Please take a moment to send a letter to Subaru regarding their recent decision to reclassify the Outback as an SUV, to duck gas-milage standards for autos. There is a form for doing this at the UCS link below. First some background information - and why I've sent to kayakers & canoers: The American Canoe Association and Subaru have 'partnered' for many years, with Subaru being the 'official' auto of the ACA, and ACA members receiving up to $3000 off MRP on the purchase of a new Subaru. http://www.acanet.org/VIP.htm Subaru's "committment statement" to Outdoor enthusiasts can be read at the following link: http://www.subaru.com/outdoorlife/commitment/index.jsp However, Subaru's concern for our outdoor world/enviroment has taken an interesting twist: Subaru's ''redesign'' of its Outback qualifying it for lesser fuel economy standards is outrageous. Check it out at http://www.ucsaction.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=14624 Thanks, and happy boating, Kim (Eugene boater who drives a Toyota) and Steve (Aldercreeker who's happy with his Honda) *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
BTW- feel free to forward this message to anyone you wish. a number of folks have asked. steve http://mail2web.com/ . *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
FYI: Not all paddlers share this view. Or, put another way, being a paddler doesn't automatically make me in favor of any cause that seems to be "green" Why pick on Subaru? Somehow I doubt that this reclassified vehicle is going to be a bigger poluter or gas gusseler than the many other "SUV" vehicles out there which are used in the same role as station wagons of the past only with lower gas milage, and greater danger to anyone soccer mom happens to run into. How does the mileage of their off road / utility vehicles compare to those of other companies? You call it ducking gas mileage standards, but not having any trucks or SUVs puts them at a disadvantage to those who do. Why shouldn't they level the playing field? Also, it sounds like Subaru is doing something for ACA paddlers by offering a discount. How does that somehow subject them to a higher standard? One more thing - What does Subaru's decisions about the market positions of their products have to do with paddling? I don't see it, but I figure if the point does, then so does the counter point. Alder Creek Kayak & Canoe <aldercreek_at_qwest.net> wrote: Please take a moment to send a letter to Subaru regarding their recent decision to reclassify the Outback as an SUV, to duck gas-milage standards for autos. There is a form for doing this at the UCS link below. ........... However, Subaru's concern for our outdoor world/enviroment has taken an interesting twist: Subaru's ''redesign'' of its Outback qualifying it for lesser fuel economy standards is outrageous. Check it out at http://www.ucsaction.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=14624 Thanks, and happy boating, Kim (Eugene boater who drives a Toyota) and Steve (Aldercreeker who's happy with his Honda) Steve Brown *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Brown" <steve_at_brown-web.net> > One more thing - What does Subaru's decisions about the market positions of their products have to do with paddling? I don't see it You may not see it but obviously Subaru does as they have tied themselves to paddling. By there own choice. Now they need to make that marriage work or duck out. Jim et al *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
A few years ago Subaru made a point of sending their 'Green Team' to many outdoor industry related exhibitions, and their association with ACA often had them raffling off chances for a new Outback at these events. Subaru USA also made alliances with LL Bean, etc. At the Canoecopia event I attended that year, Subaru made a distinct point of handing out 'Leave No Trace' Ethics cards...cards with helpful hints on being environmentally friendly when in the outdoors, stickers, etc.; they sponsored a 'Green Team' that toured the country to educate younger students, outdoor industry professionals, outdoor sport/activity enthusiasts and the general public about environmentally friendly practices. The point here is that Subaru has made a very deliberate and conscious decision to incorporate 'Green' strategy as part of their marketing efforts, and they've used these as a means to forge alliances with groups like the ACA; groups that have direct relevance to the Paddlewise online community. While other auto/truck manufactures are also hypocritical in their sales appeals, Subaru's recent actions are worthy of specific notice in this forum because of their direct contradiction of previous corporate positioning with the paddling community. This isn't a pissing contest. Subaru sought to forge an alliance with paddlers to sell them cars/trucks. It seems entirely proper to: 1) inform those paddlers of the controversy; 2) suggest a means for interesred paddlers to express their views to Subaru; 3) make the case that taking such action is: a) feasible, and b) desireable. -Will *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Just my thought but: >It seems entirely proper to: 1) inform those paddlers of the controversy; We've been informed. >2) suggest a means for interesred paddlers to express their views to Subaru; It has been suggested. >3) make the case that taking such action is: a) feasible, and b) desireable. Case made. Now, on to topics more directly paddling related - like... the relative merits of sweep vs C to C rolls? on-deck storage bags - step towards death or great idea? or raisins vs no raisins in trail mix? :o) *************************************************************************** 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 3 Feb 2004 at 12:30, William Jennings wrote: > This isn't a pissing contest. Subaru sought to forge an alliance with > paddlers to sell them cars/trucks. It seems entirely proper to: 1) > inform those paddlers of the controversy; 2) suggest a means for > interesred paddlers to express their views to Subaru; 3) make the case > that taking such action is: a) feasible, and b) desireable. This is one of the most sensible and sane comments made so far. I agree with those who say that Subaru presented one image and practice (now) another. It's fair that we are made aware of this hypocritical stance. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
