# Browns Canyon Lottery on Recreation.gov?



## glenn (May 13, 2009)

Private boating is/will be trampled on browns just like in the grand. Private concessionaires will be provided better access and drastically more influence in decision making.


----------



## Phil U. (Feb 7, 2009)

Sorry, but... hahahaha

I guess you could call that a flame...


----------



## GratefulOne (Jun 12, 2010)

im confused.... I thought it was not going to have an effect on private boaters... if anything they should dramatically reduce the number of commercial trips... that's the majority of the traffic in my eyes... 

Phil or Logan or others, please shed some light...


----------



## rivervibe (Apr 24, 2007)

It already is heavily rationed with the max being 360 commercial boats in a day. The numbers of private boaters on the river are relatively quite small. Many days during the height of the season one can see in excess of 200 commercial boats and hardly a dozen privates. There are exceptions, but that is only true a couple of days a year. Days when there are more privates than commercial the over-all numbers are so small it's not even busy.

The only real over crowding issue I see is for overnight trips and camp sites. But again, even that only gets anywhere near capacity one or two days a season. And the vast majority of those are commercial or the occasional yahoo who posts up at the same camp for multiple nights in a row. Such as July 4th weekend.

Don't get me wrong, Browns Canyon can sure become a crowded scene at times, but those overly crowded times are not really all that frequent when you look at the entirety of the boatable season. Also, I do not see the user numbers significantly increasing anyway. 2014 was up for commercial numbers from the year before, but (like the Recession) we aren't were we were a decade ago.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

Rivervibe is absolutely right. Browns Canyon is a state park. There are officials and organizations who negotiate permit and rationing numbers for the commercials. There has not been any increased use of the canyon....if you find it too crowded stop floating it on Saturday afternoons...

In order to initiate a lottery system there would be a long, drawn out period of public scoping before anything would be done, and park managers are strongly against this.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

Another BIG factor is that the river corridor is not even included in the proposed Monument...only the uplands. In fact there is a 50' buffer around the railroad tracks/Union Pacific property. So even though it has been made clear that management of the lands included in the monument would remain under the same jurisdiction as now, that doesn't matter because the river won't be part of it...


----------



## GratefulOne (Jun 12, 2010)

thanks logan... makes me feel much better....


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

I heard that they're putting in a slot machine at Fish Bridge. You put in $7 and pull the lever. If you get all cherries it spits out a Browns permit. If not you have to run Bighorn Sheep Canyon. Seems like the best lottery system for a day run...


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

It's only a matter of time till they put a permit system in place. It's all about how many boats go down the river each day. In the past, as most of you know, private boaters have exceeded that number a couple of times with big threats of implementing a permit system. The low water year of 2002 helped to keep the number of private boats a day down, and break the rhythm of usage. The numbers have slowly been coming back up to the level that it could put the permit system into place. 

One of the hopes of this monument designation is to bring more people into the area and boost the local economy. This is what will eventually bring the private boater numbers back up to the trigger point of "having to" implement a permit system to control the number of boats allowed in Browns Canyon on any given day. 

I can see the point on both sides of the argument for making it a National Monument.....but I'm still not convinced it's a good thing for private boaters and is no guarantee that a permit system is far in the future. It may be closer than you think.


----------



## GratefulOne (Jun 12, 2010)

ill would adamantly oppose a lottery based permit system... isn't there any official representatives who could give us some clarity... if browns becomes a lottery... I will probably start looking to move... SE or NW


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

There is nothing in the rules that say the permit system has to be a lottery system. That is totally up to the AHRA as to how they would issue the permits and when they might put it in place. The way the river is run right now is not suppose to change in any way, but this permit system has been on the table a couple of times over the years. By drawing more people to the area.......it's only a matter of time. Best bet is to attend future AHRA task force meetings and keep voicing your opinion of opposition against a permit system.


----------



## pablo (Apr 30, 2004)

No monument. AHRA has it screwed up enough


----------



## DesertRatonIce (Jan 1, 2015)

I have been reading a lot about the Monument. Senator Udhall was the biggest supporter of this bill. He is no longer in the Senate. I'm curious as what priority the bill has now?


