One of the reasons this forum is under used is censorship! Free the forum lets go back to the old one the current AWA one sucks! syotr tim

I'm unclear why this BWA business is not allowed to be discussed on the BWA forum.

I'm also unclear about how we, the BWA, might be expected to (help?) effectively manage the property, if it is such a hot topic issue that the people of the BWA don't want it discussed on our own forum.

I like the BWA as a social club, centered around boating with environmental leanings.

I don't want the BWA to be a heavily politically charged club, fighting over money and power.

I agree totally,
BWA discussions belong on BWA forums, currently AW policy remains such that Elkhorn Acres is managed by the EAMG, which includes representatives from the BWA, VIkings, Elkhorn paddlers, and the individuals who invested their private funds to purchase. The most recent forum postings are calling for only two representatives of each club and two reps. from the EAMG as I understand it. What about the voices of those who put up the money?

None of us would have this property if it wasn't for the efforts of the Ben's who organized the majority of the funding, or compromised with the minority organizers and yet some seem all to willing to limit or remove the representation of those who made it all possible. I disagree with that ideal strongly.

Leave the property management alone unless you can present a tangible issue threatening the welfare of paddler access, general public safety, environmental hazard, or neglect of the guidelines set forth by the AW.

Gmead

Here ya go, these are the AW guidelines for property management including Elkhorn Acres. Everyone in the BWA should read these and voice themselves on the BWA forum!


American Whitewater’s River Access Area Management Guidelines
Posted by: singleton (IP Logged)
Date: March 11, 2008 08:36AM


American Whitewater’s River Access Area Management Guidelines
March 2008

In our ever developing nation, rivers are becoming increasingly important recreational resources. Many communities have recognized this value by designating their rivers as water trails, blue ways, parks, or open space. Accessible rivers offer children and adults alike valuable contact with nature, and the relationship people form with rivers through recreation can lead to public support for river protection.

American Whitewater seeks to protect and enhance public access to our nations in a variety of ways. We advocate for public river access areas at every hydro dam we work on. We support state and federal agencies that work on river access issues. We weigh in on river and land management plans that consider river access. We educate paddlers and landowners on river access laws. We encourage responsible enjoyment of rivers that reduces potential conflicts. We collaborate with land owners and managers on management issues and actions. In rare cases, when no other viable solution exists, we will purchase or accept land and collaboratively manage it as a public river access area with the local paddling community.

American Whitewater Owns:
• Blackwater River property in Hendricks, WV (since 1997).
• Watauga River property in Johnson Co, TN (since 1998).
• Johns Creek property in VA (since 1999)
• Elkhorn River property in KY (since 2000)

American Whitewater Manages:
• Upper Yough River property Sang Run, MD for MD Department of The Environment at $0 per year (since 2001).

American Whitewater Manages & Leases:
• Big Sandy River property, WV from Power Company (since 1992)
• Gauley River Masons Branch property, WV from local landowner (since 1993?)

Site Management

American Whitewater’s mission is focused on river stewardship, and river access areas that we manage should reflect this ethic and be fully consistent with our mission. Specifically, the sites should be environmentally protective, safe and enjoyable to visit, respectful of neighbors, and supported by the paddling community that uses the site. To accomplish these goals we have the following management guidelines for the sites we manage:

Environmental Considerations:

• Sites should be maintained in a manner that severely restricts erosion.
• Sites should be landscaped with non-invasive species.
• Sites should maintain or restore a native riparian vegetation buffer.
• High use sites may require portable toilets to avoid human waste problems.
• Vehicular traffic should be confined to acceptable areas.

Visitor Experience Considerations:

• Camping is prohibited at sites unless arrangements are made with AW.
• Commercial use is prohibited at sites unless arrangements are made with AW.
• Events are prohibited at sites unless arrangements are made with AW.
• Sites should be kept free of litter.
• Areas of grass or gravel should be maintained.
• Vehicles should not be visible from the river if possible.
• Sites should include minimal development that could fall into disrepair.
• Pets need to be leashed and attended to.

Neighborhood Considerations:

• Sites should include changing facilities as needed.
• Sites should include signs listing rules of appropriate behavior.
• Sites should be maintained in aesthetic conditions.

Local Support Considerations:

• Paddlers are expected to coordinate and conduct site maintenance with AW.
• Paddlers are expected to alert AW of any breech of site rules.
• Paddlers are expected to act responsibly when at the site.
• Paddlers are expected to support the site through donations and AW membership.
• Paddlers are expected to keep the site free of litter through regular clean-ups.

American Whitewater is proud to be able to support stream access through site management and ownership when the need arises. Maintenance of our river access areas is made possible only through close and ongoing collaboration with our members and affiliate clubs.

For information on any of our river access areas, please contact Kevin Colburn at: Kevin@amwhitewater.org.

Gmead

uummm.....?

Post by Barry Quoted from the AW forum Elkhorn Arces Thread 3/18/2008

"Re: American Whitewater’s River Access Area Management Guidelines
Posted by: barry (IP Logged)
Date: March 18, 2008 02:08PM


George,
Thanks for bringing your Elkhorn comments to this forum - which, BTW is completely open to the public to read and post in.