The simple fact is that modern societies are designed such that it^Rs near impossible to be truly ^Sgreen^T. And it^Rs done that way for a reason: Profit in the short term. Until such time as the people (Us) who support this system change their spending habits, nothing else will change, either. It^Rs already been mentioned that individuals can do small things, which can add up if enough people do them. I chose not to have children, I recycle, I buy organic and fair trade foods whenever possible, and I drive a very fuel efficient vehicle (Volkswagen Jetta TDI --- 50 MPG highway). That still doesn^Rt make me ^Sgreen^T; it just makes me a little more conscious of the consequences of my existence than the average american. Europeans and other westerners are probably much greener than any american, but it^Rs still just a matter of degree --- we all contribute to the problem. I considered a Subaru Legacy wagon (Outback isn^Rt worth the extra $$$$ IMHO) for a short moment, but Subarus are all gas hogs nowadays --- I had a 1995 Mustang which was more fuel efficient than a Legacy. And, I only need all-wheel drive maybe 5 days out of the whole year, so why pay for something I don^Rt need? I just don^Rt drive those few days, and I^Rm much more likely to live a long life for it, because all-wheel drive doesn^Rt mean all-wheel stop in bad conditions. I^Rd say that 98% of all SUV^Rs and SUV wannabe vehicles are not used for their original intended purpose --- off-road driving. So what's the point of owning one? The Jetta Wagon was a better choice for me, as it has similar cargo space to the Legacy, is far less likely to roll over than any SUV, and since it burns diesel, it consumes far less energy per mile driven than any gasoline powered car or truck. Diesel takes half as much energy to refine, less crude oil to produce than gasoline, and the engine itself is about 30% more efficient, and lasts a lot longer (Meaning you don^Rt need to buy new ones as often). So I guess my point is this: If you don^Rt like what Subaru (Or any manufacturer for that matter) builds, DON^RT BUY IT. Demand drives the market, so demand better efficiency. It only works if you take action with your wallet --- talk does nothing. Wayne On 3 Feb 2004 at 12:30, William Jennings wrote: > This isn't a pissing contest. Subaru sought to forge an alliance with > paddlers to sell them cars/trucks. It seems entirely proper to: 1) > inform those paddlers of the controversy; 2) suggest a means for > interesred paddlers to express their views to Subaru; 3) make the case > that taking such action is: a) feasible, and b) desireable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wayne Smith wsmith16_at_snet.net Check out my website! http://pages.cthome.net/wsmith16/home.html *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Personally the fact that the Subaru I bought was classified as a car rather than a truck was instrumental in my choosing it. For me it was important that the vehicle I bought had to conform to the safety and emission requirements of a car. I suspect I am not alone in this being a criteria. While I think all car manufacturers are being irresponsible in using the using the "truck" classification to increase their profit margin (by charging more than a standard car for a vehicle which costs less than a "similar" car to produce), I don't think what Subaru is being being peculiarly irresponsible. They need to compete in a market place which has a set of rules which encourages irresponsibility. It is hardly surprising that they choose to play by those rules. I do think that their choice will cause people like me to find another alternative. Next time I am looking for a car which has some of the capabilities normally associated with a truck, I may have to look elsewhere. I also think the idea of intentionally making a car heavier and less safe is dumb from an engineering stand point, but then again I didn't make the rules. > Alder Creek Kayak & Canoe <aldercreek_at_qwest.net> wrote: > Please take a moment to send a letter to Subaru regarding their recent > decision to reclassify the Outback as an SUV, to duck gas-milage > standards > for autos. There is a form for doing this at the UCS link below. > ........... > However, Subaru's concern for our outdoor world/enviroment has taken an > interesting twist: Subaru's ''redesign'' of its Outback qualifying it > for > lesser fuel economy standards is outrageous. Check it out at > http://www.ucsaction.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=14624 Nick Schade Guillemot Kayaks 824 Thompson St Glastonbury, CT 06033 USA Ph/Fx: (860) 659-8847 http://www.guillemot-kayaks.com/ *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Steve Brown writes: FYI: Not all paddlers share this view. Or, put another way, being a paddler doesn't automatically make me in favor of any cause that seems to be "green" >> your choice. seems to me most paddlers ARE in favor of things that are 'green'. I guess there are a few that aren't. Why pick on Subaru? >> because they claim to be 'green' yet use a loophole to duck out on mileage standards. and they are part of the ACA team, as well as a number of other outdoor organizations, who DO believe in 'green'. Somehow I doubt that this reclassified vehicle is going to be a bigger poluter or gas gusseler than the many other "SUV" vehicles out there which are used in the same role as station wagons of the past only with lower gas milage, and greater danger to anyone soccer mom happens to run into. How does the mileage of their off road / utility vehicles compare to those of other companies? You call it ducking gas mileage standards, but not having any trucks or SUVs puts them at a disadvantage to those who do. Why shouldn't they level the playing field? >> this is all besides the point. Also, it sounds like Subaru is doing something for ACA paddlers by offering a discount. How does that somehow subject them to a higher