Onsr Comments

[fishinwrench]

The only term that fits, and serves your intended purpose is...."motorized vessels", period, and that would outlaw all methods of propulsion short of paddling/rowing. Jet skis (PWC) are soon to enter the scene if vessel length or "horsepower" is used in the regs, so... Hmmm.

Allowing motorized vessels by authorities only in cases of "emergency" is bull$#!t. Busting kids for weed and jello shots is not an emergency, and LEO's in motorized vessels are no less destructive to the resource than sportsmen are. And it's rediculis to assume that LEO's are the only ones capable of helping in the event if an emergency.

I'd be in favor of an All or None, with no exceptions, and if they'd think about it for awhile I think most would see it that way also.

[tanvat]

Fishinwrench, "motorized vessel" is a better term that fits what I'm trying to say. I suppose I said "jetboats" b/c that is what I see down there. Terminology aside, I think the point is clear but saying "motorized vessel" is the best, most complete term - thanks.

Re law enforcement, I've never seen park rangers using a jetboat or other motorized vessell to bust kids smoking weed; though I'm sure it happens. I might be wrong, but again, I've seen LEO on motorboats down there maybe twice in at least a 1,000 miles of floating on those rivers through the years. Granted, I stick more to upper Jacks and Current above Round Spring precisely to avoid the jetboats. But I've floated all the way to Logyard once and down to Two Rivers at least 8 times, if not more, and I just don't see much evidence of LEO using highpowered boats that much; a tiny fraction compared to the yahoos. I get your point, but if you support some additional limits on motorized vessels, surely you wouldn't favor torpedoeing such restrictions b/c a park ranger can use a jetboat; I assume you don't oppose police officers having the right to exceed the speed limit if necessary?

[Flysmallie]

I assume you don't oppose police officers having the right to exceed the speed limit if necessary?

Don't get him all worked up on the law. He opposes their existence.

Only time I've seen them mess with any body was with a bunch of old creek ho's showing their stuff. I think the only reason they stopped them is because it was creating a pretty big traffic jamb just above the confluence of Jack's Fork. Luckily I squeaked by just in time to not get caught up in it.

[Smalliebigs]

wait a minute.....even though I agree with Wrench, shut down all motorized vessels or shut the hell up......how would the giggers get to continue their Ozark traditions???

[Al Agnew]

I'm not sure I get the rationale behind banning LEOs from using jetboats entirely. I think you could limit it to emergency use only and on special occasions. I go back to the example of the Yellowstone River where we live in Montana. No motorized craft allowed, but the county has a big jetboat which they will use on the river in an emergency, or when they have the big organized raft run to raise money for something or other. Seems to work just fine.

With present technology, I also don't see any problem with a 10 HP limit...as long as it's 10 HP rated at the motor. As far as I know, 10 HP is well under the power that can utilize the jet technology. If we want to talk tradition, the use of jets on these rivers is about 30 years old, starting nearly 20 years after the Riverways was established. Before that time, you'd be hard pressed to ever see a motor on a johnboat that was more than about 15 HP, and it took a very experienced boatman to get very far up and down the river.

However, there ARE other ways of going about it. No motorized craft would be one way, no wake rules or noise rules would be another.

I've always been for strict limits on the use of motorized craft on these rivers, even though I own a jetboat. But it will never happen. Too many local constituents of the politicians own jetboats, and will scream bloody murder if they suddenly can't use their $20,000 boats on the river. There were some of us crying out in the wilderness back when jetboats first came onto the scene that somebody needed to get a handle on restricting their use. It could have been done then when there were only a few jetboat owners, but nobody, including the state legislature, the riverways, or MDC, had the guts or foresight to do anything. MDC even did a farce of a study of jetboat impacts (rumor has it that it was a farce because one of the commissioners at the time was a big jetboat fan) that showed that jetboats had less of an impact on the bottom of the river where they ran than prop boats did. Duh. They didn't bother to study the impact of big boat wakes on the banks, or the impact of a hundred boats running up and down the river where one or two did previously with the inherent limits of prop boats, or the impacts of far more people being able to get up and down the river to gig or poach.

Oh, I'm writing down my support of the alternatives I want to see, but I don't have any confidence whatsoever that much of anything good will come of it. The idiot Missouri politicians are coming out full force against anything that will change the situation for the better.

[KCRIVERRAT]

Can't stand politicans. Nor can I stand jackasses in jetboats, motorized craft, or whatever practically doing circles around me on the Current or Jacks Fork (and it's happened). The thought of ever seeing jet skis down there would be the final straw. They go into areas up here on Smithville Lake that they're not supposed to be in and I've never witnessed the water patrol inforcing them to stay out. I wish they'd actually keep the motorized stuff from Van Buren down which would mean NO motors on the JF.

Can't you go gigging using a 10 hp motor?

Good job Tanvat!

[fishinwrench]

Al: With present technology, I also don't see any problem with a 10 HP limit...as long as it's 10 HP rated at the motor. As far as I know, 10 HP is well under the power that can utilize the jet technology.

Jet ski (PWC) = about 6-15hp. (at the crankshaft) in many cases.

[KCRIVERRAT]

Had another thought about the impact motorized craft might have on the springs down there. I'm guessing the larger springs such as Big Spring and Alley wouldn't be impacted to the extent the smaller ones would... meaning any spring that trickles down a hillside with minimal cfs, or a spring that emits close to the river, and especially a spring that usually emits from the river bottom itself (such as Boiling Spring on the Big Piney).

Any thoughts guys?

[KCRIVERRAT]

Jet ski (PWC) = about 6-9hp. (at the crankshaft).

Leave me alone motorhead... and what are you telling me? That it's OK to gig from a jet ski?

[Flysmallie]

I always thought it would be neat to run up the James on a jet ski traveling from fishing spot to spot.

If that ever takes off anywhere let me know so I can open a jet ski repair facility.