=Long Eddy, NY -- River Access Improvement -- CrowdFunding=

[TR]

Hello all.

For those anglers that use the Long Eddy, NY river access on the Upper Delaware River, this topic might be of interest to you.

-----------------



The following is a forwarded message


Topic:
Long Eddy, New York Riverfront Access:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/improve-the-long-eddy-river-access/x/8658204



https://www.indiegogo.com/<wbr>projects/improve-the-long-<wbr>eddy-river-access/x/8658204



From: Jacksy, Heather K. [mailto:Heather.Jacksy@co.<wbr>sullivan.ny.us]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 3:32 PM
Subject: Long Eddy Fishing Access



Good afternoon,

I am sending you an update on the Long Eddy Access. The following is a quote from an email sent by Sue Currier of the Delaware Highlands Conservancy on which I was cc-ed:

As you know, the Sullivan County River Access Plan (see complete plan by Heather Jacksy from the Sullivan County Planning office at http://webapps.co.sullivan.ny.<wbr>us/DOCS/DPEM/river_access/<wbr>Delaware_River_Accesses_Draft_<wbr>Report_6-16-14.pdf ) identified the need to enhance access to the Delaware River for recreational enthusiasts and provide additional economic lift to our river towns.

You also know that the Long Eddy fishing access has been heavily used by river guides and recreational users for decades. That stretch of river between Buckingham, PA and Long Eddy, NY is one of my personal favorites. Yet the despite its popularity there is no access area except a road that runs straight into the river, no formal ramp, and no parking at all. The resulting crowded conditions reduce use by all but the most determined and create conflicts over inappropriate parking with the nearby residents and businesses.

The Delaware Highlands Conservancy has signed a contract acquire a piece of private property located along the Delaware River, adjacent to the ‘ramp’ in the town of Long Eddy, that will be conveyed to the NYS DEC, who will in turn improve the boat launch for all river users.

The purchase, holding, and subsequent transfer all will take time and money. We’ve negotiated a generous loan with the Open Space Institute for the bulk of the acquisition costs, but we estimate we’ll need an additional $20,000 to complete the transaction. That’s more money than the Conservancy has available to leave in the ground at the end of the day.

The Conservancy is launching an online campaign to raise funds to complete the purchase and we need your support!

Please share the link https://www.indiegogo.com/<wbr>projects/improve-the-long-<wbr>eddy-river-access/x/8658204 (via this email, facebook https://www.facebook.com/<wbr>DelawareHighlandsConservancy, or twitter) with your friends, your colleagues, your fellow fishing enthusiasts.

I am sending this for informational purposes.

I will continue to keep the group apprised of any updates on the Long Eddy Access, as well as the other accesses on which we continue to work.

Thank you,

Heather


Heather Jacksy, AICP
Sullivan County
Division of Planning & Environmental Management
100 North Street
Monticello, NY 12701
Tel. (845) 807-0531 Fax (845) 807-0546

###

 

[flyI4]

Hello all.

For those anglers that use the Long Eddy, NY river access on the Upper Delaware River, this topic might be of interest to you.

-----------------



The following is a forwarded message


Topic:
Long Eddy, New York Riverfront Access:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/improve-the-long-eddy-river-access/x/8658204



https://www.indiegogo.com/<wbr>projects/improve-the-long-<wbr>eddy-river-access/x/8658204



From: Jacksy, Heather K. [mailto:Heather.Jacksy@co.<wbr>sullivan.ny.us]
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 3:32 PM
Subject: Long Eddy Fishing Access



Good afternoon,

I am sending you an update on the Long Eddy Access. The following is a quote from an email sent by Sue Currier of the Delaware Highlands Conservancy on which I was cc-ed:

As you know, the Sullivan County River Access Plan (see complete plan by Heather Jacksy from the Sullivan County Planning office at http://webapps.co.sullivan.ny.<wbr>us/DOCS/DPEM/river_access/<wbr>Delaware_River_Accesses_Draft_<wbr>Report_6-16-14.pdf ) identified the need to enhance access to the Delaware River for recreational enthusiasts and provide additional economic lift to our river towns.

