Horrible new John Day regulations

[RunWithSasquatch]

but that doesn't make it right to close it for recreation.

Thats semi dramatic.

Maybe you wont be able to get a permit every year, but its not closed for recreation, its managed. I guess thats part of living in a population crazy time. There are many rivers in oregon that use a permit system. With out a system (ie) the Rogue, it would be crazy on the Rogue in the summer. And at times camp sites can be taxed. Though they use a permit system, I did not draw a permit last year to float that river, but I still was able to make 2 floats through the wild and scenic, and my fellow boaters made as many as 4 trips down there. There will be opportunities to make a John Day trip in my future, and yours.

 

[chris61182]

it doesn't matter if its a trophy trout fishery or how many divisions BLM has,,its BS it doesn't just affect fishermen or guides,,it affects everyone,what about the guy who just wants to take his son down the river for a float,or the rafters who use this section for recreation?you can't just lump it all into fishing and say well this is good for it cause its too hot over there in the summer to fish.and if its too hot to fish over there why not close down the entire river why just this section that the majority of recreation users use?
you could say the same for just about any central oregon river getting too hot in the summer to fish.but that doesn't make it right to close it for recreation.

Let met get this straight, you're ok with closing bodies of water off from anyone who doesn't use a particular type of lure, and be damned if "what about the guy who just wants to take his son down the river <to cast a spinner>"

But since this affects your ability to enjoy nature in a way you want to, you're suddenly feeling all righteously upset? (Not quoting you) "Life isn't fair get over it!" :naughty:


The rule changes don't sound good to me either, but it's always funny to see people who've been previously happy about taking away other's opportunity to enjoy nature for their own benefit, up in arms when their opportunity to enjoy nature is being taken for someone else's benefit. My how the wheel turns...

 

[halibuthitman]

I believe for the most part many of the authors who have reeled at this are hypocrytes.. selling the virtues of catch and release barbless, artifical lures and such, fans of managed fly only waters... managment heads on the flyfishing.. keep the scum out end.. well, here goes the inner tubers, drunk teenagers, amatures and "party" floaters.. 8 boats a day is still a lot of traffic, considering the number will be more like 12-15 with guide boats and research teams.. Yes America is supposed to be free... in heart and virtue... but you were never allowed to just go wherever you want.. whenever you want, that was never the deal so access to this river is not implied by simple freedom.... this is exactly why there is no goverment health care... who would ever think we would accept the job they do caring for humans... when you are not even willing to accept the job the goverment does caring for a river.. in the middle of nowhere...

 

[bigsteel]

Let met get this straight, you're ok with closing bodies of water off from anyone who doesn't use a particular type of lure, and be damned if "what about the guy who just wants to take his son down the river <to cast a spinner>"

But since this affects your ability to enjoy nature in a way you want to, you're suddenly feeling all righteously upset? (Not quoting you) "Life isn't fair get over it!" :naughty:


The rule changes don't sound good to me either, but it's always funny to see people who've been previously happy about taking away other's opportunity to enjoy nature for their own benefit, up in arms when their opportunity to enjoy nature is being taken for someone else's benefit. My how the wheel turns...

heres the man who puts words in other peoples mouths,,i never said closing any particular stretch of water to lures BAIT<BAIT get it through your thick head...its not just my ability to enjoy FLOATING the river its everyones..find another thread to hijack

 

[halibuthitman]

oops.... apparently we were both covering the same angle... at the same time..

 

[beaverfan]

Well because this stretch is being over-used/abused. Why continue abusing it? Why not limit use to prevent the negative impact caused by high-traffic use so it can remain a pristine river? Do some research to see what high-traffic use can have on a river, because obviously you have not. If this article had been on a change to fly only on the John Day I bet you'd have been all for it and you'd say it's whats best for the fishies, well so is restricting use.

 

[bigsteel]

oops.... apparently we were both covering the same angle... at the same time..

geez brad let a guy get A COMMENT IN BEFORE YOU GO ALL elitist ON HIM:lol::lol:
i am all for catch and release,,but i never started this thread about fishing its about RAFTING,thats why i dont get why everyone keeps bringing up fishing,,im talking RAFTING or BOATING.sheesh

 

[halibuthitman]

I don't believe Bigsteel has ever been one to push "fly only" he is simply a fan of the catch and release order.. my post also sounded like it may have corner him into the wrong box-

 

[bigsteel]

Well because this stretch is being over-used/abused. Why continue abusing it? Why not limit use to prevent the negative impact caused by high-traffic use so it can remain a pristine river? Do some research to see what high-traffic use can have on a river, because obviously you have not. If this article had been on a change to fly only on the John Day I bet you'd have been all for it and you'd say it's whats best for the fishies, well so is restricting use.

hey jay dont put words in my mouth,what does fly only have to do with anything,why dont you read the thread i started it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FISHING IM TALKING ABOUT RAFTING,,,what does an article on RAFTING have to do with fly fishing.there you go again putting words in peoples mouths....with your logic the wilson,and all your favorite coastal rivers would be d3eemed HIGH TRAFFIC would they not?why not limit the amount of people on your famous wilson river or the trask or the kilches..i think you should do some research on high traffic areas and its not in the middle of nowhere on the john day,,its right in your own backyard jay.

