony show that the MFS has already become.

Does no one remember the concept of personal responsibility?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
The more the USFS is involved in managing the day-to-day of a river, the deeper we slide into the infernal dog and pony show that the MFS has already become.

Does no one remember the concept of personal responsibility?
While I don’t disagree, the fact of the matter is, money drives these decisions. Not common sense. And like ski resorts and season pass holders, private boaters dump relatively little money into local economies. Commercial trips fund a lot of local Idaho economies, and the decisions to manage resources will always be based on how to best accommodate those that fly in, pay for a trip, fly home, and leave a bunch of cash here. As the old saying goes, money talks…
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
While I don’t disagree, the fact of the matter is, money drives these decisions. Not common sense. And like ski resorts and season pass holders, private boaters dump relatively little money into local economies. Commercial trips fund a lot of local Idaho economies, and the decisions to manage resources will always be based on how to best accommodate those that fly in, pay for a trip, fly home, and leave a bunch of cash here. As the old saying goes, money talks…

My initial post in this thread concluded with:

"If outfitters are making $ off of this "Wilderness", they should be the ones applying elbow grease to keep it open."

The USFS is underfunded to begin with. If they had more money, how many would lobby for them to plow the road sooner, or build pit toilets every 20 miles, or keep said toilets stocked with TP because noeffingway can we the people be expected to take care of our own personal needs? Who decides, who draws what lines, and where do they draw them?

A big part of why I feel the way I do here is that more government is rarely the answer to any question worth asking.

That ^ statement isn't partisan or political, by the way...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
My initial post in this thread concluded with:

"If outfitters are making $ off of this "Wilderness", they should be the ones applying elbow grease to keep it open."

The USFS is underfunded to begin with. If they had more money, how many would lobby for them to plow the road sooner, or build pit toilets every 20 miles, or keep said toilets stocked with TP because noeffingway can we the people be expected to take care of our own personal needs? Who decides, who draws what lines, and where do they draw them?

A big part of why I feel the way I do here is that more government is rarely the answer to any question worth asking.

That ^ statement isn't partisan or political, by the way...
I agree 100%. My statement is only a remark on reality. It’s unfortunate that money drives all of recreation, almost always to the detriment of the available resources. I like how GCPBA has been able to organize a voice for private boaters in the Grand. Maybe a similar org for us in Idaho would be beneficial? I can’t imagine we’ll ever have an ideal situation, especially with the boom in outdoor recreation, but some compromise would be great. And a common voice advocating for private boaters, at the state and federal level, would help a lot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I agree 100%. My statement is only a remark on reality. It’s unfortunate that money drives all of recreation, almost always to the detriment of the available resources. I like how GCPBA has been able to organize a voice for private boaters in the Grand. Maybe a similar org for us in Idaho would be beneficial? I can’t imagine we’ll ever have an ideal situation, especially with the boom in outdoor recreation, but some compromise would be great. And a common voice advocating for private boaters, at the state and federal level, would help a lot.

It's a good idea.

In reality, if you take the MFS shitshow out of the equation, we don't have much to complain about here.

If you're willing to visit the popular rivers in their slower seasons -- which I prefer for many reasons -- there's nothing to complain about at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
My initial post in this thread concluded with:

"If outfitters are making $ off of this "Wilderness", they should be the ones applying elbow grease to keep it open."

The USFS is underfunded to begin with. If they had more money, how many would lobby for them to plow the road sooner, or build pit toilets every 20 miles, or keep said toilets stocked with TP because noeffingway can we the people be expected to take care of our own personal needs? Who decides, who draws what lines, and where do they draw them?

A big part of why I feel the way I do here is that more government is rarely the answer to any question worth asking.

That ^ statement isn't partisan or political, by the way...
I agree with a number of your sentiments here, but I don’t really see anyone here advocating for absolving anyone’s personal responsibility, nor has anyone been advocating for the FS to micromanage every last potential hazard or difficulty. I am generally of the mindset that less is more in terms of FS involvement, but the one thing that would be arguably worse than excessive FS involvement/regulations would be a complete free for all with zero FS involvement. I’m glad there are limited launches, and required practices to minimize our impact on the river, for instance.

I already posted in this thread that I am not particularly in favor of the FS taking too active a role in making the river “safe”, and I am 100% in favor of personal responsibility at all times! The thing is though, our romantic notions of being in an untouched wilderness with no rules and complete self reliance are not inline with the realities of the times. Like it or not, and for better and for worse, the FS is responsible for river “management”. And again, whether we agree or not, the commercial rafting companies swing a lot more weight in the FS decision making than us private boaters.

I will say this, I am pleased to hear that two known problematic logs have been dealt with. That said, I hope that it never comes down to anyone expecting the FS (or anybody else) to make things easy or perfectly safe though. I don’t think anyone here has been suggesting anything of that sort either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I agree with a number of your sentiments here, but I don’t really see anyone here advocating for absolving anyone’s personal responsibility, nor has anyone been advocating for the FS to micromanage every last potential hazard or difficulty. I am generally of the mindset that less is more in terms of FS involvement, but the one thing that would be arguably worse than excessive FS involvement/regulations would be a complete free for all with zero FS involvement. I’m glad there are limited launches, and required practices to minimize our impact on the river, for instance.