You also know that the Long Eddy fishing access has been heavily used by river guides and recreational users for decades. That stretch of river between Buckingham, PA and Long Eddy, NY is one of my personal favorites. Yet the despite its popularity there is no access area except a road that runs straight into the river, no formal ramp, and no parking at all. The resulting crowded conditions reduce use by all but the most determined and create conflicts over inappropriate parking with the nearby residents and businesses.

The Delaware Highlands Conservancy has signed a contract acquire a piece of private property located along the Delaware River, adjacent to the ‘ramp’ in the town of Long Eddy, that will be conveyed to the NYS DEC, who will in turn improve the boat launch for all river users.

The purchase, holding, and subsequent transfer all will take time and money. We’ve negotiated a generous loan with the Open Space Institute for the bulk of the acquisition costs, but we estimate we’ll need an additional $20,000 to complete the transaction. That’s more money than the Conservancy has available to leave in the ground at the end of the day.

The Conservancy is launching an online campaign to raise funds to complete the purchase and we need your support!

Please share the link https://www.indiegogo.com/<wbr>projects/improve-the-long-<wbr>eddy-river-access/x/8658204 (via this email, facebook https://www.facebook.com/<wbr>DelawareHighlandsConservancy, or twitter) with your friends, your colleagues, your fellow fishing enthusiasts.

I am sending this for informational purposes.

I will continue to keep the group apprised of any updates on the Long Eddy Access, as well as the other accesses on which we continue to work.

Thank you,

Heather


Heather Jacksy, AICP
Sullivan County
Division of Planning & Environmental Management
100 North Street
Monticello, NY 12701
Tel. (845) 807-0531 Fax (845) 807-0546

###

This should be a wild success just like the barking dog ramp. The more people using the river the better- good for support and the economy too. The ole tragedy of the commons dilemma presents itself once again.

 

[brachycentrus]

This should be a wild success just like the barking dog ramp. The more people using the river the better- good for support and the economy too. The ole tragedy of the commons dilemma presents itself once again.

Do I detect a little sarcasm there, John ? If so, I'm with you. How about turning Lordville into a boat access. Couple years ago, we moved the rock and were launching there for a week or two until an unnamed person, guess who, put the rock back in place. Long Eddy, at times can be a pain but it is doable and never had a problem. Lordville needs to be opened up.

 

[TR]

Lordville needs to be opened up.

-------



Good morning Jeff (and others).


I agree that Lordville, NY NYS DEC access needs to have the boulders removed so that everybody who enjoys this resource has ingress and egress to the river.


It's a fact that the area is already a New York state access underneath the Lordville bridge.


I brought that topic up last year at an Upper Delaware Council Water Use Resource Management meeting that I chair stating that there are very few New York accesses along the 75 mile stretch of the Main Stem - especially north of Narrowsburg to Hancock which would be a distance of 55 miles.


Sparrowsbush NYS DEC
Highland NYS DEC (near Barryville -- off of Route 97)
Narrowsburg NYS DEC ---> Ramp
-------
Cochecton, NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river in Damascus PAFBC)


Callicoon NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river on River Road managed by PAFBC and there is Tower Rd north of Callicoon - neither access is under NYS DEC management.)


Hankins (Red Barn - NOW CLOSED - PRIVATE)


Soaring Eagle / Kellams Bridge (Access for a fee)


Long Eddy (Depot Street - Town of Fremont)


Lordville NYS DEC (NO RAMP --Boulders placed at access to obstruct trailers)


Hancock NYS DEC (Bard Parker - NO RAMP)


Fred Peckham, who posts on this BB under the name, Kilgour Trout, and is the UDC representative from Hancock on the Upper Delaware Council, attended that meeting and was (and is) completely opposed to the idea of removing the boulders for trailers eventhough the UDC River Management Plan supports selected recreational areas for the public to access the river so that overall private property may be respected.


I don't think having another New York access for trailers between Tower Road in Callicoon all the way to Buckingham PAFBC - or about 40 miles is too much to ask.


Mr. Peckham relishes his right for private property near Lordville, but, in my opinion, is selfish with regard to sharing this outstanding recreational resource with others through public areas of access which already exist.


I had also invited my river colleagues Jeff White and Bart Larmouth (then of DRC) to attend the meeting which they did.


We had a conference call with NYS DEC and they explained that what was needed was more engineering and planning studies which was bureaucratese of either 1) them kicking the can down the road until they retire from NYS DEC or 2) those users of the river either by commercial permit or not, forget about the issue and move on.