standard? >> No higher standard. By claiming 'green', then offering a discount, does this make it OK to find and use a loophole, smile and look the other way? One more thing - What does Subaru's decisions about the market positions of their products have to do with paddling? >> the point IS paddling. as in ACA partnership. As in yes I (ACA member since 1990) took advantage of their program and bought a Outback for my Mom. As in it's for sale. Steve, are you an ACA member? steve aldercreek.com http://mail2web.com/ . *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Yes, I am an ACA member. I also own a Subaru. It seems to me that Subaru support the ACA, not visa-versa. I bought a Subaru WRX STi because it was about the fastest car I could get my hands on for the money. You could say my reasons for buying it were anti-green. Your position would be more palatable if it included an objective comparison between Subaru and other manufacturers rather than an attack because they didn't live up to your subjective standards. I suspect any factual comparison will show that they have earned their "green" image, but I am open to evidence to the contrary. Some interesting facts on the thought police: I sent my response to your email at 6:55AM, but it doesn't seem to have been sent out until after your response to it was sent at 9:24AM. In the mean time I sent a response to Steve H email at 7:19Am and it was posted by 7:21Am when I received it. Apparently all hardware and software in cyberspace was working as it should, but my response to your first email was not socially acceptable to publish until you had already responded to it. I also suspect this won't be published either unless you respond to it. Steve Brown -----Original Message----- ...... Steve, are you an ACA member? steve aldercreek.com http://mail2web.com/ . *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Steve Brown wrote: > Yes, I am an ACA member. I also own a Subaru. It seems to me that Subaru > support the ACA, not visa-versa. > I bought a Subaru WRX STi because it was about the fastest car I could get > my hands on for the money. You could say my reasons for buying it were > anti-green. > Your position would be more palatable if it included an objective comparison > between Subaru and other manufacturers rather than an attack because they > didn't live up to your subjective standards. > I suspect any factual comparison will show that they have earned their > "green" image, but I am open to evidence to the contrary. Subaru supports a number of "green" organizations, including Leave No Trace, IMBA, and, interestingly, the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. There is a page on the Subaru website entitled "The Subaru Commitment to the Outdoors". If that's all you know, you might think that the company is really green, but their "commitment" is to building cars that work well in the outdoors, not to preserving it. Read the text, that's all it says. Alder Creek Steve and I (there are too damn many Steves in this discussion) naively believed that Subaru actually was committed to preserving nature. The current brouhaha suggests we may have been wrong. Or at least that they're not the paragons we assumed they were. It's always painful to find your heroes have feet (tires?) of clay. BTW, do you like the WRX STi? If they made a wagon version I'd buy one in a minute. -- Steve Cramer Athens, GA *************************************************************************** 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 really like it. Supposedly, if I wasn't using all 300 horses most of the time, the thing can actually get 24MPG. Maybe someday I'll find out. Anyway, to add to your point, corporations don't have a conscience about anything but shareholder returns. Likewise, if I own stock in a company I want them to deal legally and ethically, but beyond that I just want to make money. The more the better! Some on this list may disagree, but how much of your own retirement will you give up to increase fuel efficiency at Subaru??? So, voting with you pocket book is what will change a corporation's mind. Money is the only language that is understood. I will concede that since Subaru has aligned themselves with the "green" party, they have some obligation to live up to that image (but a paddling issue? I'm doubtful). So what are the facts? I really haven't heard any except that some don't like a particular decision that Subaru has made. Cars, trucks, and SUVs make pollution, use natural resources, including habitat to drive them on. They're all bad! So what make an auto maker "green"? I would say doing a better job at preserving air quality and natural resources than the other ones. I know this has been declared "beside the point", but I would really like to hear how Subaru compares to other manufacturers. If no one on this list can site the comparison facts, then I would say there is not enough information to either complain or congratulate them. Steve Brown -----Original Message----- ..... Alder Creek Steve and I (there are too damn many Steves in this discussion) naively believed that Subaru actually was committed to preserving nature. The current brouhaha suggests we may have been wrong. Or at least that they're not the paragons we assumed they were. It's always painful to find your heroes have feet (tires?) of clay. BTW, do you like the WRX STi? If they made a wagon version I'd buy one in a minute. -- Steve Cramer Athens, GA *************************************************************************** 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 Tuesday, February 03, 2004, at 1:14:35 PM PST, Steve Brown wrote: > Cars, trucks, and SUVs make pollution, use natural resources, > including habitat to drive them on. They're all bad! Agreed. Unless we choose, as individuals, to live a completely "hunter/gatherer/grow your own" lifestyle, the best we can do is compromise where we can. As I sit here and type away at my computer, I can't ignore the fact the the materials used to create this machine, and the electricity used to run it, come from polluting sources. Every time I drive my car (by the way, it's an '87 Subaru GL