Woke up this morning at 10:13.


----------



## Andy H. (Oct 13, 2003)

Back in 2003 the private boat quota was reached a few days around peak runoff. People were so starved from the previous years' drought (I think it peaked at about 350 in 2002) that we flooded it when it hit 3K in 2003. I was one of the ones that helped exceed the quota Memorial Day weekend, IIRC. When the specter of a permit system was raised, private boaters pulled together and did things like boat counts, discouraged boaters from Browns and other things. Also, I think the outfitters gave up some of their existing allocation for increased use on the numbers or elsewhere to increase private boater allocation on Browns. If someone's got better beta on how it all worked, please correct me.

From what I remember, any concept of a permit system discussed then was based on permits being available for pickup in the area, like at CKS, Nathrop Store, and so forth, with same day registration/pickup available. I would be very surprised if there were ever anything more limited than a first-come, first-serve system that quits issuing permits when the quota is reached, should the day ever come at all.

So come on down off the ledge, armageddon isn't happening anytime soon.

-AH


----------



## DesertRatonIce (Jan 1, 2015)

In 2002, the peak was over 600 cfs on May 6th. It really didn't get above 300 again. Andy is right, 2003 was a great run off year, 3200 cfs peak. The allotment was filled early as people were excited to see water. 2012 was really bad and does anybody know the numbers were for 2013? Like 2003?

Victor


Woke up this morning at 10:13.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

I'm sorry but 360 commercial trips is not rationing, it is a rubber train. Perhaps the reason the private boater number is "low" is the lack of a quality experience, not one of desire. I first kayaked there in the 70's when Browns and Numbers were, believe it or not, often fairly empty, esp on weekdays. Raced Fibark too. Last time I made the mistake of making a Browns run, and it was an attempted "off hours" one on a weekday, I got run over by a raft (my fault, I peeled out of an eddy behind a blind big rock (companion was in same eddy so no spotter) and never saw it before my ferry attempt went deep south.). But based on the line of Hypalon and PVC coming down, it's possible I might have never gotten out otherwise. 

N.B. - I'm a rafter too - Love 'em just not in amounts where you need scientific notation to count 'em. Also preferably not filled to capacity with obese, drunk Texans who can't swim and all too frequently don't do well in early season, cold high water flips. 

If and when the permit system comes, and it will, rest assured the commercial pie won't be cut. Yeah, they may bring big bucks to the valley, and provide lots of jobs, but it's my river too.

We don't need a permit system (esp one that works as "well" as rec.gov) or a f*cking Monument, rather someone with enough balls to say yeah, screw the money, the commercial slots are way over allocated. By about 300. 

Sorry. Deep, longstanding feelings about this. It's possible there may be someone here I haven't pissed off, but unlikely. Rant over. 

- Jon


----------



## rivervibe (Apr 24, 2007)

It's true, 360 is the shite tonne of rubber on that river, but days like that rarely happen. 200 doesn't even happen that often. It's only a couple of months that you need to put up with it all anyway. 
Besides, the designation of the river is not changes with respect to the Monument, so a Rec.gov lottery aint happening unless other rivers in the state shutter their commercial industries. 

At least the culture isn't like it is over on the Ocoee where I head the guides (on multiple occasions) yell "Aim for the kayaker!" (at me) as if it was a standard guiding command.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

rivervibe said:


> It's true, 360 is the shite tonne of rubber on that river, but days like that rarely happen. 200 doesn't even happen that often. It's only a couple of months that you need to put up with it all anyway.
> Besides, the designation of the river is not changes with respect to the Monument, so a Rec.gov lottery aint happening unless other rivers in the state shutter their commercial industries.
> 
> At least the culture isn't like it is over on the Ocoee where I head the guides (on multiple occasions) yell "Aim for the kayaker!" (at me) as if it was a standard guiding command.


