Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
247 Posts
good thing Im outta beer, or I'd probably drink till I puked, and then do it again. that is the biggest crock of shit I have heard in, well a long time.

thanks for posting this.

also, several years ago, I was doing some papers, and most of them were based around the

FEE DEMO program.

if not familiar, see

recreation fee demonstation program.

sorry, no links, but im sure all kinds of goods will fill after a quick google search.

One link I remember

Free Our Forests Home Page.

BTW, note sent

again, thanks for posting..

see you on the river boofing on a kid, in my tube
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
I'm pretty sure at those river levels, the only way you could hit a kid is if they were drowning in the hydro below a drop. maybe that's just me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
WHAT

In response to what deepstroke said " boofing is not cool"


I was once on this “wilderness” run lets call it the “big south” I was setting up to run one of the harder drops lets call it “double trouble” and man just as I was pulling the late boof stroke over the last hole I saw this other person practicing his right to use the wilderness in another way “lets call him a tuber” So what did I do you ask? I boof right onto his dam head. What else could I do I did not want to be in that hole.. So I boofed the shit out of it and bam!! Right on his head.. It was horrible not only did I crack the hull of my boat on his noggin, but I got bounced back into the hole and knocked him out of it. Then once I was done throwing up water after taking the beating of my life the “tuber” comes up to me and says that he was a “playtuber” and I messed up his ride..
That article is right we should not be in wilderness areas, what with our creek boating messing up the environment and obvious disrespect for out fellow users like my friend the “playtuber” and his buddy the fisherman. You know I once read a study where kayaking was as invasive to wilderness as the drilling for oil and gas they are doing across much of the BLM land..
I am just glad we have AW to keep us on top of all these kinds of issues, can you imagine a world where this kind of thought was allowed to exist. Support AW, because they will keep stuff like this from happening!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
165 Posts
Response

Anyone else write? I sent the message below to the address in the article. It seems stupid to even suggest that eliminting Kayakers from the river would help. How many tubers/bathers have you seen leaving their sh!t on the banks of the river. Just look at the Hippie Dip in Glenwood vs. the river left springs that can only be accessed by boat. I'm preaching to the choir, but we need to make our arguments known to those who don't.



Hello Francis,

I am writing you from Vail, CO in response to an article I read about limiting the use of public land and water by kayakers. I understand the goal of keeping the wilderness wild, however I am uncertain whether kayakers actually diminish the wild experience or have a greater impact than other users. I think you will find that most kayakers are passionate about maintaining the wild and are good stewards of the land. They also have less impact on the river environment than anglers or hikers. Anglers leave lost line, luers/flies and tread directly on the river bottom disrupting delicate moss and algae. Hikers tread heavily in both directions, kayakers generally only walk in then boat out. These are some things to keep in mind when setting a potentially dangerous precedent.

Thanks for your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Any support you all can give would be greatly appreciated. It is a beautiful run, and into a rare remote area here in the east.

I am stoked that some of you are checking this issue out but Francis Marion is a National Forest not a person. I could see the mistake 100% just thought it was funny. Please send some letters.
Cheers
Shane
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,832 Posts
Here's what I wroe to "Francis"

I've recently become aware of pressures from anglers to ban kayaking from certain wilderness stretches on the Chatooga river.

I understand that they want the river to themselves and are willing to make absurd statements to attain this goal.

Comparisons of creek boating to ATV use are absurd. If you start to see jet skis launching off of waterfalls, then we can start to compare.

A comparison to mountain bikers vs. hikers is closer, but still off base, as kayaks rarely pose threats of collision like a bike might, nor do they erode the trails, with minor exception.

Kayakers leaving trash behind is a relative non-issue. While there are sloppy folks in any demographic, kayakers, as a group, are more likely to pack it out than in.

Another scare tactic was the idea that kayakers might land on kids in inner-tubes swimming in pools below waterfalls. While it is possible for that to occur, it is very unlikely. Most places with enough water to kayak are not safe swimming holes in the first place. Kayakers are also a relatively safe bunch and will check any blind landings for obstructions such as logs and are likely to notice swimmers at the same time. Is there even a single documented case of this?

