HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: joel@Apple.COM (Joel Spiegel)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:54:43 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <lkhqciINN1aq@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes:
>I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a bunch of favorite
>rainy season runs, mostly small creeks that can get brush-choked or
>log-jammed.  A nice trip yesterday on the San Lorenzo (Santa Cruz CA)
>got me thinking.  With a little "trail" maintenance, this would be a
>really relaxing run, instead of a minor ballbuster.
>

Despite the fact that this is largely a religious issue, I figured I'd
put my 2 cents in. I have to say that I am very uncomfortable with
the idea of messing around with the natural vegetation in a river bed -
especially on a river like the San Lorenzo. It is small and tight and
tends to be cluttered with both brush and downed trees. We are not talking
about removing one freak strainer in miles of river. The San Lorenzo
changes season to season and day to day. Downed trees, logs, etc come and
go. In my opinion this is just the nature of this stream. Despite
having made lots of jokes about mounting chain saws on ouur boats, I
have to admit I'd be annoyed if I started finding evidence of someone
doing "trail maintenance". Personally I'm just hoping for a good
flood to take those willows out (maybe it'll roll a couch or somesuch out
of someones living room to help sweep things out :-). 

Just as additional info about this run: 1) Most of it is in a state park.
2) last I checked, it was considered one of the major steelhead
spawning stream on the central coast. I assume Bill is aware of both of
these points.

One other concern I have about messing with this particular river bed
is that Santa Cruz county has never been happy about people running
it. About 8  years ago the were actively trying to stop anyone from
getting on the river. Most of the people I know still do "commando"
putins just to reduce the possibility of unpleasant coversations with
local law enforcement types (there's kind of a hidden putin just
downstream of the inflatable dam & upstream of the park bridge). I'd hate
to give them any additional excuses to hassle boaters.

Here's to a lively discussion,
Joel
From: whitaker@cs.unc.edu (Ross Whitaker)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 11 Jan 1993 13:29:33 -0500
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
NNTP-Posting-Host: trochlea.cs.unc.edu

In article <34437@goofy.apple.COM> usenet@goofy.apple.COM (USENET Administrator) writes:
>
>I am offended and appalled by the idea of modifying a river to meet your
>desire for a better run. Where does this type of abuse stop? Do you clear 
>rivers of beavers who just happen to get in your way? Do you destroy
>natural
>logjams (Read "The Control Of Nature" by John McPhee - also wrote "Survival
>of
>the Birchbark Canoe." The Control Of Nature describes how a natural logjam
>was dynamited in the  mid 1800's to clear an easy passage between the
>Mississippi and the Atachafayla (sp?). That seemingly minor logjam was all
>that was keeping the mighty Mississippi in its channel and the
>environmental damage has been immense. I digress, sorry) because you in
>your wonderful omnipotence have determined that the run is more fun? I feel
>strongly about this (although I admit that there are my opinions and no
>move valid than anyone else's) and am strongly recommending that whenever
>you decide to change something that occurs naturally, you stop and think
>long and hard about it first. If you don't know the ecological
>ramifications, don't do it.


Here in the Piedmont of Carolina, we have a "home" river called
the Haw.  It has a bizarre watershed that causes frequent flooding, 
making a wonderful class III+ run after several days of rain.  It 
can be as difficult as class IV in an all out flood (once or twice
a year).  This river gets paddled a lot.  Evenings after work, when 
the water's up, people meet down at the river.  It's our home river.

About a year ago, during one of our moderate floods we came onto
a rapid called "Gabriels bend" - as the name implies, there is
a bend.  In the middle of the bend, a large, 3+ feet, diameter
pine tree had fallen, crossing almost that entire fork of the river,
straining the water with it's branches, making that rapid unrunable.

Within 24 hours this huge tree was gone.  Several boaters carried a 
chainsaw in open canoe, and with some care and effort, chopped it into
pieces and sent it floating down stream.

I would not hesitate for a minute to clear out such an obstacle, assuming
that it could be done while maintaining the safety of others on
the river.  This river is littered with floating and trapped logs 
as well as fallen trees, but this was in the way, so we removed it.
It was very dangerous where it was, and greatly detracted from one
of our favorite pastimes - paddling the Haw.