wagon), I think not only of what it costs me in dollars and cents to run it, but I must also think about what I'm doing to the environment every time I drive it. As long as we accept the "conveniences" of modern life, we must also accept our part in the harm they cause. When I lived in NYC, I did what I could on an individual level (riding my bike and walking whenever I could, buying my organically grown veggies at the farmer's markets, etc.). In the greater scheme of things, however, just living in the city, flying to concert engagements all over the place, and taking advantage of so many other city "conveniences" I took for granted, I have to admit that the few little things I tried to do didn't really amount to very much in comparison to the "not so good" things I accepted as part of my life. I've greatly simplified my life since then (and wish to simplify even further), but I'm still nowhere near as "green" as I'd like to be, and probably never will be. Even so, I do what little I can. Yes, I have a car that gets pretty good mileage, but I still do all I can to restrict my usage of it. Though I might like the idea of long road trips to find new and wonderful places to paddle, I instead found a place to live where there's lots of nice local water available, so that I either don't have to drive at all, or at least drive very little (I spend, on average, less than $10 each month on fuel for my car, and spend whatever it takes to keep it running as "clean" as possible). I may never get to paddle in all the exotic places I dream of, but I do manage to be quite happy where I am. Finally, I do feel it's better to support those companies that we feel are trying harder than others to offer "clean" products and support "greenish" causes, but that's not always enough. We have to look very honestly at all the choices we make in our daily lives, and in doing so, most of us will still have to admit that we're not yet doing enough. :-( -- Melissa *************************************************************************** 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 3 Feb 2004 at 15:42, Melissa Reese wrote: > On Tuesday, February 03, 2004, at 1:14:35 PM PST, Steve Brown wrote: > > > Cars, trucks, and SUVs make pollution, use natural resources, > > including habitat to drive them on. They're all bad! > > Agreed. Unless we choose, as individuals, to live a completely > "hunter/gatherer/grow your own" lifestyle, the best we can do is > compromise where we can. Good plan, Melissa! The idea that all energy consumption is evil is not right. There are degrees. After all, if the trend that started in the '70s continued unabated, we'd collectively be consuming about _half_ as much energy for personal transportation today. Instead, everyone went crazy as oil prices dipped in the '80s and early '90s and we are consuming more than ever. In fact, energy consumption increased faster than any other index - inflation, economic growth, population etc. We aren't just using more collectively, we are using more per capita and vehicles are using more per vehicle-mile. If we could turn back the clock twenty five years and change the course of history, just in personal transportation, we could make a huge adjustment to pollution and all. We can take a different tack today. Some of us have been following a different tack for quite a while (when I get a message from the electric utility to cut back, I think "on what?" The changes they are asking for I made 15-20 years ago!) Mike *************************************************************************** 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 Feb 3, 2004, at 01:14 PM, Steve Brown wrote: > BTW, do you like the WRX STi? If they made a wagon version I'd buy one > in a minute. They do make a wagon WRX, only 227 horsepower and 217 foot/lbs of torque. I drive a WRX Sedan, only because I bought it last year when the STI wasn't available here in the US. The WRX gets me 18-20 mpg in the city and 24+ on long trips pulling my two kayaks on a trailer. -- Check out the marine mammals, dog & Bengal cats _at_ <http://homepage.mac.com/dflory> *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Dear Paddlewise Participants: ACA has noted your comments regarding the Subaru vehicle classification. Subaru has received some negative publicity regarding the upcoming new redesigned 2005 model year Outback to be launched this February at the Chicago Auto Show. We are very aware of the situation yet convinced that Subaru is very committed to safeguarding our environment. Below is the official release from Subaru of America. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Gerald L. Babao American Canoe Association 7432 Alban Station Blvd., Suite B-232 Springfield, VA 22150 703.451.0141, Ext. 23 (phone) 703.451.2245 (fax) http://www.acanet.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SUBARU RELEASES STATEMENT REGARDING 2005 MY OUTBACK CLASSIFICATION CHERRY HILL, N.J., Jan. 13, 2004 - Subaru of America, Inc. today released the following statement in response to various media reports regarding the vehicle classification of its new Outback Sedan and Wagon: The primary reason the 2005 model year Outback will be classified according to NHTSA as a light duty truck is because it was completely redesigned to meet customer demand for more SUV-type features. Subaru pioneered the crossover vehicle category back in 1995 with the Legacy Outback - the World's First Sport Utility Wagon. Today, the crossover category is the fastest growing segment in the auto industry. Through our market research, we know that customers don't want to sacrifice fuel economy, comfort, ease of entry, or ride quality; but desire SUV-like features such as dark-tinted side rear windows, higher ground clearance, and approach and departure angles suitable for off-road driving. Customers frequently choose Subaru Outback over conventional truck-based SUVs because of its outstanding fuel economy, performance, handling, and safety. The new Outback will continue to deliver the best of both worlds to the popular cross-over segment and remain a strong alternative to SUVs. The new Outback, to debut at the Chicago Auto