In short the anglers seem to be saying "That's mine" and have come up with some bogus safety concerns to justify the claim. Maybe they should just say honestly "I prefer to have the creek to myself". To which I respond: "sorry it is not yours, exclusively".

Please don't be swayed by efforts to ban kayaking on the creeks that you manage.

Thanks for listening, Dave Frank
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
805 Posts
YO! You asleep at the mouse! Write a letter to the Forest Service! Now!

Seriously though - this is a very important battle for AW and could affect the entire Wilderness system. If this *BS* stands it will set a bad precedent and some sad day down the road we might not be allowed to boat the run by the same initials of the BS. Here is the link again to all the info you need.

American Whitewater - No Boats in Wilderness?

Copy someone else's letter if you don't have time to write your own but JUST DO IT! BY SEPTEMBER 13! THIS WEDNESDAY! DO IT! OK. :mrgreen:


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,107 Posts
Sent my letter in. I noted that several agencies including the forest service, the BLM, and the National Park Service all regulate wilderness river systems that allow for boating with such notable examples as the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon, the Middle Fork of the Salmon etc. Wilderness ethics for boating are well established and have a track record of success.

This is also a great example of why all boaters should join AW. They need support to fight issues like this. This could just as easlily be sportmans paradise fisherman in cheesman, as it could fishermen on the chattooga.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
659 Posts
Another letter...

September 10, 2007

Francis Marion & Sumter National Forest
4931 Broad River Rd.
Columbia, SC 29212-3530

To whom it may concern,

I've recently become aware of pressures from anglers to limit or eliminate recreational boating from certain stretches of the Chattooga river. It is my understanding that anglers would like to keep the river "safe" from boaters and block access for this kind of appropriate and legal use of rivers in Wilderness. I have extensively studied the 1964 Wilderness Act and know that human powered kayaking, canoeing and rafting fall squarely within the range of acceptable use of Wilderness because of their non-motorized/mechanized nature.

From the 1964 Wilderness Act:

"...lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition..." Section 2(a)

"...an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man..." Section 2(c)

"...an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvement or human habitation..." Section 2(c)

"...generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable..." Section 2(c)

"...has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation..." Section 2(c)

"...shall be devoted to the public purposes of recreation, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation and historic use." Section 4(b)

Based on the above quotes, I do not see how boating is incompatible with the Wilderness values set forth in the Act.

I find it extremely disturbing that kayaking has been compared to ATV use, which if far more damaging to the environment and would, under the current Wilderness Act, be prohibited in Wilderness. Therefore, comparisons of kayaking to ATV use are absolutely unfounded and profoundly absurd.

Kayakers leaving trash behind is a relative non-issue. It has been my experience that tubers with coolers full of beer and bait cups and monofilament fishing line left behind by anglers are more to blame than the trash that might be left behind by recreational boaters.

As far as safety issues resulting from boaters and tubers/swimmers, this is a non-issue. When the water is low enough to tube safely, boaters are generally on rivers that have more water such as the dam release Ocoee, Nantahala, etc. This is an overblown assessment of a risk that isn't truly a risk.

I find it unfortunate that the USDA Forest Service is bowing to one group of forest users and not taking into account the myriad uses of OUR national forest lands, particularly Wilderness. It would do the decision makers on the Francis Marion good to take a close look at the mission statement of the USDA Forest Service "CARING FOR THE LAND AND SERVING PEOPLE" My understand is that the agency is in existence to serve ALL people who are enjoying THEIR national forest in a legal and appropriate manor. Not to bow to the special interest of one particular user group.

Thank you for your consideration of my comments on this critical issue. I trust that you’ll make the right decision.

Sincerely,



JBL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Let 'em hear from you. I got mine submitted. Thanks for the above lettters that gave me a start!
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top