 

[bigsteel]

I don't believe Bigsteel has ever been one to push "fly only" he is simply a fan of the catch and release order.. my post also sounded like it may have corner him into the wrong box-

I dont care about fly only,,see thats wherim sick of getting picked out by,,,i am for catch and release catcyh and release..

 

[OnTheFly]

dave ...you rebel you.

 

[halibuthitman]

yes, I dragged it into the fishing end... its what applies to me, which is what most of us address, the obvious attempt here by the fed is to eliminate the need to spend money on camp sites, medical attention, concrete EPA approved shipoopiers that would be helo lifted in, improved boat launches and yada yada yada... so in the end the boat limit really will just keep out the lesser intense rafters.. many will float it anyway, as by the second year there will probably be no enforcement around up there anyway- whenever the Fed makes a move that is being sold as enviromental protection... you can usally spot the real angle if you look hard enough- their own study proved several hundred thousand dollars worth of improvements for waste managment and access would be required to protect the river from this volume of use... so the best move of a broke goverment to do is restrict travel... which is free.. if a single person on here so much as mentions the lost revenue could purchase the shipoopiers I will f*****g have a mental break down.... concrete shipoopiers are the death of an area, if the do one improvement to the JD to attract more escalades and pavatti drifters with girls who need a special spot to crap I will personally destroy them-

 

[RunWithSasquatch]

Groovers..... like most real scenics, groovers will be the only option, I would suspect that like all other rivers, they higher summer time labor to float and enforce

 

[chris61182]

I dont care about fly only,,see thats wherim sick of getting picked out by,,,i am for catch and release catcyh and release..

If that were really the case you'd have agreed with me on the issue of allowing any artificial and then managing mortality based on disallowing barbs and mandating catch and release. Instead you'd rather talk about how those who don't fly fish leave trash. The relation to the floating and boating on this thread is that it's negatively affecting you and now you're in a huff about it.


With regards to the river a whole order of magnitude cut in the allowed launches sounds incredibly drastic for a river that appears to be handling it acceptably. If it is being overused and damaged more modest reductions should probably be tried first, probably something on the order of 10-20% reduction to start.

 

[chris61182]

yes, I dragged it into the fishing end... its what applies to me, which is what most of us address, the obvious attempt here by the fed is to eliminate the need to spend money on camp sites, medical attention, concrete EPA approved $hitters that would be helo lifted in, improved boat launches and yada yada yada... so in the end the boat limit really will just keep out the lesser intense rafters.. many will float it anyway, as by the second year there will probably be no enforcement around up there anyway- whenever the Fed makes a move that is being sold as enviromental protection... you can usally spot the real angle if you look hard enough- their own study proved several hundred thousand dollars worth of improvements for waste managment and access would be required to protect the river from this volume of use... so the best move of a broke goverment to do is restrict travel... which is free.. if a single person on here so much as mentions the lost revenue could purchase the $hitters I will f*****g have a mental break down.... concrete $hitters are the death of an area, if the do one improvement to the JD to attract more escalades and pavatti drifters with girls who need a special spot to crap I will personally destroy them-

But think about all the jobs the government can create by employing people to put those crappers in there and maintain them regularly!

 

[RunWithSasquatch]

10%-20% is not enough, I imagine that most dont realize the over use problem that existed on that river

 

[chris61182]

10%-20% is not enough, I imagine that most dont realize the over use problem that existed on that river

I don't have any experience on the JD, so I was just going by what others were indicating, which was a mostly healthy river. Is it your opinion that it's being damaged badly enough and quickly enough to need an immediate 90% reduction?

 

[halibuthitman]

if the river appears to be handling it acceptably.... per the study... nothing would require being done... have you floated it 16 times? I know someone who has... 10-20% great number, is that what you came up to after helping and participating in the enviromental impact study, or just cool numbers... ok, I pick 13.5-26.7% as my out of my ass science... what does everyone else think...? sheesh, read the ****ing report

 

[RunWithSasquatch]

I believe that the river has been long over looked, last several years of experience has not been postive dealing with squids at the ramps, sometimes boats lined up for long distances, and waits to move your boat in or out for over an hour

 

[RunWithSasquatch]

I dont base my opinion off any report, or any numbers that someone can invent. Mine is based off of PERSONAL experience of boating for 11 years. Ive boated rivers with good management, and poor management, and I think in the case of the JD that ANY management is good, its a base to build from.