Show in early February, was designed to be a light duty truck. In fact, both the Outback Wagon and Sedan will exceed the NHTSA light duty truck standards on 4 of 5 requirements including break over angle, departure angle, running clearance, and axle clearance. Subaru has always made fuel economy a top priority in its product development process. Subaru has a track record of producing superior crossover vehicles that meet stringent federal safety and emissions standards. The new Outback is no exception. The base model Outback is expected to have improved gas mileage for model year 2005, while we will also offer a model with enhanced performance characteristics for those customers that have expressed that desire. The new Outback Sedan and Wagon will meet federal emissions -- more - standards for light duty truck - which is as stringent as emission standards for light duty vehicles as defined by the EPA and ARB. However, final testing by the EPA for emissions compliance and fuel economy label calculations for model year 2005 Outback has not yet been completed and therefore is not available. Subaru is committed to developing advanced technologies that improve fuel economy and emissions as evidenced by the new Sequential Series Hybrid Electric (SSHEV) propulsion system in the B9SC and the urban commuter electric vehicle R1e concept cars featured at this year's Detroit Auto Show. In addition, the new Outback released later this year will feature advanced engine technologies such as Active Valve Control System (AVCS) that improves overall engine efficiency. Further, the newly designed Outback body structure reduces overall vehicle weight by as much as 180 pounds. Subaru always has been and will continue to be committed to safeguarding the natural environment that so many of our customers avidly enjoy. About Subaru of America, Inc. Subaru of America, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. of Japan. Headquartered near Philadelphia, the company markets and distributes all-wheel drive Subaru vehicles, parts and accessories through a network of nearly 600 dealers across the United States. Subaru is the only car company that offers symmetrical all-wheel drive as standard equipment on every vehicle in its product line. For additional information please visit www.media.subaru.com. ******************************************************************* *************************************************************************** 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 Tue, 3 Feb 2004 10:46:30 -0800, "Steve Brown" <steve_at_brown-web.net> said: > Some interesting facts on the thought police: snip rec.boats.paddle still exists if you don't like the way I monitor/moderate the list. Any post that gets forwarded to me, for any reason, is guaranteed to be slower in getting delivered. Kirk -- Kirk Olsen kork4_at_cluemail.com *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Kirk, I apologize for the "thought police" comment. That was more than a bit over-the-top. You do a great job of managing the wide range of viewpoints on this list for maximal freedom of speech with minimal conflict. Steve Brown -----Original Message----- On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 10:46:30 -0800, "Steve Brown" <steve_at_brown-web.net> said: > Some interesting facts on the thought police: snip rec.boats.paddle still exists if you don't like the way I monitor/moderate the list. Any post that gets forwarded to me, for any reason, is guaranteed to be slower in getting delivered. Kirk -- Kirk Olsen kork4_at_cluemail.com *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Subaru has been, and still is, supportive of kayaking and other sports. Their fuel economy for what their product line provides is excellent and they have no low end economy models that sell enough to offset their overall fleet mileage. What they are doing is not against "green" only reclassifying to conform to newer standards as their product will, I am told, maintain a similar level of fuel usage. Why not pick on some of the other companies that produce totally inefficient vehicles and don't support outdoor recreation except to push their product? Mike Brown *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> Subaru has been, and still is, supportive of kayaking and other sports. > Their fuel economy for what their product line provides is excellent and > they have no low end economy models that sell enough to offset > their overall > fleet mileage. What they are doing is not against "green" only > reclassifying to conform to newer standards as their product will, I am > told, maintain a similar level of fuel usage. Well said Mike. Subaru is just playing the game, the rules of which have been determined for them, probably more by lobbyists than by scientists. Why is it OK to sell gas guzzlers just because you sell some cars that don't guzzle? That logic escapes me. Either we want better fuel mileage or we don't. The car-buying market "don't" or they'd not buy the guzzlers, and they would go away. But they don't just buy them, they DEMAND them. Want to be green? Outlaw them then. Good luck with the lobbyists. Perhaps the "rules" were established to give companies with a broader market offering an advantage, or perhaps it's based on volume, so in order to sell a vehicle with a moderately good fuel ecconomy you have to sell a lot with good fuel ecconomy. Which would eliminate the specialty company from the market. Based on a model-to-model comparison, how does Subaru do? I'm not interested in what fuel mileage the vehicles they choose not to sell need to get to make it OK to sell the ones they do. "It's OK, I had Subway!" Carey *************************************************************************** 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 3 Feb 2004 at 15:23, Carey Parks wrote: > Subaru is just playing the game, the rules of which > have been determined for them, probably more by lobbyists than by > scientists. And by administrations that are anti-environment. Reagan (followed by the Bushes) have repeatedly refused to address environmental issues in anything like a balanced way. They allowed the motor industry