The fact that this tree fell "naturally" during a flood does not
make it sacred, and does not ensure that it is valuable to the
natural environment in the area.  It's just a fallen tree.  In such a case
it's absurd to start worrying about the longterm environmental consequences
of a single fallen tree.  Use some common sense.


	Ross


Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: fhm@well.sf.ca.us (Frank Miles)
Subject: What's up with the flow phone?
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Distribution: ca
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 06:25:47 GMT


Does anybody know what's wrong with the flow phone? I've been calling for
the past couple of weeks and getting either busy signals or no answer. Is
there any other number to call to get Ca. river flow info? It's getting
pretty frustrating knowing there's got to be a bunch of water out there and
not knowing which direction to head for.
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: marquet@audi.ece.cmu.edu (Marquet Anderson)
Subject: Re: FAQ and ohiopyle falls
Originator: marquet@audi.ece.cmu.edu
Keywords: canoe, kayak, raft, paddle, whitewater
Reply-To: marquet@audi.ece.cmu.edu (Marquet Anderson)
Organization: Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:10:05 GMT


In article <paddling-faq_726127330@athena.mit.edu>, rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
|> 
|> A common question about upper end of the scale is "Does a successful
|> run of a previously 'unrunnable' rapid make it a class VI, rather
|> than 'unrunnable'?".  The answer is no.  Various expert paddlers with
|> a certain cavalier attitude have managed drops such as Ohiopyle Falls
|> on the Yough, but it is probably better for our collective health
|> to continue to consider those places out-of-reach.  Even though
|> techniques and equipment continue to improve, bringing more rapids
|> into the "runnable" category, we need to be very careful about devaluing
|> ratings -- especially in rapids where there is significant danger.
|> 

I agree with the jist but disagree about the particulars.
In particular the Ohiopyle Falls.
I have run it 3 times, twice no problem and once real ugly.
I didn't have enough speed and ended up surfing the hydraulic at
the bottom. Was recirced after I exited the boat. While being recirced
I was held what appeared to be a couple feet beneath the surface of the
water. I swam down until it was calm and then swam away from the falls
and upwards to the surface.

The falls has a straightforward approach and between 9" and about 2' 
the entire run is quite smooth, granted one doesnt pencil as I did
that one time. In my opinion, this falls is no more difficult than
Wonder Falls at the Sandy.

The ONLY PROBLEM is the ludicrous $2500 fine the park is supposed
to impose on individuals running the falls.

Summary: to update the FAQ how about a more updated choice of unrunnable.
??Coming Home Sweet Jesus on the Lower Meadow?? run only at low water 
and by few other than Dean Tomko.

Just some random thoughts.
Marquet.
From: billrich@caspian.ext.vt.edu (Bill Richardson)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 5 Jan 93 22:58:49 GMT

In article <lkhqciINN1aq@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill  
"Bill" Tuthill) writes:
> What are the ethics of moving logs and clearing brush?  Do fish need
> the habitat under a logjam?  Can pruning a willow clump have adverse
> effects on riparian habitat?  How about moving a few rocks to create
> a clear kayak channel?
> 

I say, go ahead.  I can't imagine you doing enough work to adversely  
affect fish habitat unless there's usually no water or shade.  Willows  
will ALWAYS grow back so dont worry about them.

Bill in Blacksburg, VA
From: dryan@sgi1 (Dan Ryan)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 6 Jan 1993 18:55:09 GMT
Organization: Department of Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Guelph
NNTP-Posting-Host: sgi1.mathstat.uoguelph.ca
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Cheers to Bruce King and Paul Tomblin who clearly recognise the important role
habitat diversity plays in maintaining the ecological balance of a stream.

As previously stated, maintaining a stream to suit OUR standards generally 
leads to the destruction of important habitats, and although one person 
removing a few rocks for a clear run does no major damage, if everyone removed 
just a few rocks, the potential for damage is enormous.

