# Westwater - Self Registration OK



## Ninja_Nico

That's a relief.


----------



## LSB

Sounds like open season to me.


----------



## yesimapirate

Bottom line -


----------



## Nickdanger

Thanks for posting this Andy. Big relief.


----------



## BrianK

I have a permit for westwater coming up, and the deadline for fees is coming. I guess I'll just wait till they come back to work.


----------



## DoStep

Andy H. said:


> I know someone mentioned it earlier but here's the word on Westwater:
> 
> *****************************************************



So do we need to send checks to cover fees? That would definitely be paying for services NOT to be rendered if so. But if that keeps us legit, I'd be inclined to consider it...


----------



## David Spiegel

I was hoping to add a couple of spots to a permit.... I am assuming no one will be at the phone to help with this until the shutdown is over?


----------



## eddy hopper

*Open Season!*

Remember when we used to have open season starting October 1st? That 1st. weekend was always a blast! Hmm....


----------



## catwoman

Will the potties be locked?


----------



## Gremlin

Regarding "open season", I would only consider running a day trip without a permit. The lucky permit holders should have the camps available to them.


----------



## LSB

eddy hopper said:


> Remember when we used to have open season starting October 1st? That 1st. weekend was always a blast! Hmm....


A blast indeed. I ran it on 4 consecutive days Oct. 1-4 one year. Big Party! We probably would have kept going but we ran out of supplies.


----------



## Ed Hansen

Andy, thanks for posting this.



David Spiegel said:


> I was hoping to add a couple of spots to a permit.... I am assuming no one will be at the phone to help with this until the shutdown is over?


No one will be at the put-in to do a head count...


----------



## bonzola

Anybody know the status on any regular day use put-in/take outs like Pumphouse, Radium, Statebridge, etc??


----------



## pinemnky13

bonzola said:


> Anybody know the status on any regular day use put-in/take outs like Pumphouse, Radium, Statebridge, etc??


I dont rmember seeing any gates at pumphouse or radium but I could be wron. Statebrige is Eagle County run


----------



## basinrafter

I thought Eagle County Open Space bought State Bridge, Two Bridges, etc...but turned the management of them over to the BLM. But I don't remember seeing gates at any of those places that could be closed, either. Maybe try calling Cutthroat Anglers in Silverthorne? I'm sure they would know pretty quickly if any gates or access points on the Upper C have been closed.


----------



## BLM_Moab

*please don't abuse the opportunity that I fought hard to keep available for you*



Ed Hansen said:


> Andy, thanks for posting this.
> 
> 
> 
> No one will be at the put-in to do a head count...


I am a boater and a land manager now 'non-essential' furloughed government employee. If you take a moment to review the chain of events that is unfolding at Lee's Ferry I hope that you will appreciate the opportunity to have access to Westwater Canyon. 

This government impasse is not settled and I fear that it could get worse before it gets better... Public lands belong to the people and there is no doubt that there will be a big mess to clean up once we get back to work. Thanks to all of you honest, responsible folks that are looking out for the facilities and the canyon in our absence!

For those that read through the Westwater business plan you are aware that the Westwater river program does not support itself even at the $10 fee it is not self sustaining - it is an expensive program. We would be there answering the phone calls if we could...

Thank you in advance for respecting the job that the rangers perform and the management decisions that continue to allow for a fabulous,primitive and fairly wilderness like boating experience. Many of us recall the 'open October chaos' and the parking/ boat ramp/ camping clusters. Hopefully you agree that we don't want to go back to those days...


----------



## catwoman

Jennifer,
As a person invited on WW this weekend, I really appreciate that we still can float the canyon this weekend. Thank you. In reading the various documents, it sounds as though the restrooms are "supposed" to be closed. While I recognize that I am likely on my own for TP, I am wondering if we should expect to need a groover set up at the put in. I am contemplating finding/bringing an extra for our relatively large group if we do need it at the put in. Any input?


----------



## BLM_Moab

The bathrooms were not locked as of Tuesday. Hopefully they are in okay shape without the staff to clean and stock... I hope that you find the vault toilets to be presentable but if not, you know what to do... Be safe and have fun!


----------



## larryo

does anyone know if deso is open


----------



## 2tomcat2

larryo said:


> does anyone know if deso is open


Regarding Deso:http://www.recreation.gov/wildernessAreaDetails.do?contractCode=NRSO&parkId=72440


----------



## restrac2000

BLM_Moab said:


> I am a boater and a land manager now 'non-essential' furloughed government employee. If you take a moment to review the chain of events that is unfolding at Lee's Ferry I hope that you will appreciate the opportunity to have access to Westwater Canyon.
> 
> This government impasse is not settled and I fear that it could get worse before it gets better... Public lands belong to the people and there is no doubt that there will be a big mess to clean up once we get back to work. Thanks to all of you honest, responsible folks that are looking out for the facilities and the canyon in our absence!
> 
> For those that read through the Westwater business plan you are aware that the Westwater river program does not support itself even at the $10 fee it is not self sustaining - it is an expensive program. We would be there answering the phone calls if we could...
> 
> Thank you in advance for respecting the job that the rangers perform and the management decisions that continue to allow for a fabulous,primitive and fairly wilderness like boating experience. Many of us recall the 'open October chaos' and the parking/ boat ramp/ camping clusters. Hopefully you agree that we don't want to go back to those days...