to create a new market for gas guzzlers by essentially gutting CAFE standards and excluding small trucks from the standards. > The car-buying market "don't" or > they'd not buy the guzzlers, and they would go away. But they don't > just buy them, they DEMAND them. Which suggests that the car buyers are acting according to traditional economic theory. However, they don't, they buy according to advertizing and lots of other crap that has nothing to do with logical decision making. If half the car buyers bought with their brains and with knowledge of what they were doing, the trends would not be as they are. Buying a $40k SUV when a $25k van provides the same overall utility doesn't make economic sense. Buying an SUV when a small car provides for all their _needs_ (e.g. one person commuting to work = 80+% of their driving) also doesn't make sense. The makers of the market are the sellers, not the buyers. They know that and they only care about money - not the environment nor the health or well-being of future generations. Mike *************************************************************************** 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'll ignore comments on past and current US presidents as it is way far removed from paddling, but your comments about why people do what they do, hits right to my original point about making posts of this kind on a paddling list. You seem to be operating with the assumption that anyone who doesn't do what makes sense to you simply isn't thinking straight or doesn't have all the right information. I hate SUVs because they are often driven belligerently and otherwise over aggressively. Nevertheless, I believe that the people who buy them have thought their decision through very carefully and buy the SUV for its tank-like qualities. They get their way on the road, and are likely to fare better in a collision just because of how massive they are. The fact that I don't like their decision doesn't mean they are either mentally incompetent or uninformed. Likewise I recently bought a high performance car (from Subaru) because I wanted one (mid life crisis or second childhood - take your pick). I thought it through carefully. I can afford the car, the gas, and the insurance. I think the air is generally clean enough, and we don't seem to be running out of oil as fast as anyone predicted 20 years ago. The fact that you disagree with my reasoning and decision doesn't invalidate them. We both share paddling as an interest, but obviously we do not share common views on politics or automobiles. The point (I've almost forgotten myself): Posting a request on this list to pester Subaru about deciding to classify a vehicle as an SUV is no more or less appropriate than posting a request to pester Subaru into making vehicles available that have more horsepower. Serious paddlers can have both views and neither of them really has anything to do with kayaking. Steve Brown -----Original Message----- ......... they don't, they buy according to advertizing and lots of other crap that has nothing to do with logical decision making. If half the car buyers bought with their brains and with knowledge of what they were doing, the trends would not be as they are. Buying a $40k SUV when a $25k van provides the same overall utility doesn't make economic sense. Buying an SUV when a small car provides for all their _needs_ (e.g. one person commuting to work = 80+% of their driving) also doesn't make sense....... Mike *************************************************************************** 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 3 Feb 2004 at 15:28, Steve Brown wrote: > You seem to be operating with the assumption that anyone who doesn't > do what makes sense to you simply isn't thinking straight or doesn't > have all the right information. Based on what I studied in transportation engineering courses, this is true. People _do_not_ usually have the right information to make such decisions and rarely make them based on anything resembling logic. That's what makes transportation engineering such a difficult field - too many politicians, lobbyists, and uninformed voters. Believe me, the intricacies of the why and how of the auto industry are very well studied. The average person, for example, thinks that cars and trucks are designed and built to the same standards. > I think the air is generally clean enough, Based on the wrong information. It's filthy and getting worse every year. > and we don't seem to be running out of oil as fast as anyone > predicted 20 years ago. Shell recently downgraded its reserves by 20%. Big boo-boo or a lie to improve "shareholder value"? How many other oil companies are inflating their oil reserve estimates? Be more sceptical - Enron was an energy company, after all. Mike Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Steve B writes:>>I hate SUVs because they are often driven belligerently and otherwise over aggressively. Nevertheless, I believe that the people who buy them have thought their decision through very carefully and buy the SUV for its tank-like qualities.<< hate's a pretty strong word. IMHO, more often than not, SUV's are purchased because they have 4 wheel drive. In our 'storm of the century' on New Years most of the western portions of Oregon and Washington were covered with 3" to 8" of snow, covered by 1" to 2" of ice. The only cars that could safely get around were SUV's and 4X4 trucks. period. I don't think too many folks were thinking 'tank', like me they were thinking more like 'survival'. (required paddlin' content) My Honda CR-V (mini SUV) got me to a very sweet paddling location in the middle of that week and a half, and I enjoyed a very peacful time on the river amoungst the snow and ice. steve Alder Creek Kayak & Canoe N 45: 36.285' 250 NE Tomahawk Isle Dr. W 122: 39.841' Portland, OR 97217 Web: www.aldercreek.com Phone: 503.285.0464 Email: aldercreek_at_qwest.net *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Hey Steve, I can debate that one! I drove through that "Storm of the Century" returning from Baja. My Astro van isn't 4 wheel and I made it through very nicely, without chains. I must admit, the