Local Kayaking / Canoeing

[BankShot]

Elections have consequences.

They sure do...someone needs to call Kearns for his "scoop" on the proposed OC-Hasselberger "launch site" that wasn't built AFTER a sizable article was published in the Trib-Star w/no announcement of a "change of plans." The O.C. Conservancy Group might also be privy to the matter. I believe that Rothrock was trying to leverage their support of her opposition. Kearn's was NOT aligned w/ Hines & Rothrock.

 

[meistro]

Send an inquiry to Co. Commission Pres. Chris Switzer. There was NO public release re: Contract "Change of Order" plans, which is POOR GOVERNMENT, regardless of County.

FYI, Mike Morris is Commissioner president. [email protected]

 

[Sycamorefan96]

That ramp was proposed by a previous commissioner. This project is not currently on our radar. Regarding 96 comment above about not enough water in the creek to kayak - if that's the case, why would we want to put in an area to access it? And yes, there is a lot of opposition from property owners for having kayaking through private property.

I appreciate the response, but Otter Creek is definitely NOT private property. Even Beacon cleary shows that Otter Creek is public land. As a county commissioner I'm honestly shocked that you don't know this.

Let me guess, someone "important" bitched and now the county isn't going to do it. Let me take another guess and I'm going to say it was actually Cary Sparks who I googled and found out is VP and T.O. of First Financial Bank and owns land on both sides of the creek on the north side of the road. What a freaking joke this county is! It's honestly quite pathetic. If I or some other peon owned land down there it wouldn't even matter if we complained. Maybe quit building all of these bike trails "through private property" if it's such a big deal. Sheesh.

 

[Sycamorefan96]

Also Otter Creek does have enough water to kayak as long as it isn't during a very dry season. I've made it from Burnett to Old Mill Dam before. Biggest issue is occasional log jams, but they aren't too bad past the Sulfur Creek confluence which also adds quite a bit more water to the creek.

 

[meistro]

I appreciate the response, but Otter Creek is definitely NOT private property. Even Beacon cleary shows that Otter Creek is public land. As a county commissioner I'm honestly shocked that you don't know this.

Let me guess, someone "important" bitched and now the county isn't going to do it. Let me take another guess and I'm going to say it was actually Cary Sparks who I googled and found out is VP and T.O. of First Financial Bank and owns land on both sides of the creek on the north side of the road. What a freaking joke this county is! It's honestly quite pathetic. If I or some other peon owned land down there it wouldn't even matter if we complained. Maybe quit building all of these bike trails "through private property" if it's such a big deal. Sheesh.

wow! great conversation. While the waterway may be public property, the land on either side is not, unless the county owns that.

 

[meistro]

I appreciate the response, but Otter Creek is definitely NOT private property. Even Beacon cleary shows that Otter Creek is public land. As a county commissioner I'm honestly shocked that you don't know this.

Let me guess, someone "important" bitched and now the county isn't going to do it. Let me take another guess and I'm going to say it was actually Cary Sparks who I googled and found out is VP and T.O. of First Financial Bank and owns land on both sides of the creek on the north side of the road. What a freaking joke this county is! It's honestly quite pathetic. If I or some other peon owned land down there it wouldn't even matter if we complained. Maybe quit building all of these bike trails "through private property" if it's such a big deal. Sheesh.

Again, kayaking down Otter Creek isn't on our radar. As far as the trails, they are on county owned or leased land.

 

[sycamore tuff]

I guess this is proof #30649631456754325664 that politicians can't be trusted to keep their word.

 

[meistro]

I guess this is proof #30649631456754325664 that politicians can't be trusted to keep their word.

What are you talking about? I had nothing to do with this decision you're talking about.

 

[Sycamorefan96]

What are you talking about? I had nothing to do with this decision you're talking about.

So what exactly would it take to get this ramp idea back into the discussion? Easy access to a 3.7 mile kayak trip (Dam to Hassleburger) would be a great outdoor activity for people that live on the north side of town. Seems like it shouldn't be that big of a deal to get access there considering it made it all the way to the paper, it just sounds like it's not currently a priority.

 

[sycamore tuff]

I'm referring to promises made but not kept. In this case they said they were going to rebuild a bridge and leave the lay down area for kayak parking. I don't think you were in office yet. Is the bridge going to be replaced or is it not bad enough to need replaced?

 

[meistro]

I'm referring to promises made but not kept. In this case they said they were going to rebuild a bridge and leave the lay down area for kayak parking. I don't think you were in office yet. Is the bridge going to be replaced or is it not bad enough to need replaced?

I will check the status of the bridge tomorrow and let you know.

 

[Sycamorefan96]

wow! great conversation. While the waterway may be public property, the land on either side is not, unless the county owns that.

FWIW my little rant wasn't aimed at you in particular. It was aimed at county and city officials (past and present) in general. I honestly have no idea what your record is, what you support, or what you are responsible for. I just see what ultimately happens in this county and read what is supposed to happen. I honestly don't even vote on local elections most of the time, because it is very hard to find info on what the candidates support and what their records are, which is very frustrating to me as a voter.

 

[4Q_iu]

Elections have consequences.

I thought it was pronounced " Results " ?

 

[SycamoreStateofMind]

I thought it was pronounced " Results " ?

Yeah, that’s right too.

I could say a lot on this topic having lived here for 37 years… Having probably spent more time in some of these creeks fishing for small mouth than anyone ever spent on the water in their entire life. Having known Kearns personally for over 15 years.