My reason for paddling is to escape the real world and enjoy the NATURAL
beauty of the wilderness.  This does not include streams with all the 
rocks, trees and subsequently wildlife removed.

I hope more people adopt the attitude of Bruce and Paul, and leave the
MAINTENANCE to Mother Nature, the only one truly qualified to do it.

Dan Ryan
MTHRYAN@VM.UOGUELPH.CA
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: aa0fm@vexcel.com (Zach)
Subject: Re: Flossing the rivers
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder, CO
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:15:04 GMT

Jeez, here I go with my $.02. I tend to agree with the
attitude of leaving the natural obstacles alone in
rivers. I started thinking about it and realized that
debris cleaning could also mean removing strainers
such as those that form in the Five Falls area of
Section IV of the Chatooga. How the heck are you going
to do that in Crack-In-The-Rock or Hydro-Electric-Rock?
Of course sometimes the alteration approach does not
work and you end up with something similar to Woodall
Shoals. I know that a dam in the Royal Gorge section
of the Arkansas was blown up and you can supposedly see
some rebar sticking up as you pass by. Personally I
was not looking for it when I paddled by. This does not
mean that I would not mind removing those low-hanging-
de-capitating bridges that you see occaisionally. 

On a more important note: If any of you SE paddlers see
my sister, Gwen, or brother Ben Bergen on the river,
say hello for me and tell them to move to Colorado.

Ah, my first post on this group and it felt great...

Zach (That rafter in the whitewater episode of "The GO Show")

Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: rhmartin@berger.fishkill.ibm.com ()
Subject: Re: open boats .vs. kayaks
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:56:39 GMT
Reply-To: rhmartin@berger.fishkill.ibm.com ()
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1993Jan12.154731.19396@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>,
spangler@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Christopher A. Spangler) writes:
> In article <1993Jan11.234948.13462@spectrum.xerox.com>,
damouth@wrc.xerox.com (David E. Damouth) writes:
> > In article 13278@hemlock.cray.com, dsj@juniper12.cray.com (Douglas
Jackson) writes:
> > >I have heard that open boats can do everything
> > >that a kayak can do.  I am a little skeptical.
> > >
> > >So, has anyone seen the following:
> > >
> > >    1)  An open boat pirouette?
> > >
> > >    2)  An open boat hands roll?
> > >
> > >    3)  An open boat make an upstream move
> > >        where a similarly skilled kayaker
> > 
>  As for the question of ever seeing an open boat hand rolled, I have 
> seen such an occurence.  Our club (Purdue University) has a Mohawk
> that one of our members can hand roll in a pool.  Impressive thing to
> see.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
An open boat is easier to roll than either a kayak or a C-1 when
properly outfitted.  This goes for both paddle rolls and hand rolls.
I am a kayaker and can hand roll an open boat.  It certainly helps
to know a "C" roll to start with though.  In any case, the only 
difficult part of rolling an open canoe is staying in the boat while
upside down.  This is where outfitting comes in.....
From: dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 5 Jan 93 02:50:22 GMT
Organization: University of Southern Mississippi

Most of the streams around  here have to be cleared of some brush
and trees just to be passable. Much of the junk  in the streams
is there because someone put it  there. In my experience, this
includes trees. Many of which are felled by harvesters or campers.
On my local streams I have no problem with removing enough brush
or logs to make the stream passable. This does not include any
beaver dams or any areas that are park or wilderness.

I feel that the best way to  protect the local streams is to
make them passable and known to the cannoe/kayak community.
The situation where you live may well be quite different.
-- 

Donald R. Newcomb                * Life only admits two states: 
dnewcomb@whale.st.usm.edu        * growing and dying. So what,
newcomb@usmcp6.bitnet            * if I've put on a little weight?
From: sbaker@slate.mines.colorado.edu (BAKER SCOTT ALLEN )
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Cataract Campsites
Date: 8 Jan 93 21:55:54 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Colorado School of Mines

This talk of brush clearing got me thinking of campsites between
Potash and Lake Powell. I have boated Cataract one other time and
I can only remember Spanish Bottom as a significant campsite.

