Mountain Buzz banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Who do you support? Who is doing good work? I am currently not a member of any group but I need to change that. The two I'm aware of, at least through their website, are Idaho Rivers United and American Whitewater. I'm sure there are more. Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,097 Posts
American Whitewater and then would try and find your local group for Oregon or you home river basin. Friends of the Yampa for my local plug.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,213 Posts
  • American Whitewater if you're a boater
  • Grand Canyon Private Boater's Association if you want to go run the Grand Canyon
  • Your Local Whitewater / River Conservation Advocacy Group
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
786 Posts
Trout Unlimited is the main lobby group fighting to keep boaters off the Chattooga Headwaters. If you enjoy floating on rivers do not give them your money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I do not know about their involvement there. Please show a link or two. I do know in the west they are doing great projects that often benefit kayakers and rafters. Things like getting access and removing dams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Screw Trout Unlimited, they are trying to shut down boating in the SE. For example, here is a letter signed by a few chapters trying to shut down boating on a tributary to the Chattooga, Overflow Creek: http://www.americanwhitewater.org/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?media=aw:overflowclosereq.pdf

AW has a good resource on who has been involved with the Chattooga headwaters dispute:
American Whitewater - aw:chattooga_groups

Of note:
Trout Unlimited
National organization whose mission is to conserve, protect and restore North America’s trout and salmon fisheries and their watersheds. Two state chapters and several local chapters of TU oppose paddling on the Upper Chattooga, with support from the national organization. These chapters sought to join the lawsuit in defense of the boating ban
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
My understanding of the primary (national) conflict that river runners have with Trout Unlimited, is that TU prioritizes fishing over river running. Thus, when it comes to private vs public land/river access disputes, TU has a tendency to compromise by trading sections. They'll support a land owner in closing a section of river to river runners (to preserve said land owners commercial fishing operation or whatever), in exchange for fisherman gaining shore access to a different section of river nearby. They don't advocate for legal river running access everywhere, just where they choose.

Their intentions of river access are good for boaters as far as finding a put-in and take-out, but some river runner's feel they aren't helping the right-to-float arguments.

I'm sure someone has better, more specific examples, and more expert insight, but it's my understanding that boaters shouldn't let boaters support TU.

(I hope I'm wrong. My dad used to be a TU member, before AW of course.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
Feel free to throw the baby out with the bathwater folks, but if it weren't for TU alot (maybe most?) of water in WV would be dead from extractive industry practices.

...but hey you could still float it right!?!? Never mind that orange water that'll stain your boat or the sulphur smell sticking to your skin when you get wet, cuz hell we're having fun!! Any of you who go to Cheat Fest should be thanking them.

Notice that the push for those chatooga closures originated and are spearheaded by local chapters and have "support" from national. Become a member, go to the local meetings and don't support these grassroots efforts that propagate closures if that is your viewpoint.

Just in WV, about 300-400 streams have been protected in the past few years largely thanks to TU's suppport/lobbying and they are all still open to paddling (if you can fit a boat on them).

I belong to AWW and TU btw..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,408 Posts
AW member
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Well, I did a search on AW, google, bing and here for boating bans and I only found the one - Chattooga - that appeared to have no reason other than a fisherman/boater conflict. It looked like all of the other bans were your National Park and High Water safety closures. (I'm sure I'm about to be hammered here).

So (I'm trying to ask, not to incite) when you say that TU is trying to shut down all boating in the SE are there other rivers/creeks? I certainly hope that is not the case.

As for not advocating for boating everywhere - yes, their priority is fishing, just like AWs is boating.

I have worked with TU in three states (Colorado, Oregon and Wyoming) and only know the stuff I work on (fish passage) in terms of their policies. However, from those experiences I can say they really are benefitting boaters. Think of the many dams they have worked to take out, instream water rights that have been obtained and that they look to obtain, and spring releases for fish.

Anyway, I'm sorry to hear that so many of you will not support them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
I never said "all" boating, I said they are trying to shut down boating in the SE. I supposed I should've used the word "some". I was referring to the Chattooga headwaters, including the Upper sections and tributaries.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,836 Posts
My understanding of the primary (national) conflict that river runners have with Trout Unlimited, is that TU prioritizes fishing over river running. Thus, when it comes to private vs public land/river access disputes, TU has a tendency to compromise by trading sections. They'll support a land owner in closing a section of river to river runners (to preserve said land owners commercial fishing operation or whatever), in exchange for fisherman gaining shore access to a different section of river nearby. They don't advocate for legal river running access everywhere, just where they choose.

Their intentions of river access are good for boaters as far as finding a put-in and take-out, but some river runner's feel they aren't helping the right-to-float arguments.

I'm sure someone has better, more specific examples, and more expert insight, but it's my understanding that boaters shouldn't let boaters support TU.

(I hope I'm wrong. My dad used to be a TU member, before AW of course.)
A big issue I have with TU is that they promote the moment of stored reservoir water in the winter in order to keep river flows at minimum healthy amounts for trout populations in summer and fall. Trout Unlimited believes the Voluntary Flow Release Program on the Arkansas is detrimental to a burgeoning trout river and they also view private boaters as a nuisance... I am a member and a fisherman, but membership is mostly for monitoring purposes.

I would encourage those of you who love the Ark to get involved with Friends of the Arkansas, in addition to AW.

Friends of the Arkansas River
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top