NYCkayaker Fwd: [Tiffgringa at gmail.com: [CCC] Nationwide Chattooga Comments Needed (from Kevin Colburn)]

[Rich Kulawiec]

I'm forwarding this because -- although this is a long way from NYC and
isn't something most of you will ever want to paddle -- we need your help.
The core issue in this particular instance is one that can and will affect
waterway access in other parts of the country.

The problem here is that a review of the longstanding ban on boating
on the upper Chattooga (the river some folks know from "Deliverance")
has been poorly conducted -- with key data uncollected and the conclusions
rendered before the facts have been ascertained.  Paddlers have been
singled out for discriminatory treatment based on non-existent problems
and in a manner that ignores their valuable contributions to maintaining
the pristine state of the Chattooga.  (Every time I've paddled it, I've
carried out trash, invariably including fishing tackle and beer bottles or
cans, in the back of my boat.  I've never been alone in doing so.)

Thus the ban seeks to exclude those who not only are least likely to
have an environmental impact, but are among those whose efforts have
mitigated the adverse environmental impacts of others.

We need need your help -- which you can render without getting out
of your chair.  We need you to familiarize yourself with the issue
and write a letter (details below) in support of the AWA (American
Whitewater Affiliation) position.

Thanks,
---Rsk


----- Forwarded message from Tiffany Mozingo <Tiffgringa at gmail.com> -----

> From: Tiffany Mozingo <Tiffgringa at gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:09:10 -0400
> Subject: [CCC] Nationwide Chattooga Comments Needed (from Kevin Colburn)
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Kevin Miller <kevintmiller at hotmail.com>
> Date: Jul 10, 2008 6:34 AM
> Subject: FPC Nationwide Chattooga Comments Needed (from Kevin Colburn)
> To: foothillspaddlingclub at yahoogroups.com
> 
>   The Wild and Scenic Upper Chattooga River borders North Carolina, South
> Carolina, and Georgia, and has been banned to kayaking, canoeing and
> rafting for over 30 years - without any basis. The US Forest Service has
> prepared a new Environmental Assessment (EA) of the issue that
> recommends maintaining the ban - once again with no basis. AW has
> finished our initial review of the EA and we will be filing detailed
> comments on the EA prior to the August 1st deadline. We encourage
> paddlers nationwide concerned with the management and protection of
> rivers across the country to submit comments.
> 
> The proposed management action on the Chattooga will influence the
> management of rivers across the country and would create a selfishly
> motivated precedent that would negatively impact rivers, managers, and
> recreationists. Private landowners are seeking a monopoly on a Wild and
> Scenic public river, the Forest Service is seeking to strip basic
> protections from Wild and Scenic Rivers, and other stakeholders claiming
> zero-tolerance of paddlers are seeking to have paddling prohibited.
> Boaters are irrationally being singled out for adverse treatment, even
> while the Chief of the Forest Service directed that all users be treated
> equitably. Many river professionals and Forest Service personnel are
> behind us, but it is up to us to stop this nationwide train wreck.
> 
> The EA follows the same format as the Forest Service's past
> assessment of the issue: they list a string of ecological effects common
> to all recreation, then discuss abstract user conflicts that have never
> occurred and will never occur, and then make a recommendation that
> essentially renews the ban on floating the Upper Chattooga River, while
> allowing all existing recreational users unlimited access without
> providing any rational basis for the discrimination. There are a few
> differences though. They propose to allow a few people to paddle
> roughly a third of the upper river somewhere between zero and six days a
> year in the middle of winter at high water based on an impossible set of
> logistical hurdles. This miniscule paddling allowance is so small and
> bizarre it is realistically a total ban. The rest of the upper river
> and its tributaries remain totally off limits to paddlers. A second
> major difference is the exclusion of the uppermost section of the
> Chattooga and its tributaries from even a cursory discussion. In
> addition, this EA cost taxpayers several million dollars.
> 
> The EA is not viable and breaks many basic rules and laws for preparing
> such documents. It is quite clearly not a scientific document; it is a
> philosophical and political one. It flies in the face of the successful
> AW appeal decision that required a user capacity analysis (which has not
> been conducted) and equitable treatment of all users if limits are
> needed to protect the resource. The new EA essentially claims that the
> river has a capacity of zero boating and a capacity of infinite hiking,
> angling, and camping. That is hardly equitable.
> 
> PLEASE SUBMIT COMMENTS by August 1, 2008 TO:
> 
> comments-southern-francismarion-sumter at fs.fed.us<comments-southern-francismarion-sumter%40fs.fed.us>
> <mailto:comments-southern-francismarion-sumter at fs.fed.us<comments-southern-francismarion-sumter%40fs.fed.us>
> >
> 
> or surface mailed to
> 
> U.S. Forest Service
> 
> Chattooga River Project
> 
> 4931 Broad River Road
> 
> Columbia, SC 29212.
> 
> A copy of the EA and a summary of the alternatives is available on the
> Francis Marion and Sumter National Forests' web site at
> http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/fms <http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/fms> .
>