Thank you for doing whatever administrative magic was necessary in advance to make this resource available to the public. 

I cringe when I read small remarks like "open season" as I would hate to see a few selfish folks lead to future closures of Westwater. From the chain of events I am guessing federal shutdown could be a regular occurrence for a while. Please show the agencies we can manage ourselves during times like these and help discourage poaching and resource degradation. Westwater could be an example of how to change the access to other rivers.

Phillip


----------



## Ed Hansen

As a fellow Federal Employee, thank you Jennifer for your time/actions taken and updates here regarding the status of Westwater. Sorry if you took offense to my previous statement. I too am on a permit this weekend and am sincerely grateful to be afforded the opportunity to have a stress free float on what appears to be a great weather weekend. 

Hopefully by the time this trip is done, there will be good news out of Washington regarding both of our pay checks. Shouldn't be long now.... 20 Republicans have come forward stating they will vote along with the Democrats to get the government open again. The ball is now in the majority leader's, (John Boehner), court on putting it up to a vote. Yup, as of now, only one man is keeping the government closed.

Here's A Tally Of Which House Republicans Are Ready To Fund The Government, No Strings Attached

SYOTR,

Ed

ps... I'll toss in an extra roll or two in the bathroom if it's open/needed.


----------



## jeffsssmith

restrac2000 said:


> I cringe when I read small remarks like "open season" as I would hate to see a few selfish folks lead to future closures of Westwater. From the chain of events I am guessing federal shutdown could be a regular occurrence for a while. Please show the agencies we can manage ourselves during times like these and help discourage poaching and resource degradation.
> Phillip


I have a few days off mid week next week and there are days open but the permitting office is closed. I could just go "poach" since no federal employee will be at the put-in to check me out. If I did this would that lead me to doing resource damage or would I just be managing myself since no one is permitted to manage me due to the government shutdown. I am capable of running Westwater without management or permitting since I have 87 prior trips through the canyon and 26 years of river running experience. Would this be inherently wrong or would everything be the same except that just like 99% of the rivers that I normally run there would be no one to tell me that I am "permitted" to go.


----------



## 86304

don't ask, don't tell?


----------



## restrac2000

jeffsssmith said:


> I have a few days off mid week next week and there are days open but the permitting office is closed. I could just go "poach" since no federal employee will be at the put-in to check me out. If I did this would that lead me to doing resource damage or would I just be managing myself since no one is permitted to manage me due to the government shutdown. I am capable of running Westwater without management or permitting since I have 87 prior trips through the canyon and 26 years of river running experience. Would this be inherently wrong or would everything be the same except that just like 99% of the rivers that I normally run there would be no one to tell me that I am "permitted" to go.


Nuanced question, though a little snarky to say the least.

Unfortunately, the only thing I can say is it boils down to personal values for those choosing to poach the river. If you are one who doesn't believe that you should be limited by the BLM management than right now would obviously be a brilliant time to go without a permit.

On the other hand, if you are like me, someone who would prefer less oversight but recognizes and has come to term with the reality of land management, then you recognize that flippant public comments about poaching are not a benefit for the long fought relationship with the land managers. No matter our personal views they are largely bound by laws and regulations from above. Their jobs require certain responses to specific uses of the resource.

I can't predict what will actually happen but I can say, having worked for the land managers who care about protecting and expanding access to users, that there ability to do so for us is often very tenuous. 

But obviously each person on this forum can do as they please. Just remember you actions can lead to consequences for all of us. 

Best of luck mate.

Phillip


----------



## k2andcannoli

O what will we ever do without our nanny state and its lemmings watching over us...maybe spend more than one night in the canyon?


----------



## Rockgizmo

I agree with restrac2000. Just because someone is not there to regulate doesn't mean if should be a free for all. I would amagine that this is why they have Rangers at Lee's ferry in the first place. The majority pay for the few. It would suck to see everything close down.


----------



## restrac2000

k2andcannoli said:


> O what will we ever do without our nanny state and its lemmings watching over us...maybe spend more than one night in the canyon?


