Good news! There is a proposal to ban jet skis from the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore starting 4/21/01. You can support this proposal by sending an e-mail to the park superintendant from this form http://www.npca.org/take_action/action_alerts/ click on the "More information about this issue" link to learn more about the environmental damage and safety issues of personal water craft. Thank you, -Bob Matter Hammond, IN *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 12/3/00 3:35:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, rjmatter_at_PRODIGY.NET writes: << Good news! There is a proposal to ban jet skis from the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore starting 4/21/01. >> Bob, Although I don't like jet skis, banning them concerns me. If they can be banned, them someday sea kayaks might be banned. We should all try to share the water. Duane *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Strosaker_at_aol.com wrote: > > Bob, > > Although I don't like jet skis, banning them concerns me. If they can be > banned, them someday sea kayaks might be banned. We should all try to share > the water. > > Duane I stongly disagree. We should not all try to share the water. We should all try to protect the water. Quiet, human powered, not polluting craft are in no way kindred to those noisy, polluting, high horsepower, internal combustion thrill machines. If sea kayaking were banned somewhere for good reason like a tortoise nesting area, I would fully support that also. -Bob Matter Hammond, IN *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Well said, Robert! Jet skis (and snowmobiles) are disproportionately destructive compared to most other forms of outdoor recreation, and their use should be regulated. Unfortunately, most kayaks do have a lot more in common with jet skis than you suggest, because most kayakers transport their craft on top of their automobiles, which are also "noisy, polluting, high horsepower, internal combustion thrill machines" of a different sort. And though autos are much cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck of a lot more of them. Given this info, I think it is kind of hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas, even I fully support it. I personally feel a lot of guilt from driving all the time to go kayaking, and I wonder if any others on this list feel the same way? Kevin On 04-Dec-2000 Robert J. Matter wrote: > Strosaker_at_aol.com wrote: >> >> Bob, >> >> Although I don't like jet skis, banning them concerns me. If they can be >> banned, them someday sea kayaks might be banned. We should all try to share >> the water. >> >> Duane > > I stongly disagree. We should not all try to share the water. We should all > try to protect the water. Quiet, human powered, not polluting craft are in > no way kindred to those noisy, polluting, high horsepower, internal > combustion thrill machines. If sea kayaking were banned somewhere for good > reason like a tortoise nesting area, I would fully support that also. > > -Bob Matter > Hammond, IN *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Do you paddle much in wilderness areas? You write : "I think it is kind of hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas... because most kayakers transport their craft on top of their automobiles, which are also "noisy, polluting, high horsepower, internal combustion thrill machines" of a different sort. I don't drive, and I don't have a drivers license either. My choice. It suites" my" needs. However , most Americans have a need for an automobile. It's tough to justify a "need" for a jet ski. By definition if you can drive there it probably isn't Wilderness. A lot of Paddlewisers post interesting trip reports on their paddling experiences on the Louisiana/TX Gulf Coast, the NYC harbor, the Chesapeake Bay, Columbia River and Puget Sound. These places aren't wilderness. But they do offer an opportunity for relative quiet. I think that "this" area, this tiny piece of silence, contemplation, and solitude is what the anti-jetskiers are taking about. A refuge from the omnipresent noise, which must be protected. I wouldn't go to a NASCAR event seeking silence and solitude. I would , however like a tiny piece of the universe set aside for me and similar souls, who think that there is still a place for silence in our modern world. Rich Dempsey ridem_at_msn.com See our canoe tripping website http://communities.msn.com/RichWendysAwayFromHomePage ----- Original Message ----- From: <kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org> To: Robert J. Matter <rjmatter_at_PRODIGY.NET> Cc: <paddlewise_at_paddlewise.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 4:16 PM Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Indiana Dunes NationalLa > Well said, Robert! > > Jet skis (and snowmobiles) are disproportionately destructive compared to most > other forms of outdoor recreation, and their use should be regulated. > Unfortunately, most kayaks do have a lot more in common with jet skis than you > suggest, because most kayakers transport their craft on top of their > automobiles, which are also "noisy, polluting, high horsepower, internal > combustion thrill machines" of a different sort. And though autos are much > cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck of a lot more of them. Given this > info, I think it is kind of hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from > wilderness areas, even I fully support it. I personally feel a lot of guilt > from driving all the time to go kayaking, and I wonder if any others on this > list feel the same way? > > Kevin *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Backpacking in the Three Sisters Wilderness back in the 70's, I would often encounter cattle grazing on a mountain meadow. Was there no place that was off-limits to the sacred cow (out West, I mean)? The ranching industry is too strong. I still see cattle trampling streamsides to dirt along salmon streams here in Oregon. But they are out of our wilderness areas now. The thought of cattle in our wilderness now seems preposterous to the public at large. We are just slow to do what to many are obvious and long overdue. Jet skis are like cows. They will eventually be out of the wildernesses. But what really needs to happen is for them to be cleaned