I first paddled the Ocoee somewhere around 1979, I think around a year or so after the flume was condemned (only later to rescued as "historic"). We would come down from Dartmouth every spring and I don't recall ever seeing a raft. One spring break we ran it at full flood, when the Chatooga, Nolichucky, Tellico, even the Little T, pretty much everything was washed out or closed by the TVA. I don't remember much about that run except thinking that maybe this wasn't such a good idea. I do recall the Powerhouse ledge hole as pretty much gone, and the takeout zipping up pretty damn fast. In those days the upper put-in wasn't yet built and I think we carried down at a spot just below Grumpy's. Later while at Vandy Med we'd go over and do laps on the Ocoee in our new-fangled "play boats" (Dancers) and slalom race on the Nantahala, and there were more rafts but never an issue. Things must have changed a lot since then. 

So I've gone from being a grumpy old fart to a sentimental one in two posts.


----------



## tango (Feb 1, 2006)

Seems like some people are getting their panties in a bunch over pure speculation. Time and time again the AHRA has stated that management of the river corridor will not change, despite potential National Monument designation. 

The current fee system for day use and overnight camping works well. There is certainly competition in Browns for prime real estate when it comes to overnighters, but hey, the Arkansas is the most popular river in the country. Most river folks know what they're getting into when they show up in the area.

And private versus commercial.… pffffft. Get over it. If you don't want to slam dance down the river with a parade of various river craft, go find yourself a wilderness experience somewhere else. Splatting rafts, rocks, and anything else in the way is half the fun down in Clowns Canyon. Try peeling out of an eddy during club boater fest on the Gauley.

There are still many locations on the Ark where hippie trash river scum can legally put in or put out without paying the day use fees.


Sent from my iPhone using Mountain Buzz


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

Don't wear panties Tango. And on my many trips to the Gauley it was way less crowded. I have left Browns, and found other "wilderness experience" areas, but then that misses the entire point.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

tango said:


> Seems like some people are getting their panties in a bunch over pure speculation. Time and time again the AHRA has stated that management of the river corridor will not change, despite potential National Monument designation.
> 
> The current fee system for day use and overnight camping works well. There is certainly competition in Browns for prime real estate when it comes to overnighters, but hey, the Arkansas is the most popular river in the country. Most river folks know what they're getting into when they show up in the area.
> 
> ...


Damn straight Tango. If you have a problem with the way the most popular commercial run in the country is managed than step up, or shut up. I have been attending every citizens task force meeting for 3-4 years and no one from the public ever shows up. Its wonderful that you want to use the internet as a platform to bitch, but how about actually being active and expressing your opinion at a public meeting with the park managers?


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

In fact, here is your opportunity:

Help Shape Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s Vision for the Future

Colorado Parks and Wildlife is embarking on a strategic planning process to guide CPW's efforts into the future. During February and March 2015, CPW wants to actively engage our stakeholders and the public in the strategic planning process. Public input will be utilized along with other comments, research and planning efforts to inform the development of CPW’s 2015 Strategic Plan. The draft plan will be released in the summer 2015 for public review. The plan will be finalized in the fall 2015. CPW’s strategic plan will set a vision for the future and define goals, priorities and strategies for managing Colorado’s state parks, wildlife and outdoor recreation resources. The strategic plan aims to improve CPW’s efficiency, responsiveness and services by helping the agency focus on a strategic vision and capitalize on agency strengths and opportunities. Public are encouraged to submit comments before April 3 2015. An online comment form is available in English and Spanish on the CPW website at Colorado Parks & Wildlife - Strategic Plan. Public are invited to attend one of the following workshops where they will have a chance to share their thoughts on the future of Colorado’s state parks system, wildlife populations and opportunities for outdoor recreation, education and stewardship. CPW may schedule additional workshops. Please visit our website for an updated schedule. 