I would state it a little different but I would IDEALLY prefer much less oversight myself. But we live in a reality where that preference does not exist yet. There are some great managers out there working hard towards that end game (just read this thread to see one such person who has made positive changes for the community). But we have to remember....this furlough will end and the BLM will return to actively managing the river. They don't magically disappear in this process. And from all of my experiences, here included, land managers read these forums. They are rafters, kayakers and recreators as well. But they also read the most flippant comments. We have the ability to self-regulate to show the managers that we are capable of not exhibiting the behaviors that led to the increased management in the past (managing human waste, not overly impacting campsites, even discouraging general overuse, etc). 

But bad mouthing them (most of my friends are use to it and it rolls off them better than I), joking about poaching and that ilk won't likely lead to the outcomes many of us desire.

Done with my input, I am sure people heard me the first time. I did not have a permit in the first place and will not be heading out there. May the shutdown end soon and river management only change for the better.

Phillip


----------



## k2andcannoli

Yeah im a little ill and grumpy today. My filter seems skewed... No malcontent intended.


----------



## LSB

BLM_Moab said:


> I hope that you will appreciate the opportunity to have access to Westwater Canyon.


Shows to go ya that some feds do give a shit.
My wife is breaking furlough at this very moment to irrigate a festering wound on one of the mules in the regional pack string. Unpaid and illegal.


----------



## David L

However.........

If I lived closer to Westwater, I'd seriously think about going if the powers that be chose not to manage it for a week or so.

My reasoning: I consider myself a boater respectful of the river environment and other boaters. I would still bring the proper river/camping gear, I can take care of myself, and I would NOT launch if I thought too many other people were already there.

My point is that if the feds chose not to manage it, I say I can properly self-manage myself.




Rockgizmo said:


> I agree with restrac2000. Just because someone is not there to regulate doesn't mean if should be a free for all. I would amagine that this is why they have Rangers at Lee's ferry in the first place. The majority pay for the few. It would suck to see everything close down.


----------



## jeffsssmith

restrac2000 said:


> I did not have a permit in the first place and will not be heading out there. May the shutdown end soon and river management only change for the better.
> 
> Phillip


I don't have a permit either and that is my point. Permits are available but the office is closed. No one will launch on the dates that are available but some would like to. 

Maybe this will make it more clear: Mom and Dad are having a fight and all the children must stay in their rooms until the fight is over. Normally the children can just go out and play anytime but must ask permission to go certain places. They always get permission if they ask politely but Mom and Dad are locked into their bedroom and won't talk to any of the children. After days of this childish display by the parents some of the children make adult decisions and go out to play without permission. Some other children just sit in their rooms waiting for the parents to start acting like adults again. In the end the parents won't know what the children were doing during the whole time that they were fighting and it likely won't matter.


----------



## restrac2000

jeffsssmith said:


> I don't have a permit either and that is my point. Permits are available but the office is closed. No one will launch on the dates that are available but some would like to.
> 
> Maybe this will make it more clear: Mom and Dad are having a fight and all the children must stay in their rooms until the fight is over. Normally the children can just go out and play anytime but must ask permission to go certain places. They always get permission if they ask politely but Mom and Dad are locked into their bedroom and won't talk to any of the children. After days of this childish display by the parents some of the children make adult decisions and go out to play without permission. Some other children just sit in their rooms waiting for the parents to start acting like adults again. In the end the parents won't know what the children were doing during the whole time that they were fighting and it likely won't matter.



Your conclusion and metaphor fails on one point: you and others are posting and encouraging poaching in a very public, online forum. So in fact they will know.

I have worked in and with agencies for various stakeholder groups over the years. You will be shocked what they know and observe. Most are willing to overlook the occasional banter but you are severely misinformed if you doubt that such actions don't matter. Enough poaching or even the threat of it can and has damaged access and relationships with managers in the past. It can happen again.

Choosing to poach Westwater when a manager has made such amazing efforts as to make the resource available to permitted parties during the shutdown is an immensely selfish behavior. You have the privilege and option of doing so but no level of justification can hide the fact that it has the potential to negatively affect the community at large. If you deem the reward greater than the consequence than I guess it makes sense for you to poach.

SeldomSeen didn't broadcast his intentions and choices to the authorities ahead of time. The story would have been different if he had. The irony is too hard to pass up.

My lack of self control after making previous statements of being done is also evident.