worst part of the snow was in Bellingham with strong crosswinds. Yes, the more I drove north, the more I thought I should just turnaround head south to Mexico and say, "To hell with the world, it will get along with out us for awhile!" But, nonetheless I continued on so people like yourself will benefit from my otherwise humble experiences. hehehhehehheheh. Kirby www.CoastalWatersRec.com <http://www.CoastalWatersRec.com> every trip, a new adventure! *************************************************************************** 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 4 Feb 2004 at 10:12, Kirby Stevens wrote: > I can debate that one! > > I drove through that "Storm of the Century" returning from Baja. > > My Astro van isn't 4 wheel and I made it through very nicely, without > chains. I can too. I drive a little Honda Civic and live in an area where winter happens every year. I can't handle deep snow like a higher- clearance SUV, but otherwise I usually pass the SUVs and 4x4s on the slippery hills. Knowing how to drive counts for more than having four-wheel drive. Winter or summer I see more trucks in the ditch than cars. Mike *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
At 09:39 AM 2/4/2004 -0800, Alder Creek Kayak & Canoe wrote: >Steve B writes:>>I hate SUVs because they are often driven belligerently and >otherwise over aggressively. Nevertheless, I believe that the people who buy >them have thought their decision through very carefully and buy the SUV for >its tank-like qualities.<< > >hate's a pretty strong word. > >IMHO, more often than not, SUV's are purchased because they have 4 wheel >drive. In our 'storm of the century' on New Years most of the western >portions of Oregon and Washington were covered with 3" to 8" of snow, >covered by 1" to 2" of ice. The only cars that could safely get around were >SUV's and 4X4 trucks. period. > >I don't think too many folks were thinking 'tank', like me they were >thinking more like 'survival'. Or just accessibility or ease of accessibility to areas where a 2WD sedan might not be able to go. >(required paddlin' content) My Honda CR-V (mini SUV) got me to a very sweet >paddling location in the middle of that week and a half, and I enjoyed a >very peacful time on the river amoungst the snow and ice. When I lived in California I did a lot of snow skiing in the winter. Unlike in the east, they don't salt their roads, and the CHP establishes various restriction levels on a particular section of road at a particular time. I don't recall the exact designations but it went something like: R1 - road open to all vehicles R2 - road open to vehicles with snow tires R3 - road open to 2WD vehicles with chains, or 4WD with snow tires R4 - road open to vehicles with 4WD *and* chains only R5 - road close to all vehicles In the many years that I made numerous ski trips to the Sierra Nevada I only encountered an R4 condition once. Typically R4 was for a very short period of time before and/or after the road was closed to all vehicles. The biggest advantage of an SUV or vehicle with 4WD was when many of the roads were at R3. Driving from the bay area it was R1 for the first 200 miles, then it might be R3 all the way to the Tahoe basin (about 50 miles). On a Friday night thousands of people would drive up from the bay area, and about 4000' CHP would be set up to enforce the R3 restrictions. There would be hundreds of vehicles off to the side of the road installing chains, and on a very busy weekend, much of the slow lane on I-80 would have vehicles in the road. In my 4WD vehicle they'd just wave me through. Often by the time I reached the Tahoe basin, where most of the roads don't have much of an incline, a 2WD vechicle could get around fine without chains, so they were all removing their chains. Driving the 50 miles from 4000' with chains on is no picnic but driving around on clear pavement with them is even worse. Taking them on and off as conditions change was a really big hassle. In many areas, one could drive all around the Tahoe basin but need chains to get the last five miles to the ski resort or the place where they were staying. The 4WD was even more useful for the miles and miles of offroad access in the Sierra Nevada. One of my other passions is flyfishing and there were quite a few places I went to that would be inaccessible with a 2WD vehicle. One of them was up a steep rocky road about 5 miles off the main road. I had a canoe on top of my 4WD vehicle and drove up to this lake and had it completely to myself for two days. There was another area on the eastern slope where there were 2-3 lakes only accessible by a vehicle with 4WD and high ground clearance. These lakes held a good population of Golden trout. *************************************************************************** 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 our 'storm of the century' on New Years most of the western portions of Oregon and Washington were covered with 3" to 8" of snow, covered by 1" to 2" of ice. The only cars that could safely get around were SUV's and 4X4 trucks. period. Was that really your 'storm of the century'? Dang! I was in the central Willamette that week. Drove past PDX on the 505 at 2am on 1/31...sharing the road with skidding trucks and copious amounts of snow. Usually in Montana, we laugh at the news reports when we hear about the road closures, school closures, and wrecks that occur in cities where people aren't used to snow. 'Silly warm-weather folk', we think. But my wife and I got quite a surprise when we found the 2" of 'coastal' snow to have about as much water content as 2-3' of the mountain snow we're used to. Rather than blowing right through the snow like we're used to, we found we were nearly hydroplaning on it...and our little 'Subaru Legacy Sedan FWD' with studded snow tires did a little better than the locals' rigs, but not by a lot. When PDX gets a dumping like that, then temps fluctuate from barely freezing to barely thawed, that's serious bidness! Paddling content: paddled on the 3rd in Budd Inlet, Olympia, WA --flakes falling the whole time. Then we got into a great snow/ice-caused traffic jam on I-5. 'Silly warm-weather drivers' going too fast for conditions! Shawn *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