Colorado Parks and Wildlife 2015 Strategic Plan Public Workshops
• Feb. 24, 6:00-8:30 p.m., CPW Office, 4255 Sinton Rd., Colorado Springs;
• Feb. 25, 6:00-8:30 p.m., Lake Pueblo State Park, 640 Pueblo Reservoir Rd., Pueblo;
• Feb. 26, 6:00-8:30 p.m., CPW Office, 2500 S Main St., Lamar; 
• Feb. 26, 6:00-8:30 p.m., Steamplant Event Center, 220 W Sackett Ave., Salida;
• Mar. 2, 9:00-11:30 a.m., Bass Pro Shops, 7970 Northfield Blvd., Denver; 
• Mar. 2, 6:00-8:30 p.m., REI, 1416 Platte St., Denver; 
• Mar. 18, 6:00 -8:30 p.m., Durango Public Library, 1900 E. 3rd Ave., Durango;
• Mar. 23, 5:30-8:00p.m., Mesa County Library, 530 Grand Ave., Grand Junction.

Please visit our website for more information: Colorado Parks & Wildlife - Strategic Plan or contact Josh Garcia at [email protected] or 303-869-1350.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

lmyers said:


> Damn straight Tango. If you have a problem with the way the most popular commercial run in the country is managed than step up, or shut up. I have been attending every citizens task force meeting for 3-4 years and no one from the public ever shows up. Its wonderful that you want to use the internet as a platform to bitch, but how about actually being active and expressing your opinion at a public meeting with the park managers?


Dude, you don't know me. And have no idea about what I've done or haven't done. Good on you for 4 years of mtgs. Keep up the good work. 

I was a part of AWA & ACA river access and safety for over 20 years back east, and both participated in and helped set up and run US Canoe/Kayak whitewater races. Spent plenty of time on the water and in meeting rooms, in fact prob 3 times 4 years, working for access and water releases, clean ups, etc. Including the Ocoee, Chattooga, Pemi and Swift, Penobscot, Kennebec, Upper and Top Yough. Briefly involved with the Gauley and Wilson Gorge. Fought with east TN/ west NC copper mines to improve water quality. And of course endless battles with the TVA.

Came out here 23 yrs. ago and am now just a private boater. Spent some time at whatever the AHRA CTF mtgs were called back then (can't remember) "expressing my opinion" long before you made your presence known, and realized pretty quickly that private boaters had essentially little to no say in the same room with the big commercial outfits and the local rep from TU, so decided life was too short and moved to other sections of the Ark and other rivers.

I'll bitch when I want to, and stand by every single word I've written about Browns. The reason it's the "most popular commercial run" is we've whored out the river to the highest bidder. We allowed this to happen, to the sole benefit of the rafting outfits and tourists. And they marketed it well. Sort of a built it and they came deal, if you will. The same cozy relationship ski areas have with the NF. Remove 2/3 of the outfitter slots, or at the least, allow alternate (or even once or twice weekly) private only days, and reasonable use resumes.


----------



## Randaddy (Jun 8, 2007)

duct tape said:


> Dude, you don't know me. And have no idea about what I've done or haven't done. Good on you for 4 years of mtgs. Keep up the good work.
> 
> I was a part of AWA & ACA river access and safety for over 20 years back east, and both participated in and helped set up and run US Canoe/Kayak whitewater races. Spent plenty of time on the water and in meeting rooms, in fact prob 3 times 4 years, working for access and water releases, clean ups, etc. Including the Ocoee, Chattooga, Pemi and Swift, Penobscot, Kennebec, Upper and Top Yough. Briefly involved with the Gauley and Wilson Gorge. Fought with east TN/ west NC copper mines to improve water quality. And of course endless battles with the TVA.
> 
> ...


I think it's great that Logan gets involved in the management of our local river. If we all did this more the river would be managed in a way that better reflects our wishes. 

Commercial outfitters attend meetings, communicate with lawmakers and government agencies, and actively participate in the management process. If that's what you call a "cozy relationship", then you're spot on - and they have every right to it as voters and tax paying businesses. They show up and you don't.

I'm a guide on the Arkansas River. Sorry you think I'm "whoring" it out by sharing it legally and responsibly with others. Sorry you don't want me to have a job. If you're worried about impact on Colorado's resources why don't you take one for the team and move back east where you're a big deal?


