# River access and usage: Why it's sometimes an issue



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

I don't have time to explain all of the issues on the Ark to you, but this will give you information:

http://www.mountainbuzz.com/forums/f11/flows-on-the-ark-51656.html

http://www.mountainbuzz.com/forums/f11/ark-elfing-conditions-51482.html

http://www.mountainbuzz.com/forums/f11/ark-water-help-stop-winter-releases-46473.html


----------



## tanderson (Mar 26, 2010)

Why is river access and usage important????

Because if we don't protect them, we will end up with some bullshit like prior appropriations. Nothing like watching a "senior" water user irrigate acres of open lawn while a "junior" sits, hopes, and prays for an opportunity to have some sort of water right. Scary scary stuff! We need to put all attention to water protection and its use. Also, without access protection we are all screwed (unless we are million/billionaires and own the land adjacent to the rivers and spend one week a year there)

Great subject. I'm looking forward to this.


tda
slc, ut


----------



## catwoman (Jun 22, 2009)

All it is a few anecdotes and then a plug for NOR. There is nothing substantial in the link.


----------



## NationalRivers (Oct 3, 2013)

Catwoman, the plug is to make a difference for your river access and usage rights, by understanding what they are and asserting for them to be honored (on thousands of miles of rivers where they are being ignored). _Making that happen is what's most important, not who/how it happens._ Many river users believe they must litigate in order to "re-establish" their rights, which is mistaken in most cases. Federal law has consistently supported rights to boat and walk along the bank of rivers that are big enough to kayak down...so you and I can go make that happen in practice. Now. In most cases, we don't need to wait for years of litigation or something else to happen. Our rights exist but are being ignored. 

So, the plug: Know your rights and put them into practice, however that happens.

“Education is the most powerful tool which you can use to change the world.”


----------



## upshitscreek (Oct 21, 2007)

mods, honest and serious question....why is this guy still allowed to post here still? seriously. call someone a d-bag on the buzz and you get it zapped in a second. advertise fake passports.... gone. but claim a bullshit NPO and take unsuspecting, well intentioned river runners money is apparently just fine though? do you guys just not get that it's illegal and fraud or something?

the dude has had months to straighten his shit out,well into a new calendar year and it's still a BS operation as it's been for 14 plus years now.


----------



## NationalRivers (Oct 3, 2013)

upshitscreek said:


> mods, honest and serious question....why is this guy allowed to post here still? seriously. call someone a d-bag on the buzz and you get it zapped in a second. but claim a bullshit NPO and take unsuspecting, well intentioned river runners money is apparently just fine though? do you guys just not get that it's illegal and fraud or something?
> 
> the dude has had months to straighten his shit out,well into a new calendar year and it's still a BS operation as it's been for 14 plus years now.


Nothing you've said is correct. I'm a gal, name is Vanessa. It's been 36 years, not 14. Everything we have is based on existing law...nothing is "illegal" about educating people about existing law. 

You're quiet adversarial, and you can have the liberty to have your opinion. Respectfully agree to disagree with you. I'll be engaging in respectful and on-topic discussions here.


----------



## upshitscreek (Oct 21, 2007)

NationalRivers said:


> Nothing you've said is correct. I'm a gal, name is Vanessa. It's been 36 years, not 14. Everything we have is based on existing law...nothing is "illegal" about educating people about existing law.
> 
> You're quiet adversarial, and you can have the liberty to have your opinion. Respectfully agree to disagree with you. I'll be engaging in respectful and on-topic discussions here.


"vanessa".... here you go, cupcake. buy a fucking clue....





does that mean anything to you, dipshit?

or that you claim to be a NPO but STILL aren't on the list of approved NPO's by the IRS?


----------



## NationalRivers (Oct 3, 2013)

upshitscreek said:


> "vanessa".... here you go, cupcake. buy a fucking clue....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Respectfully and on-topic, do you have anything legitimate to discuss about river access and usage rights?


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

Ok so a name to put with the postings. That's good. Like it or not the river community is rightfully skeptical of some of the big claims laid down last year by NOR and the continued referral to 'purchase the book' and it will all be clear. 

While your heart may be in the right spot NOR as an organization and this 'alias' seem to be less than forthright. That is the perception. The good news is you can change that. Show that your legal status is current and is a true 503. How about a list of your board of directors? Who you are? Or who the office staff is? Again the website has precious little in the 'about' to inspire confidence. 

AWA has a list of professional staff, board and IRS status. They are legit. Show us you are and you will engender a lot more support and interest.


----------



## upshitscreek (Oct 21, 2007)

NationalRivers said:


> Respectfully and on-topic, do you have anything legitimate to discuss about river access and usage rights?


holy fuck. that's your response?


----------



## NationalRivers (Oct 3, 2013)

carvedog said:


> Ok so a name to put with the postings. That's good. Like it or not the river community is rightfully skeptical of some of the big claims laid down last year by NOR and the continued referral to 'purchase the book' and it will all be clear.
> 
> While your heart may be in the right spot NOR as an organization and this 'alias' seem to be less than forthright. That is the perception. The good news is you can change that. Show that your legal status is current and is a true 503. How about a list of your board of directors? Who you are? Or who the office staff is? Again the website has precious little in the 'about' to inspire confidence.
> 
> AWA has a list of professional staff, board and IRS status. They are legit. Show us you are and you will engender a lot more support and interest.