The car and light truck classifications were arbitrarily created to reduce the objections of Detroit to several federal regulations including CAFE. Without those expemptions it is quite likely that many of the fuel mileage and crash rules for cars would not exist. It is fairly safe to say that Subaru was not a player in creating the rules and loopholes by which they now compete. How "green" a company is has little or nothing to do with whether they build trucks, cars or kayaks. It has to do with how they conduct their business. There is a lot of greenwash out there and little real action. On that regard I have no idea how green Subaru is relative to other manufacturing firms. It also has little to do with the fact Subaru supports groups and activities that promote active outdoor lifestyles. That is called marketing and product positioning. That they believe the market wants traits in thier vehicles not compatible with the arbitrary classification of car vs truck is also irrelevant as to whether it is or is not a green company. To get some background on the issue I checked out the Subaru web page. The following is from a Subaru news release. As a news release I assume it is acceptable to repost. ---------------------------------------------------------- The primary reason the 2005 model year Outback will be classified according to NHTSA as a light duty truck is because it was completely redesigned to meet customer demand for more SUV-type features. Subaru pioneered the crossover vehicle category back in 1995 with the Legacy Outback - the World's First Sport Utility Wagon. Today, the crossover category is the fastest growing segment in the auto industry. Through our market research, we know that customers don't want to sacrifice fuel economy, comfort, ease of entry, or ride quality; but desire SUV-like features such as dark-tinted side rear windows, higher ground clearance, and approach and departure angles suitable for off-road driving. Customers frequently choose Subaru Outback over conventional truck-based SUVs because of its outstanding fuel economy, performance, handling, and safety. The new Outback will continue to deliver the best of both worlds to the popular cross-over segment and remain a strong alternative to SUVs. The new Outback, to debut at the Chicago Auto Show in early February, was designed to be a light duty truck. In fact, both the Outback Wagon and Sedan will exceed the NHTSA light duty truck standards on 4 of 5 requirements including break over angle, departure angle, running clearance, and axle clearance. Subaru has always made fuel economy a top priority in its product development process. Subaru has a track record of producing superior crossover vehicles that meet stringent federal safety and emissions standards. The new Outback is no exception. The base model Outback is expected to have improved gas mileage for model year 2005, while we will also offer a model with enhanced performance characteristics for those customers that have expressed that desire. The new Outback Sedan and Wagon will meet federal emissions standards for light duty truck - which is as stringent as emission standards for light duty vehicles as defined by the EPA and ARB. However, final testing by the EPA for emissions compliance and fuel economy label calculations for model year 2005 Outback has not yet been completed and therefore is not available. *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
> From: "Michael Daly" <michaeldaly_at_rogers.com> > Subject: RE: [Paddlewise] ACA and Subaru > > On 3 Feb 2004 at 15:28, Steve Brown wrote: > > <snip> >>> I think the air is generally clean enough, > > > Based on the wrong information. It's filthy and getting worse every > year. Assertions like the one above, without data to back them up, are misleading at best and at worst, make it very difficult to make further progress. Both the air and water today are *much* cleaner than they were 20 years ago, thanks to various regulations and programs. Those of you older than, say, 30 may remember what a street full of cars smelled like before catalytic converters, what the Thames or Charles rivers smelled like, or what the skies over Gary, Indiana or the industrial areas of East Germany looked like back a few decades. Cars today, for instance, put out barely a few percent of the emisssions of pre-EPA regulation cars. The shift from high-sulfur coal and oil to better burning technologies as well as gas and nuclear has radically changed air quality. In the city of Kyoto, for example: Between 1965 and the present, dust fall has decreased from 8 tons/Km^2/month to 2 tons. Between 1984 and the present, sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere has decreased by 80%, carbon monoxide has decreased by 40% EPA stats (and I am sure there are many who will see these as fabrications of a conspiracy) at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/trends98/chapter3.pdf show major decreases in almost all emissions over the past 30 years, with many levels now at or less than pre-1940 levels. Some emissions, like lead, have been cut drastically. Marginal increases in a very few- like ammonia and oxides of nitrogen- still reflect large unit decreases per capita or per unit of industrial output. Every summer there's a classic car "cruise" that brings a few thousand cars to my suburban Detroit neighborhood for a weekend- what a friend calls "ozone inaction day". One afternoon walking around these pre-emissions control cars is all it takes to remind me of the changes made in the last few decades. -- mike -------------------------- Michael Edelman http://foldingkayaks.org http://findascope.com *************************************************************************** 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/ ***************************************************************************
Enough already! By now even the dullards get the point. Can we move on. *************************************************************************** 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 - 16:33:36 PDT