For those that do not know, Sullivan County was awarded $125,000 to for:


Implementing the Upper Delaware River Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


Lordville was not studied since it is in Delaware County and not Sullivan that is the reason it is not mentioned in the grant from state to Sullivan County.


The rationale for the purchase and improvement of the Long Eddy access is that property which adjoins Depot Street is now for sale.
The price was reduced to $69,000.
It has 75 feet of riverfront and a condemned house which was flooded twice.
With the purchase of the land, better public parking could be implemented as opposed to using the railroad tracks and Dedeco.
Long Eddy access is used quite a bit for floats from Buck to LE and LE to Callicoon especially when there is no water to float on the WB and EB which has occured many times in the spring.


In any event, there is a monthly meeting of UDC WU/RM this evening at 7:00pm.


Emails to the executive director are welcome regarding the Long Eddy topic.


Google:
> Upper Delaware Council, Narrowsburg, New York


Thank you.
TR

 

[flyI4]

-------



Good morning Jeff (and others).


I agree that Lordville, NY NYS DEC access needs to have the boulders removed so that everybody who enjoys this resource has ingress and egress to the river.


It's a fact that the area is already a New York state access underneath the Lordville bridge.


I brought that topic up last year at an Upper Delaware Council Water Use Resource Management meeting that I chair stating that there are very few New York accesses along the 75 mile stretch of the Main Stem - especially north of Narrowsburg to Hancock which would be a distance of 55 miles.


Sparrowsbush NYS DEC
Highland NYS DEC (near Barryville -- off of Route 97)
Narrowsburg NYS DEC ---> Ramp
-------
Cochecton, NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river in Damascus PAFBC)


Callicoon NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river on River Road managed by PAFBC and there is Tower Rd north of Callicoon - neither access is under NYS DEC management.)


Hankins (Red Barn - NOW CLOSED - PRIVATE)


Soaring Eagle / Kellams Bridge (Access for a fee)


Long Eddy (Depot Street - Town of Fremont)


Lordville NYS DEC (NO RAMP --Boulders placed at access to obstruct trailers)


Hancock NYS DEC (Bard Parker - NO RAMP)


Fred Peckham, who posts on this BB under the name, Kilgour Trout, and is the UDC representative from Hancock on the Upper Delaware Council, attended that meeting and was (and is) completely opposed to the idea of removing the boulders for trailers eventhough the UDC River Management Plan supports selected recreational areas for the public to access the river so that overall private property may be respected.


I don't think having another New York access for trailers between Tower Road in Callicoon all the way to Buckingham PAFBC - or about 40 miles is too much to ask.


Mr. Peckham relishes his right for private property near Lordville, but, in my opinion, is selfish with regard to sharing this outstanding recreational resource with others through public areas of access which already exist.


I had also invited my river colleagues Jeff White and Bart Larmouth (then of DRC) to attend the meeting which they did.


We had a conference call with NYS DEC and they explained that what was needed was more engineering and planning studies which was bureaucratese of either 1) them kicking the can down the road until they retire from NYS DEC or 2) those users of the river either by commercial permit or not, forget about the issue and move on.


For those that do not know, Sullivan County was awarded $125,000 to for:


Implementing the Upper Delaware River Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


Lordville was not studied since it is in Delaware County and not Sullivan that is the reason it is not mentioned in the grant from state to Sullivan County.


The rationale for the purchase and improvement of the Long Eddy access is that property which adjoins Depot Street is now for sale.
The price was reduced to $69,000.
It has 75 feet of riverfront and a condemned house which was flooded twice.
With the purchase of the land, better public parking could be implemented as opposed to using the railroad tracks and Dedeco.
Long Eddy access is used quite a bit for floats from Buck to LE and LE to Callicoon especially when there is no water to float on the WB and EB which has occured many times in the spring.


In any event, there is a monthly meeting of UDC WU/RM this evening at 7:00pm.


Emails to the executive director are welcome regarding the Long Eddy topic.