Phillip


----------



## jeffsssmith

restrac2000 said:


> Your conclusion and metaphor fails on one point: you and others are posting and encouraging poaching in a very public, online forum. So in fact they will know.
> 
> I have worked in and with agencies for various stakeholder groups over the years. You will be shocked what they know and observe. Most are willing to overlook the occasional banter but you are severely misinformed if you doubt that such actions don't matter. Enough poaching or even the threat of it can and has damaged access and relationships with managers in the past. It can happen again.
> 
> Choosing to poach Westwater when a manager has made such amazing efforts as to make the resource available to permitted parties during the shutdown is an immensely selfish behavior. You have the privilege and option of doing so but no level of justification can hide the fact that it has the potential to negatively affect the community at large. If you deem the reward greater than the consequence than I guess it makes sense for you to poach.
> 
> SeldomSeen didn't broadcast his intentions and choices to the authorities ahead of time. The story would have been different if he had. The irony is too hard to pass up.
> 
> My lack of self control after making previous statements of being done is also evident.
> 
> Phillip


My style of river running comes from years of experience on permitted and unpermitted rivers but mostly unpermitted rivers where no one ever knows of our passage since we are stewards of the rivers and canyons without having any management. As a kayaker that self supports the rivers that are too hard for rafters to run I have seen places that are still truly wild and not in need of the type of management that Westwater and other popular rafting rivers have. 

The real irony here restrac is that I was playing devil'advocate and you got trolled. I understand the need for permits and management on Westwater and other popular rivers and appreciate the work of the land managers to protect the resource and preserve the river experience. I think you may be taking yourself too seriously and have missed the message.


----------



## k2andcannoli

Dgaf


----------



## restrac2000

jeffsssmith said:


> My style of river running comes from years of experience on permitted and unpermitted rivers but mostly unpermitted rivers where no one ever knows of our passage since we are stewards of the rivers and canyons without having any management. As a kayaker that self supports the rivers that are too hard for rafters to run I have seen places that are still truly wild and not in need of the type of management that Westwater and other popular rafting rivers have.
> 
> The real irony here restrac is that I was playing devil'advocate and you got trolled. I understand the need for permits and management on Westwater and other popular rivers and appreciate the work of the land managers to protect the resource and preserve the river experience. I think you may be taking yourself too seriously and have missed the message.


I didn't miss the message. I have worked long and hard to reduce the need for government oversight over the last decade. I have heard the philosophical perspective for ages now in relation to rafting and canyoneering. Its nothing new. The groups I have donated to and worked to create (often ending in failure due to competing views within the community) ultimately seek to increase access. While working for them it becomes obvious how just a few selfish actions can easily outweigh the concerted effort of many to be productive (just look to the sudden closure of Deer Creek in the Grand). As for serious.....not about myself but about my ideas (don't appreciate the ad hominem attack, always best to critique the ideas not the person). Just as you serious after decades of kayaking relatively untouched rivers. I also understand the others just choose to float within permitted rivers without a care in the world as they have the skills to go undetected.

As far as getting trolled....thats not an insult to me. Trolling is a derogatory term for those doing the action. I may have fed it but I did so in a sincere manner that stuck to my values. Too often flippant comments go by in these forums without others standing up to show the moderate side. I believe that we need folks to voice dissent against selfish acts as it shows we can self regulate as a community (not just individuals). Self regulation = cooperation which reduces the need for agencies to enforce compliance in the long run.

And maybe that is the difference for me.....poaching is a short run, personal benefit that increases the likelihood of compliance based regulations. 

I fully accept and appreciate passionate disagreement. I have stated several times that my opinion and interpretation has no authority to stop someone from poaching. 

I have been to the wild places you have mentioned, though only on foot. Stewardship comes in many forms. Voicing a preference to have more of those places is actually consistent with my own worldview. As far as experience and justification for our ideas....I have only really been rafting for a little more than a decade. I have seen more places increase restrictions in that time. I value personal stewardship but ultimately you are comparatively rare in the scheme of things. Just look to Ruby Horsethief to see how a run was abused by multiple stakeholders. 

Best of luck achieving what you want. I just have never seen any benefit to support poachers.

Phillip


----------



## jeffsssmith

restrac2000 said:


> I didn't miss the message.
> Phillip



Yes you did.


----------



## stinkyk8

Thank you Jennifer Jones and the Moab BLM for making it possible for those of us who have permits to go ahead with our trips!

I also believe that despite the lack of "government presence" at Westwater this weekend (and/or month or however long this shutdown lasts...) we need to continue to respect and abide by the permitting rules set in place. Westwater is the fabulous place that it is because of the folks who regulate (and clean up after) the river runners who use that wonderful waterway! please don't ruin it for all of us. Otherwise, I'm sure the next time the government shuts down, we will be barred from Westwater, as someone thought we should have been.

Again, thank you Jennifer!!!


----------



## restrac2000

jeffsssmith said:


> Yes you did.


Beyond the response of a 4 year old, care to enlighten me with a different wording of the message I missed, Mr. Ken Sleight. Because at the moment I have seen nothing new in this thread that I haven't read or understood over the past decade.

Phillip


----------



## restrac2000

restrac2000 said:


> Beyond the response of a 4 year old, care to enlighten me with a different wording of the message I missed, Mr. Ken Sleight. Because at the moment I have seen nothing new in this thread that I haven't read or understood over the past decade.
> 
> Phillip


Sorry for my snarky reply. In all honesty if there is something I missed I would love to know. I have spent the last decade as both recreator and student of human dynamics in land management. If there is some thread and approach I have missed I would be sincerely curious. I don't like playing into purely antagonistic relationships, though my fingers get ahead of my editing. But at the same time its hard when you admit to trolling me.