----------



## DoStep (Jun 26, 2012)

I started running Browns and Numbers commercially in '86, and continue to run AHRA stretches privately 10-20 days/year, with at least double that in additional days in the park without a boat. I know when the commercials are out and I know when I'm going to have it to myself, and I know full well what to expect in that regard every time I go. I know the industry feeds local economy and the outfitters are the ones who shape the landscape, much like the military and focus on the family do in Colorado Springs, for better or worse. 

I know the Arkansas River is a significantly anthro-manipulated stretch of river that can hardly be called a wilderness under the federal government's definition. Leadville superfund, downstream user storage, and trans basin diversions have altered the ecosystem in ways 99% of its users will never comprehend. I saw a raft and a group of kayaks in Seidels today in the middle of freaking winter. It was runnable and ran by many in both March and on Thanksgiving in 2014. A railroad has run through it for a century. There are significant historical and current mining and agriculture presence. Anyone who thinks the river corridor is a wilderness is fooling themselves. There is fantastic wilderness just beyond the tracks though, worthy of that designation IMO. All indications are that nothing will change in current land uses should it be done.

I am very appreciative of the AHRA's management of the 'park' and the system in place that addresses issues and adapts to changing dynamics. The CTF has a voice, and it is important that their representative has a little political savvy. Rob White and the AHRA staff do a great job in maintaining access, safety, facilities, and a charcoal, trash, and feces free experience for nearly a 1/4 million people per year. I don't know Logan, but I know plenty of his ilk that have been boating here for decades, and I appreciate very much his efforts.

The reason the Arkansas is the 'most popular run' is that is it a very special place. The management and outfitters have done a remarkable job over 4+ decades to make sure the place wasn't whored out, and the system is in place to make sure it continues. I have faith it will.


----------



## DesertRatonIce (Jan 1, 2015)

I guided on the ark for 10 seasons from 1990-2000. I have been a guide now for over 20 years. I feel sometimes that Browns needs more respect given to it by the commercials. It's embarrassing how a few companies really leave their mark in the canyon and it's totally wrong. The Upper Ark Valley needs rafting. The private boater just needs to launch at different times other than the launch times of most of the commercials from Fish. As a private boater now on the Ark, I launch my trips in mid morning. I will hit some traffic but for the most part, the half days are well ahead of me and about 80% of the full days are eating lunch. Sometimes this formula works out best and others not so. 
I thank you duct tape for your work on the upper Y. That section hands down is my favorite kayak run. Worlds Greatest Boof gets me going everytime. 
From the looks of the dwindling snowpack, there might not be as much water. That usually keeps the numbers down. 



Woke up this morning at 10:13.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

Randaddy said:


> If you're worried about impact on Colorado's resources why don't you take one for the team and move back east where you're a big deal?


Never said or meant to imply I was a big deal, and in fact never was. Just a warm body with a pulse, showing up. If I need a reminder of that all I have to do is ask my kids..

As I mentioned earlier, I expected my opinions would be inflammatory. I replied earlier in a fairly grumpy mood, which was unfortunate as I've tried to avoid that behavior and that style while here at on MB. I genuinely enjoy most posters info here, including your's Randaddy which I've seen several times. I've gotten a lot of good info about equipment and trips. So in that regard please accept my apologies for my grumpiness. It sometimes seems to show up with advancing age. Regarding Browns, I think I'll sign off from this thread and concept, and just close with I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.


----------



## AW-Evan (May 27, 2014)

Browns is an incredible canyon. Period. Probably the most classic class III stretch in the US, at least the Rockies. Obviously why people get so passionate about it and why tourists, all the way to expert paddlers, flock to it during the summer. 

This is a good discussion because on the most popular rafting stretch in the country permitting is always going to be an issue. I think it's important to note that 

1. Nothing in the proposed National Monument legislation leads to permitting the stretch for paddlers or any other users, or advises it, or even mentions it. 
2. Management of the stretch would remain as it is (by the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service in cooperation with the Colorado Division of Parks and Wildlife). The federal government isn't going to take over the canyon. It's the beauty of National Monuments, they get the protection but not the bureaucracy (or at least a new one that doesn't already exist). 

