I can't believe no one has put up anything on this.
Poker Joe up your ass.
Opinions are like assholes. Way to safely skirt the middle, Missoulian. Applause. God forbid you take a stand. Jesus.
LONG LIVE THE MONTANA STREAM ACCESS LAW, even if we have to shoot ourselves out of cannons to access state waters.
Yeah, I am surly. It is slow around here and they are drilling in the walls behind my head. There is a great sticker on a cooler that sums it up for me "FUCK WORK!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
This one twists me.
Someone trying to block my access to public land! Fuck that! Where’s my gun? Let’s go! I’m ready to set up deces and blast some rounds. Hell, maybe even put an arrow in his dog that’s chasing deer.
On the other hand, I feel for the land owners. I would be pissed too if I had a hundred cars on my street, blocking my drive way, throwing their trash on my property. If the law was unresponsive to their complaints, what else where they to do? Their actions definitely got some attention!
We are not talking about shutting down a trailer park just because you don't like it. If residents of that trailer park were parking on Hefe's property or throwing trash in his yard, there would be consequences.
There is always tons of trash in Heff's yard...are you saying that the people from the trailer park didn't throw it there?
People always throw trash in our yard. Fuck it, I am going to demolish our sidewalk.
I do agree with you Walt, I would be pissed too, but closing off public access is not the right solution. Working with FWP for maintenance and parking solutions would have been much better.
But I guess if he wanted to get attention, he managed it.
On another note, I spoke to one of my friends who frequents this access spot and she said that they go there at least once a week in the summer to swim their dogs. She said that she has seen some trash, but it isn't ever really that bad and that parking has never been an issue. She didn't really understand the land owners' complaints. She also pointed out that winter use is really low, so the fact that they waited for the winter to do this is more of a show than to prevent problems.
I think the root of this problem is with the entire Bitteroot valley itself, but that shall be saved for a campfire beer drunk chat.
You non-river access owners just don't understand. Stay off my property. I have a herd of X-mas deer that need protected.
Coleman's: your yard is a toxic, over fertilized, pesticide ridden and riddled with dog shit. What's a couple of beer cans?
I use that sight a couple times a year, and I have also never seen excessive litter or tons of people. Turkey hunting in the Bitterroot last year opened my eyes to the way people behave down there, like children. You have half the people trashing the place and every landowner is in a property dispute with their neighbor that has been in the courts for three years. It results in some bitter people....hey wait a minute, maybe I have something there.
Apparently Walt and Mikey are in favor of knapweed as the preferred species for their lawn. Ahhh, the Ravalli/Missoula County Flower.
Here's some suggestions that will work, although it may take some time to see the effects...
1. Stop sending money to your university. The less money the universities get from their Alumni, the more they will have to get from tuition. Increased tuition = less students and/or (big leap here) higher class/more educated enrollees (OK that might be a stretch). Less students = less impact to the access sites by poor, dog owning, beer drinking, groovy, out of state, fast driving, trying to learn to duck hunt, inner-tubing dirtbags. He who is without sin can cast the first stone....anyone I know???
2. Parking permits similar to those found at poular X-country ski areas. One flat yearly fee lets you access all the river sites in MT. Again, a better demographic as once vested in the system, people generally try to maintain its effectiveness. Everyone more or less follows the hunting regs right??? Ok, I conceed, charge outfitters double, triple, or by the user day (as they do now) or by how many square feet of access they take up with their tour busses. No permit and you get a stiff fine, no pansy ass warning ticket. Apply all proceeds to acquiring/improving access...or create artificial whitewater features so all the trendafari will stay off my rivers.
3. Toll booths at Lolo Pass!!!!!
4. Launch a DEQ funded study on point source pollution and sedimentation from the increased use of "undeveloped", unpaved river access points. Create new legislation guarding against the cumulative effects of recreation in the river corridors by creating permit system. Use proceeds from #4 and #3 to fund creation of dog/kiddie/stoner pool in missoula with FREE shuttle. Peeing in pool OK.
%. Use all your creative writing and democratic influence to send letters to the University. There are enough gullible college dorks just looking for a cause to grab. Educate them about the effects of recreation and overuse and they will start some sort of trendy grass-roots clean up the rivers volunteer garbage pick-up...very hip, very cool. T-shirt included with membership fees. Use membership fees to supply members with free weed and beer, thereby killing their motivation to come trash my rivers. (Walt and Mikey excluded...you are pros)
connie,
I didn't realize it was the Missoulian's responsibility to take a stand. My understanding of RESPONSIBLE journalism is to report the facts witout bias and let you come to your own conclusion. Your suggestion of the Missoulian taking a stand and spoon feeding you an argument, well, is very conservative, I must say. Sort of Rush Limbaugh-ish. Maybe they could revamp the title of the story into something slanted like "Automated tree butchery triples production"
THAT would get people fired up....
Furthermore....
Who is this friend and what scientific basis are they using for their estimations of what is bad and not bad? What are their credentials? I'm sure there are many a rancher wondering the same thing about why his operation got shut down because he was .01 PPM over some legal limit....didn't look that bad to him, eh?
I don't think a casual visit every week or so would capture they long term effects noted in the story. I can tell you that Josh, Ed, Brian, Heff, etc, etc, were going there doing the same stupid things and pissing people off over ten years ago. I'm surprised it's taken the folks this long. As noted in the story as well, their requests for assistance went unfilled leading them to take a stand. Different time, different circumstance and you'd be applauding them. I found it noteworthy too that the FWP can't produce any evidence of an easement...hmmm.....