So in all sincerity what have I missed? 

Phillip


----------



## mikepart

jeffsssmith said:


> My style of river running comes from years of experience on permitted and unpermitted rivers but mostly unpermitted rivers where no one ever knows of our passage since we are stewards of the rivers and canyons without having any management. As a kayaker that self supports the rivers that are too hard for rafters to run I have seen places that are still truly wild and not in need of the type of management that Westwater and other popular rafting rivers have.
> 
> The real irony here restrac is that I was playing devil'advocate and you got trolled. I understand the need for permits and management on Westwater and other popular rivers and appreciate the work of the land managers to protect the resource and preserve the river experience. I think you may be taking yourself too seriously and have missed the message.


Evidently, I missed your point to. You say that you were playing devil's advocate and that you understand the need for permits and appreciate the work of land managers. Then why did you seem to have a problem with Phillip pointing out the gaping holes in your argument?

The first paragraph of of the above quoted block seems to make a point completely unrelated to the issue at hand: that you are a super duper river runner and have run rivers that don't need intensive management. Do you feel that this entitles you to a reprieve from the rules that apply to more heavily used rivers?

Your previous posts clearly argue that it is ok for everyone to go poach Westwater on those dates that have spots open on the calender. Or maybe not everyone, just everyone who thinks they are as great a river runner as you think you are and can go "undetectable." But maybe you were playing devil's advocate and you don't actually agree with that. Who knows.

Either way, there seems to be an exponentially growing number of river runners in this area and if a quarter of them show up at Westwater it could pose a problem. Even if they all practiced the best of leave no trace ethics there would still be problems. Government action or inaction will inherently piss someone off. Right now the steps taken by the Moab Field Office seem to be the best decision given the current circumstances. 

It's funny how the people who argue against any form of government regulation often exemplify the very need for such regulation.


----------



## Snoopmo

stinkyk8 said:


> Thank you Jennifer Jones and the Moab BLM for making it possible for those of us who have permits to go ahead with our trips!
> 
> I also believe that despite the lack of "government presence" at Westwater this weekend (and/or month or however long this shutdown lasts...) we need to continue to respect and abide by the permitting rules set in place. Westwater is the fabulous place that it is because of the folks who regulate (and clean up after) the river runners who use that wonderful waterway! please don't ruin it for all of us. Otherwise, I'm sure the next time the government shuts down, we will be barred from Westwater, as someone thought we should have been.
> 
> Again, thank you Jennifer!!!


Thanks Stinky! Well said.

I hope folks will heed your advice and appreciate what the BLM has done by letting the river be accessible. I bet some folks at the Grand wish Jennifer was working there.


----------



## mikesee

mikepart said:


> there seems to be an exponentially growing number of river runners in this area and if a quarter of them show up at Westwater it could pose a problem. *Even if they all practiced the best of leave no trace ethics there would still be problems.*


I've been happy to sit on the sidelines here and watch as everyone chimes in but the argument still seems to go nowhere.

But your comment in bold above drew me out. Tell me, please, how a boat floating down a river with an occupant whom takes nothing and leaves nothing, causes 'problems'?

I get that accidents happen. I get that when overnighting people leave a trace on the beach. Best I can tell, Jeff was advocating civil disobedience for *day trips*, and a day trip of Westwater can *easily* be done without ever setting foot to ground--other than at the paved ramps on either end.

Anyhoo--the question remains: How would this cause "problems"?

Thanks,

MC


----------



## restrac2000

The civil disobedience perspective was anything but clear to me considering he claimed to do most of his poaching (theoretically) without ever being known. The common understanding of civil disobedience has normally required the action be public or at least revealed in communication. As I understand his advocacy of the devil was not about such public actions but about being completely capable of floating rivers without ever been seen or leaving an impact.

I would support a concerted act of civil disobedience by rafters, though I think there message and goal would be poorly timed right now. Friend of mine are staging a 'Occupy Zion" event tomorrow. I won't join them because I don't agree with their goals but I have supported the organizers in their desire to garner attention for the losses they are experiencing due to the shutdown.

But there is a pretty obvious line between poaching a resource for personal gain and pursuing an act of civil disobedience. If he was commenting on CD then I missed the memo. Maybe actually using that language or something similar would have been clarifying. "Open season" has historical roots that would hint at selfish gains that have nothing to do with philosophical or political conflicts.