My thoughts here are to indicate that debating the permitting of Browns Canyon is a worthy exercise, however there's no need to put it in the context of the National Monument designation. It affords the area surrounding the canyon greater protections from future extractive uses and secures the area as a national treasure, which I think in most people on this boards opinions, it is.


----------



## caverdan (Aug 27, 2004)

Thanks Logan for posting those dates. I'm going to try and make the one in C Springs. Maybe Duct Tape would like to join me? Anyone else care to do a meet and greet before the meeting?

I have attended a few AHRA CTF meetings over the years, but the last couple came as very short notice to me, so I couldn't make them. At the last meeting I was at, they were starting to come up with new numbers of boats allowed in each section starting up at Turquoise Lake and the river sections above Granite. From what I've learned, the original numbers of boats allowed in each section where pulled out of thin air and set as law. They are now trying to come up with more realistic numbers of boats allowed in each section. Now is the time that the private boating community needs to pay attention to what the CTF is up to. The numbers are about to change for the entire river corridor. If the last meeting wasn't about Browns......I bet the next one will be. I'm going to try and make the next one. Anyone have a date for it yet?

IMHO.....what ever number they set for private boats, we will have to live with for a long time. This is the number that will also trip the trigger for the need of a permit system.


----------



## DesertRatonIce (Jan 1, 2015)

Please post any CTF meetings in April. I am moving back to the Ark Valley. I am more than interested in being used. I will be out in WV for March and half of April. Cheat season. I can be available to talk to anytime. 


Woke up this morning at 10:13.


----------



## duct tape (Aug 25, 2009)

caverdan said:


> Thanks Logan for posting those dates. I'm going to try and make the one in C Springs. Maybe Duct Tape would like to join me? Anyone else care to do a meet and greet before the meeting?
> 
> .


Dan,

Thanks, it would be nice to meet you. We've talked about rafting and trips several times here, including my Main Salmon trip last summer. BTW, I have a Sept 6 (low water!) MF permit if you're interested. I'm working until 7:30 ish on the 24th and then leaving town for the next week. To be honest, while I do care, and would like to maybe get into doing my share, it may be best that I'm not there. It 's possibly (likely?) I would just piss someone off, as I've done so well here, and would do no benefit to the private boating community.

- Jon


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

AW-Evan said:


> Browns is an incredible canyon. Period. Probably the most classic class III stretch in the US, at least the Rockies. Obviously why people get so passionate about it and why tourists, all the way to expert paddlers, flock to it during the summer.
> 
> This is a good discussion because on the most popular rafting stretch in the country permitting is always going to be an issue. I think it's important to note that
> 
> ...


I appreciate those comments, even if I may have a different perspective on the Monument proposal. From the structure of the bill I have read it appears the impetus is to protect the "greater" area that influences the canyon and not affect the current management structure of the river itself. Long term policies may change but it doesn't seem like that will be directly related to NM designation (though more bureaucracy creates its own currents). 

The one element of concern for me is the intentional advertising of the Monument proposal on economic grounds (whose relevance is playing out in the traditional private-vs-commercial tension here). There has been plenty of research to support why they would approach the designation from this standpoint: wildlands status draws short term tourists and long term residents. The downside is the inherent short-sightedness of these benefits. Drawing more interest to the canyon inherently changes the towns around it and the river experience itself. There is no way around that argument (many of the commercial interests in favor of the monument are banking on the free advertising the NM status brings). 

Does the Arkansas River really need more notoriety and are larger population of users? Many of us think not. The status alters the very fabric of the region that so many have enjoyed over the decades. While this is especially true for river users it also becomes important for residents and local workers. Cost of living is often already above the ability of most of the people who professionally provide the services that keep those towns running (from town service industry jobs to river guides) but it gets worse with these designations. Workers are forced further and further out of the place they make their living. We see this process lived out time and again across the west. 

