Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

In another post here, as well as on the RRFW listserv, Tom Martin, the head of River Runners for Wilderness, made the following claim:

"...concessions passengers seem to be doing more than one river trip a year."

I'd like to know a couple of things:

1. Does Tom have actual proof for that assertion?

2. If proof exists, could Tom provide a copy of any letter or other communication RRFW sent to the appropriate authorities, conveying relevant information, so that a proper investigation could be initiated?

Just asking...

Rich Phillips
 

·
GoBro
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
It seems the proof of concept has already been established. Outfitters aren't checking id's. You won't get much more proof than rumor beyond that until someone is actually caught.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Hi Glenn,

Proof of concept is a nice turn of a phrase, but it has its limits.

In concept, you could be driving without a license. But you wouldn't want to get fined simply because someone told the highway patrol that you might be doing it. Conceptually, a lot of chemical substances might possibly be consumed on the river, but that potentiality isn't actionable.

Look, Tom is a talented, experienced, knowledgable fellow. He's done -- and continues to do -- a lot for the boating community. Nobody denies that.

But just because this is the internet doesn't mean he or anyone else can throw out allegations of unlawful conduct without being ready to prove them. And if he has that proof, then wouldn't you expect him to have provided it to the proper authorities? After all, he's unabashedly anti-commercial, so you'd think he's do anything he could to make the case against them -- particularly with the Park authorities.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips
 

·
GoBro
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
Hi Glenn,
Proof of concept is a nice turn of a phrase, but it has its limits.

In concept, you could be driving without a license. But you wouldn't want to get fined simply because someone told the highway patrol that you might be doing it. Conceptually, a lot of chemical substances might possibly be consumed on the river, but that potentiality isn't actionable.
That's why a licence is checked at all traffic stops, purchasing liquor, tobacco etc. It's pretty clear that due diligence would close the gaps and no one is being fined arbitrarily.

Look, Tom is a talented, experienced, knowledgable fellow. He's done -- and continues to do -- a lot for the boating community. Nobody denies that.

But just because this is the internet doesn't mean he or anyone else can throw out allegations of unlawful conduct without being ready to prove them. And if he has that proof, then wouldn't you expect him to have provided it to the proper authorities? After all, he's unabashedly anti-commercial, so you'd think he's do anything he could to make the case against them -- particularly with the Park authorities.
As I said before, until someone is caught it is highly unlikely any real info will be brought forward. How do you know no one is working the system if you lack to safe guards to monitor potential scams?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,018 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Hi Glenn,

Actually, I don't think you and I are all that far apart. I personally think that rangers at the Ferry ought to check the IDs of all commercial passengers. I don't like it that they rely on some kind of certification that nobody on the trip has already done one that year. But the fact is, the check the rangers do of private IDs is pretty cursory, and also subject to some attempted skuldudgery.

What I'm getting at is something different. Tom has made a simple and clear declarative statement, implying systematic fraud by commercial passengers -- fraud that would entail some form of tolerance (if not cooperation) by the outfitters. All I'm asking is if he has proof, and if so, has he provided it to the proper authorities.

If not, then all he has is an unfounded supposition -- something that doesn't dignify him or his organization when he propagates it in public, in an attempt to sway opinion.

FWIW.

Rich Phillips
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top