I already posted in this thread that I am not particularly in favor of the FS taking too active a role in making the river “safe”, and I am 100% in favor of personal responsibility at all times! The thing is though, our romantic notions of being in an untouched wilderness with no rules and complete self reliance are not inline with the realities of the times. Like it or not, and for better and for worse, the FS is responsible for river “management”. And again, whether we agree or not, the commercial rafting companies swing a lot more weight in the FS decision making than us private boaters.

I will say this, I am pleased to hear that two known problematic logs have been dealt with. That said, I hope that it never comes down to anyone expecting the FS (or anybody else) to make things easy or perfectly safe though. I don’t think anyone here has been suggesting anything of that sort either.

So, how do you draw the line?

Is the FS required to fly/float the river every day and give live updates on where every tree has moved from and to?

Fire is a natural and integral part of the landscape in Idaho. Always has been, and as long as there are forests and grasslands to burn, it always will be.

As the river rises and falls wood moves around. Our only mistake in inserting ourselves into that process is a hubris in assuming that we can predict or control it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
So, how do you draw the line?

Is the FS required to fly/float the river every day and give live updates on where every tree has moved from and to?

Fire is a natural and integral part of the landscape in Idaho. Always has been, and as long as there are forests and grasslands to burn, it always will be.

As the river rises and falls wood moves around. Our only mistake in inserting ourselves into that process is a hubris in assuming that we can predict or control it.
I think that you must have missed my point.
Really quick:
-I’m not really suggesting that I have the perfect line to draw.
-Of course not! Is anyone suggesting that?
-yep
-No one is suggesting that we can or should!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
870 Posts
I think that you must have missed my point.
Really quick:
-I’m not really suggesting that I have the perfect line to draw.
-Of course not! Is anyone suggesting that?
-yep
-No one is suggesting that we can or should!

Nope, I was getting you to see my point: that there will always be contention over where to draw the line, and who gets to draw it.

No matter where it is drawn, people will fall on either side of it.

In this instance, I think it should be drawn somewhere out near Idaho State Hwy 21, and once a would-be boater crosses that line, and for every mile they travel ~N from that point, they should expect to rely more and more on only themselves.

Basically, keep the wild in Wilderness, don't dumb it down for the least common denominator.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Nope, I was getting you to see my point: that there will always be contention over where to draw the line, and who gets to draw it.

No matter where it is drawn, people will fall on either side of it.

In this instance, I think it should be drawn somewhere out near Idaho State Hwy 21, and once a would-be boater crosses that line, and for every mile they travel ~N from that point, they should expect to rely more and more on only themselves.

Basically, keep the wild in Wilderness, don't dumb it down for the least common denominator.
Preaching to the choir here. Unfortunately, we are where we are. The FS is the managing party here, doesn’t matter if you or I like it. They draw the line, and private boater sentiment has little sway compared to commercial outfitters. Is there anyone here who has suggested anything like dumbing things down for the LCD? I don’t think anyone has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Mike, it seems like you're drawing a line at "never do anything to clear wood, ever".

Do you apply the same logic to mountain bike trails? Fallen trees should never be moved? Landslides shouldn't have trail crews repair/rebuild a section of trail? And if you dismiss that example based on the prohibition of bikes in designated wilderness, consider that the FS clears fallen trees from the hiking trail that runs alongside the MFS. Other than a different equation to determine cost/benefit/hassle assessment, why is it philosophically any different to very infrequently deal with fallen trees in the river bed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,334 Posts
People have seemed to read my posts as saying I think the Forest Service should be making the the MIddle Fork a Disneyland ride and "100% safe" and that boaters should just check out and not take any personal responsibility for their own safety. I never said any of that... I just said they should be the ones overseeing the removal of a few hazards.

I guess I'll put it this way. I do think it is warranted to remove known hazards that could hurt or kill boaters and I think as the managing agency, it is the Forest Services job to oversee that it is done in safe manner that doesn't make the situation worse. This is a far cry from "paving the wilderness" or advocating against personal responsibility. Things are way to binary with some people on this board. Either its 100% hands off or any management by "the government" means its Disneyland. I, for one, can see different degrees of management and oversight.

In reality... if there was 100% hands off approach with the MFS... it would be a colossal shit show with way more people. Even with restrictions people still occasionally trash the place. If there was zero management, no permit system or group gear requirements... it would be chaotic and gross. One thing I've found when you just let the general population run rampant is a certain percentage of them, whether through ignorance or malace, will just do whatever the hell they want and trash the place. At least with how it is now, there is some semblance of accountability for ones actions and possible real consequences.
 
41 - 60 of 65 Posts
Top