I am not fundamentally against Monument status. Many extractive industries forever alter the landscape, but not all. Protecting the river experience and the ecosystem from those deleterious uses is paramount. On the other hand, I do have a problem when movements like those pushing to designate the canyon fail to vocalize, or even inventory and be aware of, the negative aspects of their goals. I am not really sure we need another western mountain town turned (further) into a sub-divided second and third home vacation community for the wealthy. 

That is the reason I think going through Congress is better than a unilateral Presidential declaration. Its sloppy and can take longer (if ever) but at least it goes through a more thorough democratic process. Its gives people the chance to vocalize and debate the myriad of perspectives that are part of our diverse lives. While the outcomes may be the same I think it leads to a richer understanding that is often buried by the false binary of "for-and-against" that often define the debates. And I think that knowledge can affect future outcomes.

Phillip


----------



## Treswright3 (May 20, 2013)

Last summer I spoke with one of the Park Rangers (or whatever they are called) that was rafting down the canyon. I asked about the Monument status and if they would require permits. He said that they will never require permits on Browns and that they view browns a a river that should be open for public use. He said that they permit so many rivers around colorado and that they have to just give up one river for people to use. He assured me that it would never happen. That being said, Im sure its possible that someday they will require permits but I think that overall they want to leave at least one river open for use.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

caverdan said:


> Thanks Logan for posting those dates. I'm going to try and make the one in C Springs. Maybe Duct Tape would like to join me? Anyone else care to do a meet and greet before the meeting?
> 
> I have attended a few AHRA CTF meetings over the years, but the last couple came as very short notice to me, so I couldn't make them. At the last meeting I was at, they were starting to come up with new numbers of boats allowed in each section starting up at Turquoise Lake and the river sections above Granite. From what I've learned, the original numbers of boats allowed in each section where pulled out of thin air and set as law. They are now trying to come up with more realistic numbers of boats allowed in each section. Now is the time that the private boating community needs to pay attention to what the CTF is up to. The numbers are about to change for the entire river corridor. If the last meeting wasn't about Browns......I bet the next one will be. I'm going to try and make the next one. Anyone have a date for it yet?
> 
> IMHO.....what ever number they set for private boats, we will have to live with for a long time. This is the number that will also trip the trigger for the need of a permit system.



This is correct, and they have now moved on past this portion of the process. FYI though the only stretches of the Ark that are anywhere close to private capacities are those between Salida and Cotopaxi. They are ideal for beginners as well as fishermen and subject to the most conflict. They are the stretches pushing the system and most likely to draw some kind of use compromise....although it has been stressed that there is no compromise when it comes to the rights of the private boater to launch at any time they see fit.


----------



## lmyers (Jun 10, 2008)

I should also mention the next CTF meeting is scheduled for 930, Thursday April 9th. The last few meetings have been held at the Chaffee County Fairgrounds.


----------



## DesertRatonIce (Jan 1, 2015)

Logan
Thanks for the April dates. If you know of anymore after the 15th let me know. I will be back from the Cheat and living in the Valley. 
Thanks
Victor


Woke up this morning at 10:13.


----------



## nathanfey (Jun 7, 2006)

Philip, if you were given a choice between placer operations in the river, or increased advertising around how great boating is in Browns, what would you choose?


Sent from my iPad using Mountain Buzz


----------



## restrac2000 (Mar 6, 2008)

nathanfey said:


> Philip, if you were given a choice between placer operations in the river, or increased advertising around how great boating is in Browns, what would you choose?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Mountain Buzz


False dichotomy, and one of the things I hate most about modern environmentalism. And from my understanding, wasn't the monument status about altering the land status around the river and not changing the management regime of the river itself?

I have made it clear here and elsewhere that I am in favor of protecting river corridors and riparian systems. My undergraduate degree and intended career was wildlife biology so I am fully aware of how destructive certain extractive industries can be to our landscape. But along with that degree came studies in HOW we designated land affected the very outcomes we were seeking. I am fundamentally against the us-vs-them attitude that has defined environmentalist, especially for the last 1-2 decades. And that approach comes from both sides not just the ideology we oppose. 

Phillip


----------

