Here We Go Again!

[Chief Grey Bear]

Canoe outfitters are not serving alcohol, like bar owners. So I don't think it would be fair to put that burden on them even if you could.

Also we have to remember that too much of a law enforcement presence will deter customers from using that paticular stretch of float. Thus possibly running the outfitter out of biz. So how would that look for big brother?

I think it is something we are stuck with. Its better, I think, that they seem to limit this to just a few areas of the state. Leaving all of the rest of it to those who enjoy the fishing.

[soggyfeet]

I really dont see it as a burdon but as a way to generate a little more revenue for the outfitters and maybe reduse the number of excessively drunk people on the rivers and the camp grounds after. That is till they get back and hit the booze they have in camp. I dont think that an extra 12 to 18 bucks a person is going to detuer the people that float the river for the bueaty and the fishing. I mean come on first six is free add 12 thats 18 add six more thats 24. The people that take 24 beers per person might as well sit at the campsie and drink cus thats the only thing they are there for. These are the people that dont care for the river or the river system(and I not saying all of them are like this). Any one takeing a case of beer for an 8 hour float is there for one thing. I mean come on three beers an hour thats quite a bit no matter how much anyone thinks they could drink. And money wise its still cheaper than going out to the bars. Two nights camping 12 bucks, canoe rental 30 bucks divided by 2=15 bucks, 18 extra beers 18 bucksfor a total of 45 bucks for for an 8 hour tour. Night at the bars 24 beers 72 dollars alone for only 3 to 5 hours and not to mention the fancy bus to take you back to the campground is not included in the bar tab.

[Chief Grey Bear]

You are spot on there soggy. I can't argue with obvious logic.

[jdmidwest]

Canoe outfitters are not serving alcohol, like bar owners. So I don't think it would be fair to put that burden on them even if you could.

Also we have to remember that too much of a law enforcement presence will deter customers from using that paticular stretch of float. Thus possibly running the outfitter out of biz. So how would that look for big brother?

I think it is something we are stuck with. Its better, I think, that they seem to limit this to just a few areas of the state. Leaving all of the rest of it to those who enjoy the fishing.

While it is true they don't serve the alcohol, they have a responsibility to control their customers while they are using their equipment and have a liability if something happens to them while using their equipment. They also shuttle the beer and underage drinkers in their busses.

We did not have this problem 10 years ago, with visible enforcement of laws on these sections, the problem could stop again.

[Chief Grey Bear]

At the beginning of this thread, you pointed the finger at the gov for getting involved in your fun. Just few post back, you asked why we didn't blame the parents. In the last two post you want to blame the outfitters.

The outfitters have no responsibility to card their patrons since they don't have a license to sell alcohol. Are they supposed to check their coolers too?

I find it quit funny that you conservatives are all wanting to add laws and taxes to the outfitters to fix this problem, and us liberals are saying leave it along, you are trying to punish the wrong people.

[jdmidwest]

Here we go, I am typing slowly again,

We don't need the new laws, the ones we have are sufficient to combat the problem.

Our government officials should spend their time on more important things.

We need more law enforcement in the areas.

Business owners should be in control of their patrons while they use their products.

Parents should raise their kids properly so they don't display this behavior.

Meanwhile, if you know there are going to be crowds, drunk or sober, fishing and a good time on the river is probably going to be ruined. Fish a less crowded river and enjoy it during the weekend.

I really don't know how you can get politics involved in this.

[soggyfeet]

Most of the outfitters do sell beer so they do have a lisence to sell alcohol. And when they bus them up stream on their busses under their insurance they do have the right to deny access. An outfitter permitting an underage person to to drink on their property is the same as a resturant or bar permiting underage drinking in their establishment. I relize that this is hard to patrol but it goes along with owning a business its called responsibility. An easy way for them to put the responsibility on the patrn is to have someone over the age of 21 to register them for the rental or canoe and campsite, sort of like a gardian that takes responsibility for the actions of the underaged. Something as simple as that doesnt require more laws just the outfitters to do something besides sitting back takeing all the money they can and ignoreing what they know is going on. If the outfitters could limit the number of underage dirnkers on the river the water patrol could concentrate on other issues such as drug use and so on. The bottom line is we have all the laws we need to solve the problem but the enforcement side needs help from the public to help prevent the crimes before they are crimes.

[soggyfeet]

Canoe outfitters are not serving alcohol, like bar owners. So I don't think it would be fair to put that burden on them even if you could.

Also we have to remember that too much of a law enforcement presence will deter customers from using that paticular stretch of float. Thus possibly running the outfitter out of biz. So how would that look for big brother?

I think it is something we are stuck with. Its better, I think, that they seem to limit this to just a few areas of the state. Leaving all of the rest of it to those who enjoy the fishing.

Its not the small outfitter that is the problem. They do a good job with their buisness I think. Ive never had a problem in the smaller rental places or with the patrons on or off the river. Its the big rental places that are the problems. I will not evan think of floating the Niangua anymore because of one outfitter alone and the mess their campground is and they way people from their campground act on the river. I really dont think that if they were to restrict the underage drinking they would lose any business. Well maybe at first cus I belive thats the majority of their business. But if they were to become a good outfitter again (at one time it was a great place to go) the good people will come back and they might not have to have the security gaurds anymore. Thats a big flag for me if their is a need for 24 hour security on the weekends I will find somewhere else to go.

[hoglaw]

I know this won't be a popular post, but I sincerely wish the powers that be would ban all alcohol from the major floating streams - at least during floating hours. I like to drink...a lot. I love taking overnight camping/floating trips and hitting the scotch before bed-time. I thuroughly enjoy a beer on the bank when I'm done. But the extent of the partying on the big rivers has pushed me to the point that I don't even want to go anymore. Even the stretch of the Elk below the dam at Noel is choked with drunks on the weekends. The Buffalo seems to be getting worse and worse. The Kings isn't as crowded, but it's got its share of partiers too.

This is a completely selfish post. I love to fish, and for me, canoeing these rivers is a means to an end. It hurts my heart to have the clarity of rivers like the Elk ruined when all you can see on the streambed are discarded beer cans. It's not feasible to enforce regulations. Missouri and Arkansas have neither the personell nor the resources to effectively deter excessive partying. Why not ban alcohol outright on these rivers? Far fewer injuries, far fewer arrests, less enforcement needed alltogether.

[techo]

"I know this won't be a popular post, but I sincerely wish the powers that be would ban all alcohol from the major floating streams - at least during floating hours. I like to drink...a lot. I love taking overnight camping/floating trips and hitting the scotch before bed-time. I thuroughly enjoy a beer on the bank when I'm done. But the extent of the partying on the big rivers has pushed me to the point that I don't even want to go anymore. Even the stretch of the Elk below the dam at Noel is choked with drunks on the weekends. The Buffalo seems to be getting worse and worse. The Kings isn't as crowded, but it's got its share of partiers too.

This is a completely selfish post. I love to fish, and for me, canoeing these rivers is a means to an end. It hurts my heart to have the clarity of rivers like the Elk ruined when all you can see on the streambed are discarded beer cans. It's not feasible to enforce regulations. Missouri and Arkansas have neither the personell nor the resources to effectively deter excessive partying. Why not ban alcohol outright on these rivers? Far fewer injuries, far fewer arrests, less enforcement needed alltogether."

I keep telling myslf to stay away from threads like these! However......I concur 100%!