----------



## mikepart

mikesee said:


> I've been happy to sit on the sidelines here and watch as everyone chimes in but the argument still seems to go nowhere.
> 
> But your comment in bold above drew me out. Tell me, please, how a boat floating down a river with an occupant whom takes nothing and leaves nothing, causes 'problems'?
> 
> I get that accidents happen. I get that when overnighting people leave a trace on the beach. Best I can tell, Jeff was advocating civil disobedience for *day trips*, and a day trip of Westwater can *easily* be done without ever setting foot to ground--other than at the paved ramps on either end.
> 
> Anyhoo--the question remains: How would this cause "problems"?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> MC


Well, I suppose if your ok with Disneyland type crowds on Westwater then there is no problem. I for one hope not to see that.

Also, the though that huge crowds of people would run Westwater in an unregulated setting and never set foot on land is perhaps a bit unrealistic. Sure, it can be done fairly easily, but do you really think that it would happen. Some people would want to check out the miners cabin or the outlaw cave others would need to take a dump ect. Imagine if you showed up at the ramp to launch on your permitted overnight to find 50 pickup trucks and trailers putting in for unpermitted day trips.

Now don't get me wrong, sometimes rules suck, and sometimes I break rules when I think it doesn't harm others, but in this case poaching Westwater whether it's overnight or day trips could make the canyon a fiasco and force the BLM to shut it down for the folks who do have permits. That hurts others. Civil disobedience is a fine thing to do when government gets out of hand--our nation was born out of civil disobedience after all. But in this case it is not out of hand and I think that the BLM is genuinely trying to please the greatest number of users that they can.

We all have different opinions about what are acceptable uses of public lands. I am occasionally annoyed when I can't do things that I think should be acceptable, but I am happy that some things that other people think are acceptable are not allowed.

For the record, I think that a reasonable number of day trip floaters is a pretty low impact activity. So, to an extent I think that you are right, floating the river does not hurt much. But then the reasonable number thing comes in and to have that we need someone to regulate it.


----------



## mikesee

mikepart said:


> <snipped>
> 
> So, to an extent I think that you are right, floating the river does not hurt much.
> 
> <snipped>


You still haven't answered the original question, though your above answer suggests minor backpedaling.

I don't have a dog in this fight, don't really care too much one way or the other how it plays out in the short term. So please don't take my responses personally. I just really want to hear a legit explanation for how a boat floating down a river has an impact or 'causes problems'.

Cheers,

MC


----------



## mikepart

mikesee said:


> You still haven't answered the original question, though your above answer suggests minor backpedaling.
> 
> I don't have a dog in this fight, don't really care too much one way or the other how it plays out in the short term. So please don't take my responses personally. I just really want to hear a legit explanation for how a boat floating down a river has an impact or 'causes problems'.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> MC


Ok, the impacts and problems of one boat floating down the river are negligible. But if you can float Westwater whenever you want, then damit I can too, and so can everybody else for that matter. If you need an explanation for why that causes problems just let me know.


----------



## mikesee

mikepart said:


> Ok, the impacts and problems of one boat floating down the river are negligible. But if you can float Westwater whenever you want, then damit I can too, and so can everybody else for that matter. If you need an explanation for why that causes problems just let me know.


I'm not trying to be a douche toward you here, honest. But can you please expound on 'negligible'?

I'm not arguing anything related to the free-for-all that some here seem to fear. I just really want to understand the actual 'impact' of a boat floating down a river.


----------



## mikepart

mikesee said:


> I'm not trying to be a douche toward you here, honest. But can you please expound on 'negligible'?
> 
> I'm not arguing anything related to the free-for-all that some here seem to fear. I just really want to understand the actual 'impact' of a boat floating down a river.


Well. everything has an impact on something right. If one boat has no impact than how can a thousand boats have an impact? I would be happy to talk about "sphere of influence," wildlife stressors, and other impacts that a single non-motorized recreator can have on wilderness, but does it really have anything to do with this conversation? Perhaps you should start another thread and we can get all philosophical about the impact of one boater paddling silently down the river and never touching land. 

The reality is that while it is theoretically possible to minimize ones impact, recreational boaters have an impact on their environment.


----------



## mikesee

mikepart said:


> Well. everything has an impact on something right. If one boat has no impact than how can a thousand boats have an impact? I would be happy to talk about "sphere of influence," wildlife stressors, and other impacts that a single non-motorized recreator can have on wilderness, but does it really have anything to do with this conversation? Perhaps you should start another thread and we can get all philosophical about the impact of one boater paddling silently down the river and never touching land.
> 
> The reality is that while it is theoretically possible to minimize ones impact, recreational boaters have an impact on their environment.


So either you're:

-Being deliberately obtuse,
-Can't think of any real impacts, or
-Forgot what the question was.


----------



## restrac2000

Physical impacts of rafting:

Ramp soil disturbances. You can see the changes to the boat ramps at just about any launch region in the west. Some are related to river movements but many are related to how soils and approaches are influenced through increased use. As was stated by previous poster, if a hundred people have an influence than one person has an affect. Bad enough problem right now at Westwater that they have been considering options for relocations or further stabilization. In short, we affect soil.