If any netters can suggest other sites it would be appreciated
since I am planning a trip in May.

Thank you

Scott
:
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: meex@strawber.princeton.edu (Eric Meeks)
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:51:56 GMT

tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes:

>What are the ethics of moving logs and clearing brush?  Do fish need
>the habitat under a logjam?  Can pruning a willow clump have adverse
>effects on riparian habitat?  How about moving a few rocks to create
>a clear kayak channel?

In one of the books I've read (The Jersey Paddler), the author recommends taking
a hand saw along for minor alterations that will make a creek more passable.  I
don't see why there would be any ETHICAL prolbems with you knocking out a few logs
to make an unchallenging yet pain-in-the-butt section more enjoyable.  The rules
that I would follow would be to only knock out as little as possible (why sweat
yourself anyway?) and to only alter jams which haven't had any long term effects
on the creek.  How you would judge a 'long term' effect isn't obvious, but some
jams come and go with the seasons and the work of a few individuals to knock
those out will be swallowed by the perturbations a creek naturally experiences.
The effects won't even be noticed, let alone adverse, in any real sense.

I, personally, wouldn't worry about the fish.  It would be presumptious to even 
attempt to figure out how one small alteration in a creek would effect their
population.  You've seen the old shark-fish computer game haven't you?  

The ethical decision really has to be your own in the end.  Some people would feel
no remorse in damming the whole thing up, others wouldn't overturn a rock.  The
fact that you even consulted this newsgroup makes you alot more concerned than
I'd expect the average person to be.  Any alteration you make will be covered up
given enough time, how long your willing to let that creek bear your influence is
what you need to judge.

After reading David E. Damoth's response to your question, I wouldn't worry so
much about ethics as I would execution.  Whatever you do, try not to make alot of
noise or draw too much attention from outsiders, especially those with skewed
interest and high influence, such as creek-neighboring landowners.  Creating the
kind of fiasco that David wrote about does have the potential for some serious
damage.

Eric Meeks (meex@icecream.princeton.edu)

	"It's got a painful beginning and a predictable ending, if it were
a book, no one would read it" -- Drunken friend slurring about life
From: HF.RXF@forsythe.stanford.edu (Robin Warfield)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Pescadero Creek Info Wanted
Date: 11 Jan 1993 13:37:07 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

Hi!  We were wondering if anyone out there has ever run Pescadero
Creek?  With all the rain we have had, it is up and we would like
information regarding put-in, take-out, rapids, hazards and anything
else that we should know.

Thanks for any info!

robin

p.s.  To Bill Tuthill regarding the brush clearing topic...I'm on
your side!  I was wondering if that trip was your idea of fun! :-)


Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
From: sread@kipling.webo.dg.com (Steve Read)
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 08 Jan 93 14:19:57 GMT
	<lkpft2INNee5@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Organization: NSDD, Data General Corp.

>>>>> Regarding Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing; tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) adds:

	Bill> ...  I am not advocating dynamite or
	Bill> major rapid surgery.
	Bill> ...  I was proposing clearing
	Bill> brush and strainers, and moving a few small rocks to make a clear
	Bill> kayak channel thru shallow class I-II rapids.  Clearing brush from
	Bill> a river seems no different than clearing a trail for hikers, except
	Bill> for the habitat issue.  And as long as a rock is moved by hand while
	Bill> you're standing in the river, this again seems like trailwork.


Well it is a lot like trail work, but ... think erosion, even on
trails "improvements" can lead to problems.  Anytime you change the
flow of a stream you can screw things up, of course sometimes you
improve them.  From a geologic perspective streams are damnably
dynamic (bad pun on purpose).  Even obstacles, like brush piles, that
are out of the water under the present flow conditons may affect the
stream at higher water conditions.  If you make a channel for a boat,
you often get increased flow through that channel, and increase
erosion locally.  Move a brush pile or log that is deflecting the flow
and suddenly the bank that was shielded is eroding.  Put in a brush
pile on one bank and the water moving around it cuts the opposite
bank.  It's hard to predict what the effect will be, and good for you
may not be good for me, (eg kayaker vs fisherman vs polluter vs
fishery) so most "nice" people adopt a hands off, let Mother Nature
take care of it, approach.

