Comments on: How to Stay in the Loop http://www.rogueawareness.com/2008/11/how-to-stay-in-the-loop/ Updates about Oregon's Rogue River Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:31:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Bruce Wray http://www.rogueawareness.com/2008/11/how-to-stay-in-the-loop/comment-page-1/#comment-53 Bruce Wray Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:36:01 +0000 http://www.rogueawareness.com/?p=7#comment-53 Over the past several months I've read all the ideas and comments posted on this site. Quite a few good points have been made, but I have come to think a different approach might yield more satisfactory results. The necessary starting point is an accurate definition of the problem, which I don't think has yet been set forth. Over the last 20+ years that I've been boating the Rogue, I've seen a large number of campsites go away. A few examples: Zane Grey and Gleason Bar are all but gone; Wildcat, Missouri Creek, Solitude and the Tate Creek sites are shadows of what they once were; all along the river many usable sandbars have disappeared. Other experienced boaters could no doubt expand at length on this list. To my mind, a more accurate definition of the problem is that the number and quality of places to camp have shrunk considerably. All the sand that used flow downriver yearly to make good camping places is parked behind the dams upriver. Issues that others have described as problems can more correctly be seen as symptoms of the underlying real problem: there aren't as many places to camp, large, medium and small, as there used to be. Many writers before me have commented on Options A through E, pointing out the shortcomings, pitfalls, complexities and new issues that could arise from any reservation or group size limitation system. If there were more and better sites, I believe the majority of the symptoms that led to the rise of this forum would largely disappear. I realize that this means dealing with both BLM and The USFS, and all too often when they aren't hidebound they are budget bound. I'd propose that stakeholders who have personal relationships with BLM and USFS personnel who supervise the river contact them to explain this idea. If people inside the bureaucracy can be brought on board, the battle is more than half over. Last year BLM finally issued a great campsites map, the first update since 2002. That was a start. I think that a campsite improvement program is the next logical step. I usually boat with a small group (4-8), and a number of times we've "made" a site: pulling up alfalfa, rolling rocks, leveling a tent pads with an oar or paddle, etc. Here's my rough idea on how I think this could work: BLM/USFS surveys the river (early May?) to determine spots to improve, large medium and small, using no more than shovels, picks, rakes, and limbing saws.. Then (mid May?), previously organized volunteer trips under BLM/USFS employee direction improve specific stretches on the river. I think contacting western rafting organizations for volunteers would be very successful. I'd be happy to participate if they'd buy the food for a 4-5 day trip. As soon as the trips are done, an updated detailed campsites map is prepared for distribution to the boating public, and BLM at Rand strongly promotes use of the upgraded sites and appropriate site selection for group size, like they did with the '08 map. I like this approach because it's simple. Previous writers showed how any reservation/group size system is inherently complex. If the program focused on small and medium site improvement, there would be much less impetus for smaller groups to claim larger sites. All most boaters want is a nice place to camp without having to rush downriver to get a spot. Further, I think PETT toilets have made campsites with outhouses much less of a priority; I'd like to see all outhouses go. Well, for better or worse, there's my two cents on this issue. Bruce Wray Over the past several months I’ve read all the ideas and comments posted on this site. Quite a few good points have been made, but I have come to think a different approach might yield more satisfactory results. The necessary starting point is an accurate definition of the problem, which I don’t think has yet been set forth. Over the last 20+ years that I’ve been boating the Rogue, I’ve seen a large number of campsites go away. A few examples: Zane Grey and Gleason Bar are all but gone; Wildcat, Missouri Creek, Solitude and the Tate Creek sites are shadows of what they once were; all along the river many usable sandbars have disappeared. Other experienced boaters could no doubt expand at length on this list. To my mind, a more accurate definition of the problem is that the number and quality of places to camp have shrunk considerably. All the sand that used flow downriver yearly to make good camping places is parked behind the dams upriver. Issues that others have described as problems can more correctly be seen as symptoms of the underlying real problem: there aren’t as many places to camp, large, medium and small, as there used to be.
Many writers before me have commented on Options A through E, pointing out the shortcomings, pitfalls, complexities and new issues that could arise from any reservation or group size limitation system. If there were more and better sites, I believe the majority of the symptoms that led to the rise of this forum would largely disappear. I realize that this means dealing with both BLM and The USFS, and all too often when they aren’t hidebound they are budget bound. I’d propose that stakeholders who have personal relationships with BLM and USFS personnel who supervise the river contact them to explain this idea. If people inside the bureaucracy can be brought on board, the battle is more than half over.
Last year BLM finally issued a great campsites map, the first update since 2002. That was a start. I think that a campsite improvement program is the next logical step. I usually boat with a small group (4-8), and a number of times we’ve “made” a site: pulling up alfalfa, rolling rocks, leveling a tent pads with an oar or paddle, etc. Here’s my rough idea on how I think this could work: BLM/USFS surveys the river (early May?) to determine spots to improve, large medium and small, using no more than shovels, picks, rakes, and limbing saws.. Then (mid May?), previously organized volunteer trips under BLM/USFS employee direction improve specific stretches on the river. I think contacting western rafting organizations for volunteers would be very successful. I’d be happy to participate if they’d buy the food for a 4-5 day trip. As soon as the trips are done, an updated detailed campsites map is prepared for distribution to the boating public, and BLM at Rand strongly promotes use of the upgraded sites and appropriate site selection for group size, like they did with the ‘08 map.
I like this approach because it’s simple. Previous writers showed how any reservation/group size system is inherently complex. If the program focused on small and medium site improvement, there would be much less impetus for smaller groups to claim larger sites. All most boaters want is a nice place to camp without having to rush downriver to get a spot. Further, I think PETT toilets have made campsites with outhouses much less of a priority; I’d like to see all outhouses go.
Well, for better or worse, there’s my two cents on this issue.

Bruce Wray

]]>