up. They are way too polluting both in the context of noise and exhaust. I make no apologies for these statements. To say that because I drive or paddle too close to wildlife, I can't express these ideas (which really are self evident to those who keep informed) is rediculous. It's like being ridiculed for saying that stealing is wrong just because I (fill in the blank). Stealing is still wrong. To call one an elitist is to perform a mild charactor assassination. To most thinking people they just showed themselves to be aggressively ignorant. And they were probably pushed too hard by a well-meaning person who passionately cares about the environment. Bill *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: > I think it is kind of hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from > wilderness areas, even I fully support it. I personally feel a lot of guilt > from driving all the time to go kayaking, and I wonder if any others on this > list feel the same way? That last sentence lacks clarity as to what you are asking the reader. If you are asking whether we feel _you_ should feel guilty, of course. :-) As for driving everytime I go kayaking, I don't. I get to my stored folding kayaks on foot (about a 3/4 mile walk) or subway (5 miles) or commuter RR (12-15 miles). Other times, I have taken my folded up kayak via public transportation to areas away from the city or carpooled with others. I suggest you relieve some of your guilty feeling by getting a folding kayak. :-) BTW, the level of pollution created by a jet ski vs. that of a car are night and day. I have heard that running a jet ski for an hour throws as much polutants into the environment as a modern day car going from coast to coast. Come to think of it, this knowledge may also be a salve against guilt...so you can skip getting that folding kayak. best, ralph ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: } Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Indi > > though autos are much cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck > of a lot more of them. Given this info, I think it is kind of > hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas, Cars are already banned from designated wilderness areas. It's not hypocritical, it's applying a similar standard. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
On 06-Dec-2000 Bob Myers wrote: > kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: > } Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Indi >> >> though autos are much cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck >> of a lot more of them. Given this info, I think it is kind of >> hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas, > > Cars are already banned from designated wilderness areas. > > It's not hypocritical, it's applying a similar standard. On one level, I quite disagree with you. If you think about the total impact that the burning of fossil fuels will have on all wilderness areas worldwide, then cars are tremendously more significant than PWCs. Autos account for about 22% of the US total carbon emissions, and about 64% of the total transportation related US emissions. To put this in perspective, American autos emit more carbon than the total national output of every other country in world except for China and Russia. That's 312 million metric tons carbon equivalent vs 846 mmtce and 414 mmtce respectively. The US emits 1433 mmtce (all numbers for 1996). Since we all drive cars, we all share the guilt when we go kayaking (except for those wonderful few who manage to do without). I think it is very hypocritical to blame jetskiers for destroying very small pockets of wilderness, when autos are systematically destroying vast ecosystems on a global scale. We have only just begun to see the impacts of global warming (the *ahem* tip of the iceberg, if you will :) I think most people are living in a dream world if they are not genuinely concerned about the terrible impact of global warming. To put that statement in perspective, the Worldwatch ran a recent article about the rising sea levels due to global warming. Scientists forecast a 0.5 to 1.0 meter rise by 2100. A 1m rise would displace 1 billion (yes, 10e9) people from their coastal homes, obliterate several South Pacific island nations (e.g. the Maldives) New Orleans, much of Florida, and wreak general havoc on the places that sea kayakers love the most. However, this forecast is an underestimate since it was done using the 1995 IPCC estimate of global warming by 2100 (3-6 deg C). In the last two months, the IPCC has increased this estimate to a staggering 8-10 deg C rise by 2100 because humans have significantly reduced the amount of sulfur coming from coal powerplants. Sulfur aerosols actually help to cool the Earth, even if they also wreak general ecosytem havoc by causing acid rain. hehe, sorry if I got all worked up about this, but I can't help it once I get started on this subject. I need to stop now, but at least I've stated my position a little more clearly. Anyone have comments? Cheers, Kevin ---------------------------------- Kevin Whilden Your Planet Earth http://www.yourplanetearth.org E-Mail: kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org ph: (206) 788-0281 fax:(206) 788-0284 ---------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I don't have the numbers at my finger tips, but driving older less efficient autos contribute a disproportionate am't of pollutants. Many people suggest that we are at the point of diminishing returns in our attempts at making autos more efficient. Now may be the time to get more bang for our buck by buying and retiring the dirtiest autos. In looking at problems, our society tends to find the villan (personally most offensive causative agent) then excuse all others. We solve problems in a linear fashion by attacking one facet at a time, even though the chosen target may not be the greatest contributor. Logically we should manage all sides of a problem simultaneously, but put our greatest efforts at the worst affenders as well as the most easily correctable ones. We need the big picture. A dozen jet skis on the water may pollute more than the busy segment of freeway carring thousands of autos that borders that water. The owners frequently upgrade the size of their vehicles to haul these toys and of course drive this the rest of the time as well. The noise that these produce is also disproportionally large. Being such disproportionately large polluters makes jet skis a logical target allowing a good reurn for our effort. Two stroke mowers and blowers are other targets with a good bang-for-buck profile. Some scientests are now saying that corals may be largely gone in 25 years due to global warming!!!! The Alteutian kelp forests just died off from the sudden disappearance of large numbers of sea otters allowing urchins free reign. Warm currents in 1997 disrupted the food chain resulting in a shift in feeding habits of key preditors which saw the otter as suddenly worth their effort. Global warming seems to be here and impacting sea kayaking,too. We should be aware of our choices, but I don't think we should feel guilty if we drive efficient cars to recreate with human powered craft, as well as taking other measures, especially considering the incredibly low national awareness and poor choices made as the norm. I use a push mower and put in an ecolawn. We live in a nice house which is smaller than most of our peers own. I support ending gas subsidies and therefore pollution subsidies. More emphasis needs to be placed on highway safety that also helps environmentally, ie. penalize vehicle owners who chose passenger vehicles that are more than 1.5 the weight of the lightest vehicle, narrow the range of bumper heights. OK, I'll get off my soap box now and go to bed. Bill *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: } Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Ind > > On 06-Dec-2000 Bob Myers wrote: > > kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: > > } Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Indi > >> > >> though autos are much cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck > >> of a lot more of them. Given this info, I think it is kind of > >> hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas, > > > > Cars are already banned from designated wilderness areas. > > > > It's not hypocritical, it's applying a similar standard. > > On one level, I quite disagree with you. If you think about the total impact > that the burning of fossil fuels will have on all wilderness areas worldwide, > then cars are tremendously more significant than PWCs. If you're limiting the discussion to global warming, granted. However, CO2 emissions from jetskis have *just* as much effect on global warming in wilderness areas and in non-wilderness areas. Also "cleaner burning" is irrelevant with respect to CO2 emissions - perfectly clean hydrocarbon burning produces just water & CO2, and making the engine burn "cleaner" won't reduce carbon emissions a bit. So why did you talk about cleaner burning autos, and jetskis in the wilderness? Both of these issues are completely irrelevant to global warming. I'm sympathetic to your points about global warming, but you need to focus your argument a bit better. > I think it is very hypocritical > to blame jetskiers for destroying very small pockets of wilderness, when autos > are systematically destroying vast ecosystems on a global scale. "Autos" may be doing it, but if my 1 personal auto is doing less damage to the ecosystem than someone else's 1 personal jetski, I don't see it as hypocrisy to object to the jetski. I don't drive 200 million cars, I drive one. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
You haven't addressed the noise pollution of jet skies though. Cars remain on land, it is possible to escape them. As I said in my earlier post, what is so difficult to fathom about setting aside a small area with "natural noises", not man made one? Right know I am listening to my neighbors snow blower (0.5 inches of snow fell last night). The leaves have been off the trees for the last 2 weeks, so the leaf-blowers have subsided. The daily morning buzz of lawn mowers is 4 months in the future, and it has gotten too cold for the kids to leave their car windows open as their vehicle shakes with their booming sound system. Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: <kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org> To: Bob Myers <bob_at_intelenet.net> Cc: <paddlewise_at_paddlewise.net>; Robert J. Matter <rjmatter_at_PRODIGY.NET> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 11:23 PM Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Ind > On 06-Dec-2000 Bob Myers wrote: > > kevin_at_yourplanetearth.org wrote: > > } Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaker's guilt (was:Jet Ski Ban Proposal - Indi > >> > >> though autos are much cleaner burning than jet skis, there are heck > >> of a lot more of them. Given this info, I think it is kind of > >> hypocritical to talk about banning jet skis from wilderness areas, > > > > Cars are already banned from designated wilderness areas. > > > > It's not hypocritical, it's applying a similar standard. > > On one level, I quite disagree with you. If you think about the total impact > that the burning of fossil fuels will have on all wilderness areas worldwide, > then cars are tremendously more significant than PWCs. *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
In a message dated 12/08/2000 10:46:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, RiDem_at_email.msn.com writes: << You haven't addressed the noise pollution of jet skies though. Cars remain on land, it is possible to escape them. As I said in my earlier post, what is so difficult to fathom about setting aside a small area with "natural noises", not man made one? >> I'd like to add airboats to noise pollutants. Although the Lake Kissimmee area was wild and wonderful those #$%_at_^#% airboats were zooming all over the place throughout the night. Similarly (though in the day), our Peace (hah!) River trip was intermittently disturbed by some guy who was giving rides to all his girlfriends...one at a time. And there was another fellow in an airboat also. The noise is SOOOOO loud that they have to wear ear protectors, while the people they infringe their noise on (not to mention the wake and disturbing of wildlife) have to cover their ears. grrrrrrr sandy kramer miami *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author. Submissions: PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net Subscriptions: PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:19 PDT