I am totally in favor of stream access for the public but hey...perhaps you need to take a look a something that's clearly a problem. Yeah, they waited till the winter so they could make a statement without causing Walt to break out the shotgun on his way duckhunting one wintry morn...Oi....I need a beer, and a campfire to continue this...next time I take you and Ed down in drunken wrestling match. Demolish the sidewalk!!!
It was an editorial. The editorial board is supposed to take stands.
I like the toll both idea on Lolo pass. Maybe it will keep all the rip-raff out of Montana!
Since the public has been using Poker joe for 33 years, the public has what is called a prescriptive easment. Per Section 23-2-322(1), MCA, A prescriptive easement is a right to use the property of another that is acquired by open, exclusive, notorious, hostile, adverse, continuous, and uninterrupted use for a period of 5 years.
I am all for the toll booth at Lolo Pass. It would reduce the number of kayakers on the Lochsa. Maybe Idaho could then get rid of the cop who tickets only out out-of-staters and boaters.
yeah, that's great. you still didn't address the issue of overuse. don't make this landowner the bad guy here. why isn't the DEQ looking into this...i mean an unimproved access designed to support 2-3 cars at one time now is seeing 30-90 per day?!?!?
i think that would warrant a look, eh??? i'm sure if there was one dump truck too many at the milltown cleanup someone from the DEQ would swoop down from on high and shut them down, write letters to the president and take a stand in the paper.
DEQ does not look into access or overcrowding issues. Milltown is a Federal Superfund Site, so EPA has priimary oversight, with DEQ having only some say in matters.
There is no perfect management scheme to solve overuse and overcrowding of rivers and fishing access sites. An increased number of access sites would be tremendously helpful, which is why our Gov is proposing $15 million out of the budget for land aquisition for access.
I, however, don't think that increases in access will solve overcrowding and overuse problems since the places closest to the urban centers are going to get the most use. I think the next logical step is to ban nonresidents and outfitters from floating certain stretches of rivers, on certain days, during the seasons where there is highest use.
I also believe that if for some reason it is determined that Rock Creek, for example, can only hanle 300 launches a year and a lottery process is critical to the health of the stream, then it should be an open lottery. Meaning those 300 launches a year are open to the public and that is it. Then, if someone gets a permit, they hire an outfitter if they want one. I don't believe that outfitters should be allocated a certain number of days.
Philly will now come back with the argument that outfitters are good, hardworking people that have been around Montana/Idaho longer that me. This is a fact in some cases, but the needs, demographics, and sheer numbers of outdoor enthusialsts are changing, and I honestly believe that if a lottery system is to serve the public equally (and not cater to the wealthy), the only fair system is an open one. If outfitters can't adjust to such a system, then I believe Darwin's theory should come into play.
Currently, if you have enough money, you can run damn near any river you want, at any time of the year, and even get fanned while you poop. I just think that is wrong considering rivers are national resources that should be available to all of the public equally.
i don't give a hoot about outfitters....ban them from the rivers. it still won't solve the overcrowding issues...i agree 110% open lottery.
so who does monitor water quality in the bitterroot...what i'm saying is tha many people in that place (poker joe) could be a point source...that much beer being drank by a bunch of dirtballs will significantly increase the ammonia levels.
FINALLY, I can comment on this site. It's probably a good thing I waited until you all simmered down (and I simmered down). I like to see a little banter between friends although I have to say I was ready to kick you to the curb philly.
FWP will defend the access at Poker Joe and will present enough evidence to prove that the public has the right to be at this access site in a place where it's appropriate - Court. It'll be done without shooting, without yelling, without litigating in the newspapers where you shouldn't believe everything you read (hint for you philly).
The neighbors at this site have NOT attempted to work things out with FWP. FWP has, and especially in this region with the second greatest numbers of use (second to Region 3 which includes the Gallatin) a history of working with landowners to ATTEMPT to address issues they identify living next to an access site. This site was no exception. Some of it FWP can help, but some of the issues cannot be helped because they simply won't take any help short of excluding the unwashed public from the property altogether - NIMBY theory (not in my backyard). Again, this site was no exception.
Given that Ed is right - the landowners came to the property WITH the site already there and they were forewarned about the unwashed public, I think they should have the requisite amount of tolerance. IN this case, it seems, they have none.
Though I have questions about how disrespectful the public actions were that fueled this dispute or if they were disrespectful at all, I also think the landowners have a point. They should not have to deal with parties, trash and parking in their property. FWP can't do it all - so that leaves it up to us, the public, to be more respectful at sites, pick up trash, don't park in areas that aren't designated as parking for the site, etc. That will only happen through RESPECT from both parties - landowners and the public. So far, the only respect given has been from FWP to the landowners, from what I can tell....
Finally, philly, this is for your benefit - when a lawyer from our division (whom you might even know) went to the site to have a look around, he was accosted (in a friendly manner) by the landowners who were going to send him on his way if he was from the unwashed public. But since he was washed that day (note the sarcastic tone), he was able to visit the site. When he chatted with the landowners about getting rid of the site altogether, they were SHOCKED and appalled that he would suggest such a thing. They actually admitted to having used the site for themselves and would hate for the site to go away altogether.
For then, where would they access the river?
PRETTY IRONIC? Not at all - there is a history of people moving to sites because it's a really nice place to be so they don't have to get all the permits and spend the money to have their convenient access. And then use increases and they cite the "disrespectful public" excuse in shutting off the site to anyone but themselves...
If we (and by "we," I mean you philly) continue to feel sorry for this type of behavior, pretty soon all of Montana will be private, kinda like Texas and we will pay taxes and angler dollars to keep the private havens for people like this...
And then where will you access the river?
Post a Comment