Day Hiking: Concentrated use of specific sites has affects to soil (as mentioned above) in the form of erosion and compaction. It also affects vegetation and wildlife. Just look into the landings on either Westwater or the Moab daily.

Campsites: once again, soil, vegetation and wildlife. Also limited, or in this case no oversight, has historically been correlated with human waste problems. Just look at Ruby/Horsethief for example to understand the broader problems and specifically the proliferation of "prayers flags", as I know shallow turd graves to be, around camp

Those are just a few of the physical impacts.

"Problems" also include increased social encounters with fellow boaters (many of us in the west have become accustomed to reduced encounters correlated with almost all permit systems), campsite conflicts (once again look to the historic problems with the board at Ruby/Horsethief; even more likely considering the permitted parties are use to campsite designations), and the aforementioned issue of government interactions (cooperation-compliance spectrum). 

Just to name a few. 

Boating has an impact. Some people know how to reduce that but not all. I have found an "open season" mentality often follows the DGAF approach not only to permitting but also the minimal impact efforts that have been gained through that process. Even as a thoughtful rafter I have an impact (Leave No Trace is worded intentionally and not to be confused with no impact). Hard to escape that reality.

if you are actually interested in this subject then I suggest the following reads: 

Wildland Recreation: Ecology and Management by Hammit & Cole
---Been a while since I read but an awesome read if you like academic writing. Part II deals with the questions you ask. 

Wilderness Management: Stewardship and Protection of Resources and Values by Hendee and Dawson
---A tome. Must admit I haven't read the entire book but skimmed sections. That said, its my most dog eared text in the house. Chapters 10-13 deal with your questions.


Recommendations from a student who was interested both professionally (trying to help develop a professional society that had stewardship as goals) and avocationally. 

Phillip


----------



## mikepart

mikesee said:


> So either you're:
> 
> -Being deliberately obtuse,
> -Can't think of any real impacts, or
> -Forgot what the question was.


Why are you badgering me about the impact of a boat floating down the river? Perhaps you would like to argue that there is no impact. Than go right ahead. Stop asking me to explain this to you. I have already said several times that a single boat has very little impact. 

Can a boat float down the river with no noticeable impact? Yes, but who cares? That doesn't have anything do do with anything. We are talking about people here and people make impacts on their surroundings.

Or maybe this will satisfy you: The riparian zone is a very important area for many species of vertebrates. Studies have measured drastic changes in heart rate and other measures of stress in wildlife when humans are nearby. Particularly, river runners can stress bighorn sheep that depend on desert river canyons.

But once again, what does this have to do with anything? I feel drug into this. I don't give a damn about a boat floating down the river. Let's just be respectful and not advocate poaching Westwater on a public forum. Especially after a BLM employee has stuck her neck out to protect our ability to run this canyon.


----------



## jeffsssmith

I will reluctantly wade into this discussion one more time to see if some clarification can be achieved. Restrac and Mikepart have misunderstood my posts and assumed that I am a poacher and that I advocate for it. I mentioned "poaching" in my first post in reference to Restrac's use of the word in his post on page 2 only to illustrate a point that has been missed. I know what over crowding on rivers is like and understand the need for permitting systems to reduce the numbers of people on the river at one time. I support those systems and participate in them but not exclusively. I tried to point out that the over crowded rivers are the ones that are accessible because they don't have whitewater that is very difficult. Long ago I realized that kayakers can access more difficult whitewater on rivers that are as spectacular and beautiful as the more popular crowded rivers and these sections don't need as much management therefore are easier to access. I switched to kayaking from rafting and took the same minimum impact and leave no trace ethics that I learned from rafting to these places.


----------



## jeffsssmith

jeffsssmith said:


> I will reluctantly wade into this discussion one more time to see if some clarification can be achieved. Restrac and Mikepart have misunderstood my posts and assumed that I am a poacher and that I advocate for it. I mentioned "poaching" in my first post in reference to Restrac's use of the word in his post on page 2 only to illustrate a point that has been missed. I know what over crowding on rivers is like and understand the need for permitting systems to reduce the numbers of people on the river at one time. I support those systems and participate in them but not exclusively. I tried to point out that the over crowded rivers are the ones that are accessible because they don't have whitewater that is very difficult. Long ago I realized that kayakers can access more difficult whitewater on rivers that are as spectacular and beautiful as the more popular crowded rivers and these sections don't need as much management therefore are easier to access. I switched to kayaking from rafting and took the same minimum impact and leave no trace ethics that I learned from rafting to these places.