Google:
> Upper Delaware Council, Narrowsburg, New York


Thank you.
TR

The boat traffic and fishing pressure from buck to long has increased dramatically over the last 5 years due to low flows on the west and people trying the escape the early season crowds. Why would you want to make that float any easier with a mid-way ramp to let people to put in late, holdd up top all day and have a continuous stream of boats like u see in the no kill now , ect? A Lordville ramp would do nothing but add more pressure to that stretch which used to offer solitude to those who were over the west branch bullshit. Now, those people are forced to dump their boat off a cliff on the east branch bc the long eddy float has gotten too popular. But hey- the guides will love the lordville takeout on a windy day in April. Can't wait til the first day I put in late and see 5 boats anchored at frisbee island at equinox bc they only have to row 2 miles before dark. If u want to do it- tie your boat up at the bridge and float down the next morning- I've been doing it for years it's the best of both worlds no boats up top in the evening and can still safely leave your boat under the bridge no problem just tie it up.

 

[brachycentrus]

-------



Good morning Jeff (and others).


I agree that Lordville, NY NYS DEC access needs to have the boulders removed so that everybody who enjoys this resource has ingress and egress to the river.


It's a fact that the area is already a New York state access underneath the Lordville bridge.


I brought that topic up last year at an Upper Delaware Council Water Use Resource Management meeting that I chair stating that there are very few New York accesses along the 75 mile stretch of the Main Stem - especially north of Narrowsburg to Hancock which would be a distance of 55 miles.


Sparrowsbush NYS DEC
Highland NYS DEC (near Barryville -- off of Route 97)
Narrowsburg NYS DEC ---> Ramp
-------
Cochecton, NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river in Damascus PAFBC)


Callicoon NYS DEC (nobody uses it since there is a better river access across the river on River Road managed by PAFBC and there is Tower Rd north of Callicoon - neither access is under NYS DEC management.)


Hankins (Red Barn - NOW CLOSED - PRIVATE)


Soaring Eagle / Kellams Bridge (Access for a fee)


Long Eddy (Depot Street - Town of Fremont)


Lordville NYS DEC (NO RAMP --Boulders placed at access to obstruct trailers)


Hancock NYS DEC (Bard Parker - NO RAMP)


Fred Peckham, who posts on this BB under the name, Kilgour Trout, and is the UDC representative from Hancock on the Upper Delaware Council, attended that meeting and was (and is) completely opposed to the idea of removing the boulders for trailers eventhough the UDC River Management Plan supports selected recreational areas for the public to access the river so that overall private property may be respected.


I don't think having another New York access for trailers between Tower Road in Callicoon all the way to Buckingham PAFBC - or about 40 miles is too much to ask.


Mr. Peckham relishes his right for private property near Lordville, but, in my opinion, is selfish with regard to sharing this outstanding recreational resource with others through public areas of access which already exist.


I had also invited my river colleagues Jeff White and Bart Larmouth (then of DRC) to attend the meeting which they did.


We had a conference call with NYS DEC and they explained that what was needed was more engineering and planning studies which was bureaucratese of either 1) them kicking the can down the road until they retire from NYS DEC or 2) those users of the river either by commercial permit or not, forget about the issue and move on.


For those that do not know, Sullivan County was awarded $125,000 to for:


Implementing the Upper Delaware River Local Waterfront Revitalization Program
http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


http://www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/pdfs/2011EPF_LWRP_CFA_Awards.pdf


Lordville was not studied since it is in Delaware County and not Sullivan that is the reason it is not mentioned in the grant from state to Sullivan County.


The rationale for the purchase and improvement of the Long Eddy access is that property which adjoins Depot Street is now for sale.
The price was reduced to $69,000.
It has 75 feet of riverfront and a condemned house which was flooded twice.
With the purchase of the land, better public parking could be implemented as opposed to using the railroad tracks and Dedeco.
Long Eddy access is used quite a bit for floats from Buck to LE and LE to Callicoon especially when there is no water to float on the WB and EB which has occured many times in the spring.


In any event, there is a monthly meeting of UDC WU/RM this evening at 7:00pm.


Emails to the executive director are welcome regarding the Long Eddy topic.


Google:
> Upper Delaware Council, Narrowsburg, New York


Thank you.
TR

Tony, Peckham shouldnt even be on that board. Everything he has done has been totally self serving, from the fracking issue and the Lordville access. Between him and Sauro, I dont know who is worse.
JC, just think how it would spread out all the boat traffic, unless you enjoy the armada coming through your backyard now. I agree, it is perhaps the nicest float on the system, but there are times when a short float from Stockport or Buck to Lordville would be nice. NY does absolutely shit as far as acces goes, especially compared to PA.

