# You need a permit to go on a river?



## SpeyCatr (Aug 14, 2013)

I apologize for my ignorance but you need a permit to raft a river in the USA? I live in BC Canada and we don't have such a regulation on our rivers. Just wondering what the rationale is for permits, draws, etc.


----------



## Ninja_Nico (Mar 28, 2013)

You need a permit to travel on certain rivers in the USA. This is to help mitigate overuse of our precious natural resources.


----------



## Learch (Jul 12, 2010)

We do, and it is needed here. I hate regulations, extra rules, "the man" always on our case, but if we didn't have limits on the amount of use and type of use on some of our pristine rivers, they would suck. I like to do rivers that aren't permitted and regulated as much, but we have the beautiful Rogue here in Oregon that sees plenty of use, and would get trashed if there weren't limits on people and usage. 
A popular river in the summer here is the Deschutes. When I was young, it was a "girls gone wild" college party/ drink fest with drunk boaters, drunk drivers, over use, and generally I personally saw it things get out of hand. Now even day trips require permits, and they watch the river very closely. I like it better there. I'm taking my 5 year old there this summer, and I won't have to worry about him seeing something I don't want him to see. I also won't worry as much about drunks on the road along the river.


----------



## The Mogur (Mar 1, 2010)

Ninja_Nico said:


> You need a permit to travel on certain rivers in the USA. This is to help mitigate overuse of our precious natural resources.


It might be better to simply outlaw life jackets. The drunks, the incompetents, and the ill-prepared would take care of themselves in Darwinesque style, and that would scare the teeming masses of wannabees out of ever attempting whitewater boating.


----------



## k2andcannoli (Feb 28, 2012)

Its mostly a arid-west thing. Nonexistent on the east coast.

Imagine if there were no hunting permits. The natural resource, wild game, would degrade or disappear.


----------



## BilloutWest (Jan 25, 2013)

On some rivers you just fill out a permit, no charge, at the put in.
The management agencies require these to monitor levels of use. Eventually with good data it can become obvious when numbers restrictions become necessary.

Number of campsites, abuse and river crowding do need to be dealt with.


----------



## Pizzle (Jun 26, 2007)

If you were to out law all the drunks from the river, who would carry all the kayakers' stuff?


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

SpeyFitter said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but you need a permit to raft a river in the USA? I live in BC Canada and we don't have such a regulation on our rivers. Just wondering what the rationale is for permits, draws, etc.


The 'rationale' is that if we didn't all of our best rivers would be overrun by Canadians the way our Women's hockey team got taken out……


----------



## yesimapirate (Oct 18, 2010)

carvedog said:


> The 'rationale' is that if we didn't all of our best rivers would be overrun by Canadians the way our Women's hockey team got taken out……


Let's hope today's outcome is different!


----------



## carvedog (May 11, 2005)

yesimapirate said:


> Let's hope today's outcome is different!


aye…..still stings that bounce off the dammed post. Shoulda, woulda, coulda… but no.


----------



## FrankC (Jul 8, 2008)

SpeyFitter said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but you need a permit to raft a river in the USA? I live in BC Canada and we don't have such a regulation on our rivers. Just wondering what the rationale is for permits, draws, etc.


Yes. Every single river and creek in the United States requires a permit. No Canadians allowed. Violators will be executed by firing squad. I can't believe you havent heard about this yet.


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)




----------



## Learch (Jul 12, 2010)

GC Guide said:


> View attachment 7709


lol


----------



## flyfishing (Feb 18, 2014)

SpeyFitter said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but you need a permit to raft a river in the USA? I live in BC Canada and we don't have such a regulation on our rivers. Just wondering what the rationale is for permits, draws, etc.


It is kind of like all the crazy regulations that BC/ Dean river have for "out of town" Steelheaders. Keep the traffic down and the government gets a little $$.


----------



## the_dude (May 31, 2006)

flyfishing said:


> It is kind of like all the crazy regulations that BC/ Dean river have for "out of town" Steelheaders. Keep the traffic down and the government gets a little $$.


could not have said it better myself.

also it appears that the canucks don't give 2 shits about natural resources, what with all the tar sand development, pipelines across pristine watersheds, logging, etc. hate to paint with broad strokes, but in this case it seems to fit.


----------



## DoStep (Jun 26, 2012)

GC Guide said:


> View attachment 7709


Damn, looks like we're stuck with the little punk...


----------



## Schutzie (Feb 5, 2013)

DoStep said:


> Damn, looks like we're stuck with the little punk...


I heard a rumor about a reality show in development. Perhaps the Biebs would be interested...............


----------



## GC Guide (Apr 10, 2009)

> Damn, looks like we're stuck with the little punk...


Aww, Rat Farts!!


----------



## DoStep (Jun 26, 2012)

Schutzie said:


> I heard a rumor about a reality show in development. Perhaps the Biebs would be interested...............


Perhaps he can help us develop a cast iron PFD...


----------



## yesimapirate (Oct 18, 2010)

DoStep said:


> Perhaps he can help us develop a cast iron PFD...


Does it double as a dutch oven?


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

the_dude said:


> could not have said it better myself.
> 
> also it appears that the canucks don't give 2 shits about natural resources, what with all the tar sand development, pipelines across pristine watersheds, logging, etc. hate to paint with broad strokes, but in this case it seems to fit.