Rivers and trails are long an narrow, but the trail usually is a very
small part of a large ecosystem and the river is a very large part of
its ecosystem.  Wildlife in a forest can often avoid our trails.  When
we mess with a river the river's inhabitants can only duck.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
s. e. read | sread@kipling.webo.dg.com | data general corp | nsdd onsd
----------------------------------------------------------------------
     "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in 
      their home." (Ken Olson, President, Digital Equipment, 1977)
From: tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:57:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: cairo

I'm posting this for someone who has can reads but not post:

> From shelby@cast.uark.edu Tue Jan  5 06:10:47 1993
> From: shelby@cast.uark.edu (Shelby Johnson)
> Subject: Re Ethics of Brush Clearing
> To: tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM
> Content-Length: 1192
> 
> Bill,
> 
> Little did you know, or possibly it may have been your intent
> to set off a major discussion. If things go for boaters as they
> did for climbers.
> 
> In the 70's & early 80's climbers would have never considered,
> or didn't not consider chopping hand holds in order to 
> make some climbs easier or more possible. These days it
> is quite common to hear of another route being done that
> was previously thought impossible, later your hear that a hold
> was chopped in order for the new climb to go.
> 
> If boaters as well, begin this practice of moving rocks, etc., 
> it is automatically changing the morphology of the stream. All
> streams are in struggle to achieve equilibrium with their volume,
> sediment load, and path.
>         
> I think the ethical decision should be that boaters shouldn't mess
> with a stream's charc. The stream itself will move those willows,
> brush, and rocks in it's own time. The problem is that we just
> aren't around long enough to experience it.
> 
> 
> Shelby D. Johnson,    Technical Assistant         TEL: (501) 575-6159
> CAST, Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies
> 12 Ozark Hall, University of Arkansas
> Fayetteville, AR. 72701                          shelby@cast.uark.edu
>
From: tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 7 Jan 93 23:41:22 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: cairo

Somebody wrote me with a cogent comment that changing streambeds
is like carving out new holds on a rock climb.  The climbing
community went thru a debate years ago on the ethics of modifying
walls, which eventually led to replacement of pitons with chocks.
Now it's considered unethical to chop new holds in the rock.

There is a difference, however.  I am not advocating dynamite or
major rapid surgery.  Running the Rogue makes one painfully aware
of how a riverbed can be overimproved.  I was proposing clearing
brush and strainers, and moving a few small rocks to make a clear
kayak channel thru shallow class I-II rapids.  Clearing brush from
a river seems no different than clearing a trail for hikers, except
for the habitat issue.  And as long as a rock is moved by hand while
you're standing in the river, this again seems like trailwork.

joel@Apple.COM (Joel Spiegel) writes:
> Last I checked, [the San Lorenzo] was considered one of the major
> steelhead spawning stream on the central coast.

This isn't saying much.  Estimates are that only a few dozen steelhead
remain.  A quick check of fishermen on the day we ran the San Lorenzo
indicated that nobody had hooked anything.  We did see one fish jump
in a large pool (species unknown).  Undoubtedly the inflatable dam and
the 7-year drought have taken their toll on the steelhead population.
It's probably fair to say that steelhead are all but extinct south
of the Eel river drainage.  I doubt that clearing a few strainers and
moving a few rocks will affect the San Lorenzo's steelhead "population"
one way or the other.  Certainly anglers who don't practice catch and
release are doing much more harm than boaters to a resource they have
an interest in protecting.  By the way, ducks and herons abound.

> Most of the people I know still do "commando"
> putins just to reduce the possibility of unpleasant coversations with
> local law enforcement types (there's kind of a hidden putin just
> downstream of the inflatable dam & upstream of the park bridge).

I don't think this is necessary.  We talked to a park ranger, who was
happy with our putting in there, as long as we knew what we were doing.
People in Paradise, the Masonic community just above our take-out, were
also surprisingly friendly.

Now for commando put-ins, there's still the Cosumnes!
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle