Re: [Paddlewise] Wilderness is good business

This is something we could discuss endlessly.  It is not off-topic for
Paddlewise, I believe, but if we confine the discussion to aspects directly
tied to paddling, I suspect we will get a more focused debate.

Where I live, there is a concerted effort to make more campsites for
paddlers, near a wildlife refuge (the Columbia River Water Trail;  Steve
Scherrer has a Web site for us, I bet).  This is a classic situation:  almost
nobody knows about the wonderful paddling down here, so the wildlife is
plentiful and the meager campsite (yes, I mean __campsite singular__ -- there
is only one, really that might be "wilderness") is not often overused or
abused.  It is on private land, and is owned by one of the large timber
firms, I believe.

If we see hordes of paddlers descend on us, we will need to expand that site,
and/or find more sites.  To a large extent, that will remove a good bit of
the value of the wildlife refuge for individual paddlers:  paddlers spook
wildlife.

OTOH, if we do not "develop" this area for its paddling potential, then
paddlers will crowd into the areas that do exist.

I do not have a stronger right to paddle my home waters than anybody else,
but I feel crowded when I see a big party ensconced on "my" campspot.  Yet,
if we do not make the regulatory and decision-making bodies aware of the use
there is, we may lose it to less desirable uses:  the meager campsite might
get logged, or maybe made off limits to us.

If there becomes a Lewis and Clark National Park down here, it will attract
folks from all over the nation, and it will "ruin" it for the locals, but
make it available to others (who pay federal taxes just like we do).

It is a conundrum. and we can not have it both ways:  wild and fully
available to all is impossible.  I think these are our choices:

1. Less wild and available to many is possible.

2. Completely non-wild and "fully" developed is also possible (but execrable,
in my view).

Regarding the original issue of whether any of these is "good business:"
Choice 2. brings in the most revenue/person locally, no matter how you slice
it.  Granola paddlers do not use traditional lodging or eating facilities,
and do not buy gear locally.  Tour groups use a little more of each, but
nothing like the salmon-fishing crowd or even the crab festival crowd. A
series of B and B spots located every ten miles down the River would bring in
the most revenue directly tied to paddlers, if paddlers would use them.

I think we are really debating between 1. and 2. above.  And it turns on what
use, and how we manage that use, that are the issues.  This is not an elitist
vs populist debate -- we all make choices like this, beginning with how tall
the fence will be between our house and the neighbors.

--
Dave Kruger
Astoria, OR (long-time wilderness user, encompassing the entire Northwest)
***************************************************************************
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/
***************************************************************************