 

[Kilgour Farms]

I guess Tony didn't bother to tell anyone that he almost lost the Hale Eddy access for fishermen with his antics about Lordville and moving rocks in that teleconference with the DEC.

Do you really think I'm the only one whos against make the fishing access at Lordville drift boat ready, it is already a carry in boat access. Better get a reality check because many of the resident don't want it, especially the owner of the land south of the bridge, he won't sell and many local fishermen don't want it. Talk about self interests, seems Tony promotes it to avoid the PA fees!

As far as me being on the UDC, I am a river front landowner and as such I have every right to be on the counil. I am a staunch supporter of the RMP and it includes respecting private rights something many river users have chosen to ignore. brachycentrus<!-- google_ad_section_end --> obviously you have never read the RMP like Tony, he does selective reading of the RMP, I don't think many people know the RMP better then I do! I have supported everything that's in the RMP, maybe you should read it sometime! Private property rights are private property rights and your not going to change that as much as you'd like to. I find it ironic the only UDC meeting Tony goes to is the WURM committee meeting then he disappears for a month, talk about using the UDC for his own agenda, WOW!

Some of you are your own worse enemies. You promote the river to the extent that you deprive your selves the ability to fish it then complain to everyone about it being crowded! Your solution move everyone down river, then what? Anyone see the irony in this?

 

[Kilgour Farms]

I guess I failed to mention the conflict of interest Tony had at the meeting using the UDC to promote his personal agenda by introducing him self first and foremost as a licensed guide. I have another fisherman on the UDC that agreed with me!

 

[Ausable]

I have no idea why having more access points would not be a positive. The main benefit being to spread out the traffic and have more people enjoy this great resource. The upper Delaware area needs to be more welcoming and accommodating to people which in the long run will result in more protection of the resource.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kilgour Farms]

I guess you don't float the Delaware down through Sullivan county, if you did you would know more people more trash. I know nobody litters especially the fishermen, yet the trash appears out of nowhere.

Theres a reason the area between Lordville and Long Eddy is classified as scenic!

 

[Future Fanatic]

Some of you are your own worse enemies. You promote the river to the extent that you deprive your selves the ability to fish it then complain to everyone about it being crowded! Your solution move everyone down river, then what? Anyone see the irony in this?

Hilarious, KF.

MAXIMIZE RESOURCES!!!

 

[WBDluver]

here is how some of you are acting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKMNPQ35OUc

 

[flyI4]

I have no idea why having more access points would not be a positive. The main benefit being to spread out the traffic and have more people enjoy this great resource. The upper Delaware area needs to be more welcoming and accommodating to people which in the long run will result in more protection of the resource.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ausable,

In theory this sounds great- but sadly its just not how things have played out up there. People used to complain that the access on the west branch was limited and that it needed to be expanded- with of course the argument being the same as yours, more people = more support. The fact is that the Delaware isnt a secret as is and a new ramp on the mainstem isn't going to bring a significant amount of new river "support" that isn't already there. The people who fish up there will be the same people who fish there with or without a ramp in the future. Its a purely political argument pushed by guides that want their day to be easier with a nice takeout on sections that suck to launch/take out on at night, not to mention provide an escape plan on what is a pain in the ass float buck -long on a windy day. A take your time lazy 4 mile float from buck to lordville is exactly what an overweight middle aged guide wants. Sadly, in the name of convenience, the negative impacts of more access are totally ignored or justified on the basis of an easier day. As for the more people=more support argument- you can see how that played out first hand on the west branch. The river has been loved to death and you have more trash on the west branch than I've ever seen in the upper river, less productivity due to a ridiculous amout of fishing pressure, scars on 75% of the fish you hook due to poor handling, and a worn trail domesticated trout fishing experience. But hey- access is great now! If you want to fish the lower river, there are places to put in and take out, you just need to be willing to rough it a little bit which is fine as it ensures the resource is used by those who are experienced and are more likely to take care of the river. Its the weekend warriors with little experience that are the majority littering, poorly handling fish, and so on. Every section of river doesnt need to be a tourist attraction, and the entire west branch along with the upper main offers 30+ miles of tourist friendly water. Add the entire beaverkill and you 50 miles of tourist friendly water albeit wade fishing opportunities. There is no shortage of access up there, bottom line. This is largely a matter of convenience for guides- and you can bet when the hearing is held they will be most if not all of those supporting another ramp's approval. And this isn't directed at all guides- I know plenty that don't want the added pressure and would prefer the ramps to stay as is. This will be the battle that ensues if and when the lordville ramp is put up for approval

