From: usenet@goofy.apple.COM (USENET Administrator)
Newsgroups: rec.boats.paddle
Subject: Re: Ethics and Methods of Brush Clearing
Date: 11 Jan 93 17:16:34 GMT
Followup-To: rec.boats.paddle
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


In article <lkhqciINN1aq@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, "Bill" Tuthill wrote:
> ..... Stuff Deleted
> 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?
> 
> Once a person had made the ethical decision to "maintain" a river,
> what are the best methods?  Is it better to carry a folding saw along
> on a regular run, or is it better to hike in at low water?  How can
> a major logjam be cleared without a chainsaw?  I imagine low water
> would provide safer conditions, and that Z-rigs could be used to move
> very heavy logs.
> 
> Overall, I am against the use of dynamite.  River runners are so much
> better than they were 20 years ago, it is almost as if we need the
> challenge of rocks in the wrong place.  For example, the class IV on
> the San Lorenzo has a difficult cross-river move at the bottom, but
> wouldn't be as much of a challenge if Glen Wooldridge had dynamited a
> convenient dory chute.  Dynamite is justified only on commercially-run
> rivers after several boaters have died at a particular spot.

Folks,

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.

As to unnatural barriers in the water,I am all for removing same IF they
are recent enough to not become part of the "natural habitat." We have
discovered, especially through SCUBA diving, that nature quickly absorbs
man's works and incorporates them into the ecology. Sunken ships, and,
(sigh) even oil derricks, provide substrated to which life can easily
attach or become dependant upon (although experience shows us that we can't
contain the oil and eventually, there will be an ecological catastrophe).

Well, enough diatribe. I just wish everyone would think twice before
acting. We are a part of nature, nobody named us 'god' and gave us control
of same. Just leave it alone if you don't know the ramifications.

Rick

PS> Flame me all you want, it won't change my opinion or alter my views. I
know nobody named me 'god' either and if given a vote...
Xref: sparky rec.boats.paddle:2258 news.answers:4892