But it’s a waste of time honestly. So I will pass! Someone else’s problem. I have enough things to deal with.

 

[4Q_iu]

Yeah, that’s right too.

I could say a lot on this topic having lived here for 37 years… Having probably spent more time in some of these creeks fishing for small mouth than anyone ever spent on the water in their entire life. Having known Kearns personally for over 15 years.

But it’s a waste of time honestly. So I will pass! Someone else’s problem. I have enough things to deal with.

IMO - the takeaway is meistro's points:

1) "...not enough water in the creek to kayak - if that's the case, why would we want to put in an area to access it?"

2) "...And yes, there is a lot of opposition from property owners for having kayaking through private property."

3) "...While the waterway may be public property, the land on either side is not, unless the county owns that."

4) ...As far as the trails, they are on county owned or leased land."

Sounds like kayaking/canoeing/floating on otter creek, other Vigo waterways has the "opportunity" to become like so many of the Rails to Trails projects that cities, counties undertook without doing their due (legal) diligence

 

[SycamoreStateofMind]

IMO - the takeaway is meistro's points:

1) "...not enough water in the creek to kayak - if that's the case, why would we want to put in an area to access it?"

2) "...And yes, there is a lot of opposition from property owners for having kayaking through private property."

3) "...While the waterway may be public property, the land on either side is not, unless the county owns that."

4) ...As far as the trails, they are on county owned or leased land."

Sounds like kayaking/canoeing/floating on otter creek, other Vigo waterways has the "opportunity" to become like so many of the Rails to Trails projects that cities, counties undertook without doing their due (legal) diligence

Yes yes… The only difference between “rails to trails” and canoeing is that literally everyone can access trails and literally no one has a canoe. So when allocating resources and making decisions let us defiantly only take into consideration the 50 people that own floating vessels and not the 50k who actually can walk/run/ride/utilize a trail.

Signed,

Someone who spent more days on water this year than anyone on this forum. So bye.

 

[Sycamorefan96]

Yes yes… The only difference between “rails to trails” and canoeing is that literally everyone can access trails and literally no one has a canoe. So when allocating resources and making decisions let us defiantly only take into consideration the 50 people that own floating vessels and not the 50k who actually can walk/run/ride/utilize a trail.

Signed,

Someone who spent more days on water this year than anyone on this forum. So bye.

Really? I'm sure way more than 50 people own boats. I own 2 kayaks and a canoe. Kayaks are only like 200 bucks and they even sell them at Menards, where I bought both of mine, which is right down the road from Otter Creek.

No one is asking for anything fancy here. Like a wide gravel shoulder for a couple of vehicles to park on and a dirt trail down to the creek along the edge of the bridge would be plenty sufficient. I'm guessing you live on the south side, would never use OC, and therefore you just don't give an S. Well good for you.

 

[sycamore tuff]

I will check the status of the bridge tomorrow and let you know.

Thank you sir.

 

[SycamoreStateofMind]

Really? I'm sure way more than 50 people own boats. I own 2 kayaks and a canoe. Kayaks are only like 200 bucks and they even sell them at Menards, where I bought both of mine, which is right down the road from Otter Creek.

No one is asking for anything fancy here. Like a wide gravel shoulder for a couple of vehicles to park on and a dirt trail down to the creek along the edge of the bridge would be plenty sufficient. I'm guessing you live on the south side, would never use OC, and therefore you just don't give an S. Well good for you.

No I’d have liked to see them do it for the sake of people who do enjoy the great outdoors and using public water for recreation.

But I’m not so cynical to cry foul and corruption because it didn’t happen. That’s not stable behavior nor does it typically result in the outcome going in your favor. Had you just taken this offline and asked Meistro if anything could be done to get this reintroduced or anything you could do personally to help it become a reality I’m sure he would have been more than willing to entertain the idea. But you want to come on here and tell him that you’re “shocked he didn’t know the creeks were public land” and then cry foul. It’s an outrageous approach.

And you have such weird “guesses” and assumptions of things. Like totally bizarre profiles of people… I live on the south side therefore I don’t go to (or care about) Otter Creek . I will do you one better I’ve lived on the south side nearly my entire life and have never waded Honey Creek but have waded Otter Creek, Raccoon Creek, Walnut Creek and I have hunting property in Parke County on Rocky Fork Creek. So very incorrect assumption that because I live south therefore I don’t care.

Just take a better approach with people is all I ask. This conversation could have gone way different.

 

[BlueBleeder]

Really? I'm sure way more than 50 people own boats. I own 2 kayaks and a canoe. Kayaks are only like 200 bucks and they even sell them at Menards, where I bought both of mine, which is right down the road from Otter Creek.

I would love to have a put in/ take out location on Hasselburger. I am a big kayak fisherman and love stream/ river kayak fishing. Waded/ fished Otter Creek more times than I can count. Heck, I'd likely help get a coalition together to keep Otter Creek clear of debris/ log jams for kayakers and fisherman once we can establish determined float routes. Removing the dam will help make Otter Creek accessible to kayakers, which I will certainly appreciate. I own a few kayaks 96, started out with those cheaper ones, fell in love with kayak fishing, now I fish out of a $1,500 kayak and have a dual layered kayak trailer with rod lockers and storage. My wife might kill me, if she knew just how much money I have in kayak/fishing gear, haha!