 

[Joe D]

Ausable,

In theory this sounds great- but sadly its just not how things have played out up there. People used to complain that the access on the west branch was limited and that it needed to be expanded- with of course the argument being the same as yours, more people = more support. The fact is that the Delaware isnt a secret as is and a new ramp on the mainstem isn't going to bring a significant amount of new river "support" that isn't already there. The people who fish up there will be the same people who fish there with or without a ramp in the future. Its a purely political argument pushed by guides that want their day to be easier with a nice takeout on sections that suck to launch/take out on at night, not to mention provide an escape plan on what is a pain in the ass float buck -long on a windy day. A take your time lazy 4 mile float from buck to lordville is exactly what an overweight middle aged guide wants. Sadly, in the name of convenience, the negative impacts of more access are totally ignored or justified on the basis of an easier day. As for the more people=more support argument- you can see how that played out first hand on the west branch. The river has been loved to death and you have more trash on the west branch than I've ever seen in the upper river, less productivity due to a ridiculous amout of fishing pressure, scars on 75% of the fish you hook due to poor handling, and a worn trail domesticated trout fishing experience. But hey- access is great now! If you want to fish the lower river, there are places to put in and take out, you just need to be willing to rough it a little bit which is fine as it ensures the resource is used by those who are experienced and are more likely to take care of the river. Its the weekend warriors with little experience that are the majority littering, poorly handling fish, and so on. Every section of river doesnt need to be a tourist attraction, and the entire west branch along with the upper main offers 30+ miles of tourist friendly water. Add the entire beaverkill and you 50 miles of tourist friendly water albeit wade fishing opportunities. There is no shortage of access up there, bottom line. This is largely a matter of convenience for guides- and you can bet when the hearing is held they will be most if not all of those supporting another ramp's approval. And this isn't directed at all guides- I know plenty that don't want the added pressure and would prefer the ramps to stay as is. This will be the battle that ensues if and when the lordville ramp is put up for approval

The shortened float would be the one from Lordville to Long Eddy since there are guides who are looking for ways to to skirt the PA fees to use the PA launches. It's a wild & scenic river. Leave it that way. There isn't as great a need for more access as there is for a more equitable water management plan, tighter regs on the wild trout fishery, ie c&r, and the control of internal combustion engines in areas of the river traditionally used by fishermen and recreational paddlers.

 

[flyI4]

Thank you- nuff said.

 

[TR]

The shortened float would be the one from Lordville to Long Eddy since there are guides who are looking for ways to to skirt the PA fees to use the PA launches. It's a wild & scenic river. Leave it that way. There isn't as great a need for more access as there is for a more equitable water management plan, tighter regs on the wild trout fishery, ie c&r, and the control of internal combustion engines in areas of the river traditionally used by fishermen and recreational paddlers.

------

Uh-oh.



It's Hendrickson time on the West Branch in 2015 with my little Mokai Jet! Can you hear the purrrrrrrr....?




My little Mokai is sweeeeet! All legal with the NPS and even get's me through those boulders at Lordville!

 

[brachycentrus]

------

Uh-oh.

View attachment 11184

It's Hendrickson time on the West Branch in 2015 with my little Mokai Jet! Can you hear the purrrrrrrr....?


View attachment 11185

My little Mokai is sweeeeet! All legal with the NPS and even get's me through those boulders at Lordville!

Tony,
That is not even remotely funny. Had our run in with them in Methodist pool. Lucky they escaped with their lives. Also the kid doesnt have a PFD.

 

[brachycentrus]

The shortened float would be the one from Lordville to Long Eddy since there are guides who are looking for ways to to skirt the PA fees to use the PA launches. It's a wild & scenic river. Leave it that way. There isn't as great a need for more access as there is for a more equitable water management plan, tighter regs on the wild trout fishery, ie c&r, and the control of internal combustion engines in areas of the river traditionally used by fishermen and recreational paddlers.