I posted this before I was finished. I guess


----------



## jeffsssmith

jeffsssmith said:


> I will reluctantly wade into this discussion one more time to see if some clarification can be achieved. Restrac and Mikepart have misunderstood my posts and assumed that I am a poacher and that I advocate for it. I mentioned "poaching" in my first post in reference to Restrac's use of the word in his post on page 2 only to illustrate a point that has been missed. I know what over crowding on rivers is like and understand the need for permitting systems to reduce the numbers of people on the river at one time. I support those systems and participate in them but not exclusively. I tried to point out that the over crowded rivers are the ones that are accessible because they don't have whitewater that is very difficult. Long ago I realized that kayakers can access more difficult whitewater on rivers that are as spectacular and beautiful as the more popular crowded rivers and these sections don't need as much management therefore are easier to access. I switched to kayaking from rafting and took the same minimum impact and leave no trace ethics that I learned from rafting to these places.


I posted before I was finished. I am not poaching permitted rivers and I realize that talking about it on this forum may be leading some to jump to conclusions. The point that Restrac and Mikepart missed is that if someone was to go down Westwater in the middle of the week when available permits are going unclaimed during the government shutdown without a permit (that are sadly unavailable due to no fault of theirs or the permitting agencies) it would probably happen without anyone knowing. This would still be poaching and I don't advocate for it but since the government is now absent that act might be unknown just like running un permitted rivers remains largely unknown and would likely cause minimal impact. A simple point that got blown out of proportion. Thanks Mikesee for seeing the point and trying to help clarify.


----------



## JustinJam

*ruby horsethief?*

Interesting turn in the post. I certainly appreciaciate the rational and philosophical approach to river regulation. I'm sure there are many area where resource management is not aware and interested in working w parties involved as at westwater. Thanks to all that are trying to work this out.

Is ruby horsethief open for self permit? I'm planning on taking my buddy and his two kids on their first overnight in a couple weeks. Thanks.


----------



## Ninja_Nico

*BLM ranger*

I ran a permitted trip this weekend, the group I was with put in on Saturday and there was a BLM ranger at the put in keeping tabs and checking permits.


----------



## catwoman

Yeah, I am thinking that the ranger was Law Enforcement - likely sparked by statements like ones seen on this thread.


----------



## paulk

If there is a ranger there, but no office, is it still possible to add people to our permitted trip? Or is the initial number set in stone?


----------



## Ninja_Nico

Yes, he was law enforcement. And yes, he was there to make sure there was no rush of non-permit holders. 

I think it would be possible to add people on if you show up with a permit. Although, I'm not sure about this and didn't ask that question. He seemed mostly concerned with keeping a rush under control.


----------



## Andy H.

I was on Westwater this weekend too. The ranger was LE, and for someone who was thrown into ranger duty, did a reasonably good job checking out the parties launching. After hearing rumors of a rush on the Canyon and wondering if it was going to be a madhouse, I was relieved to hear that someone was there keeping an eye on things.



> If there is a ranger there, but no office, is it still possible to add people to our permitted trip? Or is the initial number set in stone?


Permit additions & changes have to come through the office, the office is closed , therefore it seems logical that you are stuck with the number on your permit. My group was asked how many we had, and it looked like he did a count on another group as they were launching. While that wouldn't have stopped anyone from launching with a larger group than the permit listed, it would have been very easy to identify the permit holder and impose penalties once the the shutdown is over.

We put a dozen rolls of toilet paper, bleach spray, and a brush on our tripcost and one of the Buzz's finest did a stellar job on cleaning up the toilets. Please pass it on by restocking them and having someone in your trip do a cleanup job. 

Don't forget to water the cottonwoods at your campsite and others while the rangers aren't coming by to pump water into the barrels that drip irrigate them. Think of the shade they'll give us in a few years. There's one at ULD that's about 10 feet tall already but some others looked pretty sad.

Have good trips,

-AH


----------



## lmaciag

Thanks for the update, Andy! We will replenish supplies this weekend.

So happy that we will be able to make the trip happen regardless of the shutdown. Feeling for those with permits on other rivers that are not as lucky. Thanks to those that made this happen. I LOVE Westwater!


----------



## Theophilus

Andy that was awesome! We also brought and left TP and hauled some trash left in the toilets. I thought the self regulating went well this weekend and I had a good conversation with the LEO checking our permit when we launched. Thanks to BLM for allowing us to self register and launch...now if the LEO could just kick some clueless people in the ass at the take out ramp but that's another thread.


----------



## lmaciag

Update from the weekend (10/12/13 launch) - 

Bathrooms are still in good shape and plenty of TP (good idea to still BYO). The campsite signup sheet was from the previous week. The groups communicated to try to avoid any issues. We camped below the rapids and found a group doing a second night in the canyon at Big Horn. We were aiming for Bald Eagle. Would have been a pain if they had been at our planned camp. Seemed like everyone had a permit.

L.


----------

