RSS Feed

My Flickr Feed

Latest Blog Entry

10

Rock Removal Meeting a success!

On October 11th at the Maravia Factory/Cascade Outfitters headquarters a meeting was held for public comment regarding the permit to alter a rock in Staircase by Tom Long.  Hosted by the IWA the meeting was a success with over 80 people in attendance.  Information was shared, ideas were exchanged, and a calm level atmosphere prevailed leading to some important information being shared and opinions being formed.  Notably a new idea was proposed;  instead of to remove the rock in question, Tom Long suggested that the rocks angle into the current get changed to remove the sieve without making a huge impact on the rapid itself.  A lot of helpful comments were put forward and at the vote of all in attendance at the end of the meeting 6 were opposed to altering the rock, 6 were still undecided, and the remaining voices were in approval for the project.  Hydrologists are being consulted on means of prediction of the outcome of the rock alteration, but the general consensus being that altering the position of the rock was much more agreeable to the whitewater community at the meeting than full removal of the rock.

Thanks to everyone who took the time and came to the meeting to support safety and our river system, hopefully the next Payette River Clean up day can garnish the same support!!!

10 Comments

  1. On October 14, 2010 @ 7:54 am Kelli said

    I was at the meeting and I disagree with the numbers you have posted above. There were far more than 6 people in opposition to the plan. The way the question was asked had many people confused. I did not feel like I fit into any of the category options. I feel like the meeting was a success by educating the public of what the issue is, but I do feel like your numbers are totally misrepresentative of what happened at the meeting.

  2. On October 14, 2010 @ 8:00 am Jed Miller said

    Hi Tom and the Longs
    I am still following the proposed rock re-alignment along the SF Payette via the
    whitewater blog page. I still disagree with this. True this rock was placed by
    humans, but then so were most of the rocks along the North Fork Payette during
    road and railroad construction. Where will this all end? Once you start down
    this path others are likely to follow. Every time someone dies in a rapid
    someone else will be wanting to make changes or assess blame, or both. I can
    see it now. So and so dies on North Fork Payette. So and so’s mom sues state
    for not removing the deadly undercut rock as they did on the South Fork several
    years earlier. And so it goes.

    Please do the right thing and withdraw this proposal and leave things as they
    are. The river you save might be the one your business thrives on.
    Sincerely
    Jed Miller

  3. On October 14, 2010 @ 8:31 am Larry Lorusso said

    Leave it as it is.

  4. On October 17, 2010 @ 10:23 pm admin said

    There was a question posed from the President of IWA- All people against moving the rock – 6 people raised their hands… all people undecided – 6 people raised their hands… all people for moving the rock – the rest of the people raised their hands. I am not sure how that can be misrepresented.

  5. On October 18, 2010 @ 7:28 am Chip Cole said

    The speakers’ comments and the poll at the end of the meeting clearly indicated that the majority of those who attended the Oct 11 meeting supported Tom Long’s proposal for further hydrology study, followed by adjustment of Dean’s rock. And I sure appreciated the civil, informative discussion. Thanks to all of you.

  6. On October 19, 2010 @ 10:11 am livelybrowsers said

    Thanks for good stuff

  7. On October 21, 2010 @ 8:42 am bryan said

    All of this fuss over a single rock in Staircase and not a peep about the Tons Of Rock being blasted and then shoved into Juicer. I was there yesterday and they are at work now! How are we choosing our battles? Why so much fuss over Staircase and none over working in the Boise River or NF in Cascade to create a play park? I understand the slippery slope argument of intentionally changing a whitewater feature but fail to understand how this activity can be completely ignored when it is done haphazardly (as is seems is happening in Juicer). I was undecided about the Staircase issue until I thought about the play parks and now what is happening in Juicer and have not heard the same voices of opposition. How do you oppose one and not the others? I personally think messing with Staircase is silly but I’m not going to lose sleep here… Just hoping that Juicer is as fun as it was before! SYOTR!

  8. On November 17, 2010 @ 5:07 pm Mike Stewart said

    It’s interesting that this blog is titled “Rock Removal Meeting is a success!” … I thought “removing” the rock was off the table. Or, maybe I wasn’t at this meeting afterall. That only 6 people raised their hands when asked who opposed moving/removing the rock is just not the truth, sorry. I knew the minute the question was asked, waaaay too much emphasis was going to be put on the response. This issue is becoming even more polarized, and one of the biggest reasons for that is the inappropriate application of inaccurate numbers gathered through an informal straw poll at an informational meeting. And stop with the red herring already of Kelly’s Whitewater Park. The creation of whitewater play waves where there was once nothing but a sandy-bottomed river and a dangerously eroding logmill diversion dam has no place whatsoever in this discussion.

  9. On November 18, 2010 @ 11:06 am admin said

    You are totally right, it should not be titled Rock Removal – it should have read rock alteration or something of the like. On the people who raised their hands, that count was given to me by a member of the IWA, the count was instigated by a member of the IWA.
    The concept of river alteration is the topic of conversation so altering a river wether its for a diversion play park, log jam, or landslide its ALL altering the streambed. Although I do find it a bit ironic that you are talking about Kelly’s Whitewater park at a “dangerously eroding” place on the river, when that is exactly is what is happening at staircase.

  10. On December 23, 2010 @ 11:36 pm Sophie Ortega said

    The speakers’ comments and the poll at the end of the meeting clearly indicated that the majority of those who attended the Oct 11 meeting supported Tom Long’s proposal for further hydrology study, followed by adjustment of Dean’s rock. And I sure appreciated the civil, informative discussion. Thanks to all of you.

Have an opinion? Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.