Yeah I know with all of the:

1) Progressive, innovative and largely successful projects involving protecting and expanding wildlife corridors
2) A largely successful private & public partnership system that actually leaves their national parks funded on a regular basis (this year they are experiencing major cuts, which is decades behind such actions in the US)


I assume you are largely talking about the McKenzie Pipeline project in the remark regarding watersheds. If we are judging proposals then Canada is no worse then well....just about any country in the world that has fossil fuel resources. Been to the Uintah Basin or Book Cliffs along the Colorado? Paid any attention to issues in West Virginia recently or the multitude of spills in SLC in the last decade? Ever heard talk about how Katrina's damage was largely a result of abuse and commercial damage to the fragile coastline? As with any country its about long term patterns and actual development as each country has proponents on both sides. It would appear that Canadians have a community with a robust sense of resource protection similar to the US. And not too shockingly the projects that due go through are often in rural or unpopulated regions. Studied much about a mercian resource protection? Humm, it would appear we have treated our desserts and unpopulated regions with similar disregard. It also doesn't bode well that the fossil fuels they are developing and transporting largely end up in the US, as they are the #1 supplier to our energy demands. Amerka, fuck yeah!

Broad paint strokes just don't paint an accurate picture in this case. Canada has a wealth of resource protection concerns and efforts. Hell, their citizens (not necessarily gov't or private sector) outshine our citizens any day in developing compassion and energy for limiting impact of their resource demands on the shrinking world of first nations. For the most part our outdoor recreation and conservation movement only cares about native tribes when it benefits our euro-centric policies. 

To the question posted by the OP and why the above issue matters....we have a active and concentrated use of resources that has outpaced most of the world (until recently even in the energy sector when China caught up). We have commercially and privately exploited many rivers which zeal. The Grand Canyon is a prime example of concentrated pressure on a multi-day river environment and the Arkansas would be a good example of a daily. Management in its early forms was largely reactive which came with its own negative consequences. It doesn't take looking to hard to see how policies in the name of protection actually harmed the environment and resource. But many of these places where prime examples of "tragedy of the commons" until the modern environmental movement and its correlated government oversight/policies stepped in. Sucks for us modern boaters but I for one am happy to forgo unrestricted access for reduced fecal contamination, actually being able to find a campsite without boater confrontations and waiting lines at rapids. Its happening now but we didn't have a strong sense of self-regulation in the recent past. 

Phillip


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

SpeyCatr said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but you need a permit to raft a river in the USA? I live in BC Canada and we don't have such a regulation on our rivers. Just wondering what the rationale is for permits, draws, etc.


There's an old saying from the Navy that applies to minor bureaucrats who invent and administer these "permit" programs. It applies to schools and their students in recreation resource management programs.

The Captain rides in a motorboat
the rest of us ride in a gig.
He can't do a danmed bit faster
But it does make him feel big!

And that, I believe, is what's behind the Special Interest devotees who join together in an effort to regulate _every_thing. For the organization, of course, a "cause" that can be waved is handy to stir up fear and hatred, increase memberships and loosen the pursestrings of publicity-hungry celebrities, foundations and other fools. 
People join and push for legislation because they want to be a part of something worthy that is bigger than themselves, and they spend very little time actually considering the damage and unintended consequences wrought by their activism. They are incapable of seeing or understanding more than one side of the elephant.


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

restrac2000 said:


> Yeah I know with all of the:
> 
> 1) Progressive, innovative and largely successful projects involving protecting and expanding wildlife corridors
> 2) A largely successful private & public partnership system that actually leaves their national parks funded on a regular basis (this year they are experiencing major cuts, which is decades behind such actions in the US)
> ...


If people have waiting lines above rapids, they have some inconsiderate boaters, the wrong rivers, or they are trying to boat on the wrong days. If they don't want to be around other boaters, they can go to Greenland, or toss their canoe into a big-city river after dark. By reversing course and plunging into the belly of the beast they will enjoy the lights and sounds, and see their fellows passing over the bridges, oblivious to their presence, in a whole new way. The city after dark can become a 4-hour cultural revolution. For those who insist in steeping themselves in anti-human misery, there's no hope for them anyway. For the foreseeable future, humanity is likely here to stay.


----------



## villagelightsmith (Feb 17, 2016)

Learch said:


> We do, and it is needed here. I hate regulations, extra rules, "the man" always on our case, but if we didn't have limits on the amount of use and type of use on some of our pristine rivers, they would suck. I like to do rivers that aren't permitted and regulated as much, but we have the beautiful Rogue here in Oregon that sees plenty of use, and would get trashed if there weren't limits on people and usage.
> A popular river in the summer here is the Deschutes. When I was young, it was a "girls gone wild" college party/ drink fest with drunk boaters, drunk drivers, over use, and generally I personally saw it things get out of hand. Now even day trips require permits, and they watch the river very closely. I like it better there. I'm taking my 5 year old there this summer, and I won't have to worry about him seeing something I don't want him to see. I also won't worry as much about drunks on the road along the river.


If you're going to have a party of lunatics, the Deschutes is custom made for it.


----------



## cupido76 (May 22, 2009)

^^^ responding to a 6 year old thread with 3 consecutive posts is... interesting.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

cupido76 said:


> ^^^ responding to a 6 year old thread with 3 consecutive posts is... interesting.


I think it's the new platform, it dredges up old posts and puts them in the "Recommended Reading" list below the thread. And we don't have a reminder that "you're responding to a 10 year old post" anymore.


----------



## Sparks1000 (Jul 5, 2018)

The Mogur said:


> It might be better to simply outlaw life jackets. The drunks, the incompetents, and the ill-prepared would take care of themselves in Darwinesque style, and that would scare the teeming masses of wannabees out of ever attempting whitewater boating.


Ah, the ol’ regulate the bullets not the gun approach...


----------