Well, I suppose If I had a private access point at Lordville, I would oppose it too.

 

[Joe D]

Well, I suppose If I had a private access point at Lordville, I would oppose it too.

I wish I had a private access at Lordville too, but I don't, so I make due with the public accesses.

 

[flyI4]

After the area enjoys an economic boom as a result of the recreational use at the lordville and long eddy ramps- lets share the wealth and put a ramp in at Jaws, Fish's Eddy, and Cadosia. That way we can help build support for the east branch too!

 

[TR]

After the area enjoys an economic boom as a result of the recreational use at the lordville and long eddy ramps...{snipped]

-----

Economic boom? Paging Peckham!

Paging Kigore...Dr. Kilgore...Kilogore Trout...Kligour Spur...

Kilgore!

Fred was interviewed on the BBC and will inform you on the economic boom!

BBC News - Neighbouring US towns worlds apart on natural gas 'fracking'


Hey friend. Do you know the way to Bouchouxville? I put in at Lordville with my Mokai and am kind of lost...

 

[tompg]

Gonna get that Mokai. You'll see me buzzing all the way from Bard Parker to the Beaverkill Falls. Can't wait. It's gonna be awesome

 

[flyI4]

-----

Economic boom? Paging Peckham!

Paging Kigore...Dr. Kilgore...Kilogore Trout...Kligour Spur...

Kilgore!

Fred was interviewed on the BBC and will inform you on the economic boom!

BBC News - Neighbouring US towns worlds apart on natural gas 'fracking'

View attachment 11186
Hey friend. Do you know the way to Bouchouxville? I put in at Lordville with my Mokai and am kind of lost...

Are you and Future Fanatic brothers or something? Same political undertone in every post and font that makes me wanna puke

 

[GARYB]

What you need up there is more goddam bathrooms, the hell with ramps

 

[TR]

Are you and Future Fanatic brothers or something? Same political undertone in every post and font that makes me wanna puke

-----

Not quite.

Try Tums for your tummy.

We purchased our computers at COMP USA when it was still in business near Parsippany many years ago.

I think it's a Windows thing with the font...

Kind regards and tight lines.
TR


Mokai. Exploring new horizons.

 

[Kilgour Farms]

First, its Kilgour Farms. second the industry doesn't provide the economic benefits you think it does as shown by the study done by Shepstone, the results were very liberal and most of the economic benefits were shown to be for the upper east and west branches. You're just interested in saving the fees required by PA and telling people its for everyone, yeah right talk about self serving!

I also see you have never bothered to talk to the local folks or you would know that the local economies are dead and the tourism you promote provides only seasonal, low wage jobs not enough money to support a family.

There are many B&B's in the area that said they have not had any fishermen using them in years, so much for tourism being the end all to save all!

Learn or not, your choice!

 

[TR]

What you need up there is more goddam bathrooms, the hell with ramps

-------

Well, Gary, glad you asked about that.

Dumpsters at all river accesses on the Upper Delaware River were removed this year after being there for over 20 years.

They were contracted to be there for the tourists and river users for three months - Memorial Day to Labor Day. Not much to ask...is it?

No more -- eventhough it states in the RMP to provide these for recreational users.

Can you guess why?

And... Port-o-Potties were removed after Columbus Day.

The last time I took a leak in one there was a sign that:
"This Facility is A Privilege and NOT to Abuse It."

Reason they were removed at the river accesses?

Word from on high that it was not a budgetary constraint but locals were abusing the privilege of trash dumpsters.

Paging Fred - chime in whenever...


With my little ol' Mokai...no more need for unnecessary pit stops. Fish On!

 

[Trout Nazi]

As a wader (when I'm not guiding that is), I too am opposed to more access on the lower river. You can hate on me for being a wader in another thread.

 

[Kilgour Farms]

If you had bothered to actually go to the meetings it was stated that the primary reason for removal of the dumpsters was because weekenders were too lazy to take their trash with them. They were not for the tourists/weekenders, they were for meant for river users!

Learn or not, your choice!

 

[Trout Guy]

There would be a lot less boat traffic/fishing pressure if all the upper Delaware boat launches were as treacherous as hale eddy.

Why dont we just make them all like that..

Just saying...