Thanks for the feedback carvedog. Understand and agree completely with what you've said. We were working on the strategy guide the last few months, because people started to understand the existing law and then the bigger question came up: So we have these federal rights, how do we get them applied? So we wanted to explain and address that issue, arguably one of the most important. 
In light of what I've said in agreeing with you, my question for you is this: Is solving and addressing the issues river users are facing more important, or renewing the paperwork? Ideally, both at the same time (both are definitely important), but we had to pick a priority with our limited volunteers. To us, helping issues get solved has been the priority (and we were below the total giving amount for IRS reporting for the last several years). Now that the strategy guide is done, renewing status we had since 1978 is next on the list. We are currently renewing the status (yes, I realize this was said a few months ago, and I do apologize for our limited work scope), and will keep you posted. Have a board, and a couple volunteer staff. Will be on the website (anything else you recommend on the About section?).
Also, do the facts/existing law/rights remain the same, with or without us? By all means, use the resources to solve river issues in your area. Don't wait to give to us. What's important is not giving, but for river users to use the tools explaining their existing rights to make a tangible difference on the rivers they love to use. 
Thank you carvedog for helping me with this alias, I'm sure it will be a process.


----------



## upshitscreek (Oct 21, 2007)

what a crock of shit.

again.


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

NationalRivers said:


> Thanks for the feedback carvedog. Understand and agree completely with what you've said. We were working on the strategy guide the last few months, because people started to understand the existing law and then the bigger question came up: So we have these federal rights, how do we get them applied? So we wanted to explain and address that issue, arguably one of the most important.
> In light of what I've said in agreeing with you, my question for you is this: Is solving and addressing the issues river users are facing more important, or renewing the paperwork? Ideally, both at the same time (both are definitely important), but we had to pick a priority with our limited volunteers. To us, helping issues get solved has been the priority (and we were below the total giving amount for IRS reporting for the last several years). Now that the strategy guide is done, renewing status we had since 1978 is next on the list. We are currently renewing the status (yes, I realize this was said a few months ago, and I do apologize for our limited work scope), and will keep you posted. Have a board, and a couple volunteer staff. Will be on the website (anything else you recommend on the About section?).
> Also, do the facts/existing law/rights remain the same, with or without us? By all means, use the resources to solve river issues in your area. Don't wait to give to us. What's important is not giving, but for river users to use the tools explaining their existing rights to make a tangible difference on the rivers they love to use.
> Thank you carvedog for helping me with this alias, I'm sure it will be a process.


Constructive feedback:

1) Create a user account for individuals, not the organization. This creates greater transparency and avoids the pitfalls of multiple users operating under the "voice" of one account. NOR had a noticeable PR problem with this in the autumn that can be easily avoided. Save the NOR alias for one user or only use it in the partners section. And if other volunteers want to comment on a forum, under their personal alias, that they are not historically members of then they should be open from the get-go regarding their relationship to NOR. There are numerous problems in ethics and etiquette in withholding that information, especially for professional organization that seems to desire aligning their name with such a complex issue.

2) Please, stop promoting your own site in anything other then the partners forum. If you are interested in facilitating conversations on the forum then keep it here. Linking back to your own site reeks of shameless self-promotion. Your father, assuming you are the Vanessa Leeper Jones from the Facebook site, joined the Buzz and interacted in a way that seemed self-interested (despite rhetoric) at a difficult time in access. Hard to forget that but with a thoughtful, transparent approach people could move on. It just might take a while.

3) Writing non-profit status off as paperwork is a red flag for some of us. Its not just paperwork when the NOR site intentionally stated 503c status during what appeared to be principally a membership drive this past autumn. Its a fundamental issue of ethics and operating transparently under a structure that lends credibility to an organization. Without it skepticism will likely be resilient. And even then it could take a while for people to move past historic choices. Skepticism remains for me in what could be the minutia of your wording "had since 1978" when the status was dissolved in 2002; a 12 year break kinda disqualifies the intent of the word "since". The lack of follow through from previous promises exacerbates that concern.

4) Address the issues about organizational structure in a very transparent and proactive manner. Board members? Minutes? Etc. 

I think if ya'll address those concerns then maybe people will respond explicitly to the content of your posts instead of critiquing the organization. While many of us will heartedly disagree with the content of your argument itself it is even hard to address that when we are rightfully distracted by an approach that can be honestly described as a flawed communication strategy (that from the previous months.)

Best of luck.

Phillip


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Like Carvedog said, your heart is in the right place and I'm all for improved access. We agree on goals. However, from what I understand, if we were going into a cooking contest, NOR is basically telling folks we can win with the recipe for Beanie Weenies and chips when we'll have to be ready to cook up a fancy 8 course dinner.

And please, don't register a bunch of individual NOR accounts to rep the org with, just realize that folks connect Eric Leaper with NOR.

-AH


----------