The Elkhorn council is still in the formation stages. Nothing has been decided except that AW wants a new management entity for it's property.

The BWA has yet to determine anything including who might be it's representative(s). Things are still very much taking shape and there's (hopefully) going to be folks from the Vikings, the EP, the BB and the BWA all participating. That's a lot of folks potentially involved so it's going to take some time for everyone to reach a consensus and agree on how to go forward. Everyone involved is a volunteer (except for AW staff) and getting all these folks to agree will be a time consuming, imperfect and sometimes inefficient process.

I hope you will take time to understand the issues and then give things a chance to work before slamming the process so hard. FYI, under the existing management rules, unless you pay $500, are given or inherit one, you currently have no vote in any of the decisions for takeout that might be forwarded to AW for approval. This new council that AW is asking for intends to give you (and many others) a vote. Would you agree that this idea is a goal worth taking the time necessary to work towards?
barryg"

Response:
Barry,

1) The Elkhorn Council is only a proposal by AW not an entity.

2) in your post you mentioned the Elkhorn Paddlers, Vikings, BWA, and BB. Yet you failed to mention the EAMG, the group that represents those who provided the majority of the cash to purchase the property in the first place. Further, even Mark Singleton included that group in his march 10th discussion about the port a potty.

3) To the best of my knowledge and from reading his post that's the most of what was discussed. The formation of a new managment group or a name has yet to be determined. The meeting which the BWA fail to have representation at, and only held a conversation in private which was not approved by the Club.

4) The deligation of voting priviliges for the property management was divided among the people who put up the money to buy it, and what those individuals chose to do with their voting priviliges is their business. It is NOT the privilige of BWA officers to trample those individuals to acquire the management responsiblity without a damn good reason.

5) I've yet to heard a valid reason for changing the management of the property to better meet the guidelines set forth fy the AW. The property is and alsways has met the guideline provided with the exception of Unauthorized BWA club meetings on the property (a violation of AW Guidelines) and allowing the pets of BWA club members to run free on the said property prior to and during those meetings ( also a violation of AW guidelines)

6) Even the changes Mark is asking for are very similar to the existing property management plan. The only real change is having the interests of all parties represented by elected officers of each club.

7) The BWA, nor the Vikings, nor the EP, nor the BB, nor the EAMG have voted as bodies to support this idea. None of these bodies have authoriized any of their officers to even proceed with such a discusiion that was held on March 10.

8) it is becoming very apparent that the current officers involved in this manipulation of property management have failed to represent the wishes of the members of the BWA, or even ask fo ra vote on the issue. These officers have taken all efforts to do as they chose without the consent of the individuals they represent.

9) Based on the previous actions of the BWA and the current activities of the officers involved, I for one fial to see how any involvement by the BWA in the governance of the property can be beneficial for the improvement of following th guidelines of the AW on property management.

Gmead



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/18/2008 10:14PM by ezgpaddler.

I agree with the above. Plus, how are we going to present this to future potential donors? Here, please hand over some of your hard earned cash, we'll promise you that you can be a part of the managing group, and then we'll probably just yank it out from under you under the guise of a club having a problem with the "unfair system". The only reason AW is taking such a hard look at this in my understanding is that individuals made a huge fuss about EAMG without a previous club vote on the issue.

Can I just say that I am totally confused? Someone needs to publish a score card: Names on the left column, followed by apparent agenda, then hidden agenda. So, is it B6 and Brent have "apparent agenda" to increase representation for EA management, but the "hidden agenda" is to make it a subsidiary of "their" BWA? Call me dense, but I really don't follow this at all.

So, as a "bear of little brain", here are the only solid facts that I can discern:

1. EA is owned by AW. It was donated to AW, so they own it.
2. AW has clear policy for AW property.
3. AW wants to establish a workable management organization to fulfill that policy re EA.
4. EA is a takeout.

That's about all my brain can handle. So, this is my noncontribution.
Chris S

Chris Schardl

A simple starting point would be...

Money was solicited for the property with the idea that the property would be managed by an entity made up of the major donors. $500.00 would get you one vote within the management group with 4 votes maximum.

Then... once the property was purchased, a handful were not happy with that arrangement and have been fighting to dissolve the management group every since.

In various emails the last couple of years, Brent has said the Elkhorn Acres Management Group is:
a “fantasy”
a “sordid group”
an “illegal group“
an “imaginary group”
an “unwieldy and self important” group
a “pretend organization”
and that the “EAMG needs to go. If it does not, I will continue to be a bumblebee in the bonnet.”

Do you remember him saying anything like that at the election meeting? He was asked specifically about this issue at the election meeting. Was he upfront and honest about it?

There has been a concerted effort to dissolve the EAMG and it's well on it's way to fruition.

The people who made this property a reality are our friends and mentors.

This effort to dissolve EAMG seems a bit like kicking Santa in the nuts.

I was just threatened with sensorship on this forum for my posts regarding this issue. I particular the post regarding the nine points I addressed. I personally resent the hell out of that idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gmead