Your thoughts on Motors in the BWCA

[thedeadsea]

Someone had mentioned in the post about Basswood that people are still trying to get rid of the 25 hp limit (not a good idea IMHO), which got me thinking. Not trying to get anyone going here, just wondering your opinions.

What are your thoughts on the current motor situation in the BWCA?

Personally I feel they should be more relaxed. Why can't we have the border lakes from Sag-La Croix allow motors (even a 10 hp limit). Keep all the inland lakes as they are. If you dont want motors, you are just a portage away from quietness. As far as snowmobiles, I would love to ride in the BWCA, but alot of riders now a days are really careless so I wouldnt feel too bad it that was left alone.

Steve

[Tom Linderholm]

Personally and I know it's just my opinion, I would expand into the border lakes on "no motors" the only reason they are the way they are is so that the outfitters can get people out into the smaller lakes. The whole reason I go in there and I'm sure I'm not the only one is for the experience, solitude, a challenging entry & exit testing each individual, and above all the lack of people. The more you open it up the more people you will see in there, bringing more gear and carelessness about our natural resources, not to mention the noise and air pollution from the exhaust of boats and snowmachines and the pressures felt by the semi-self sustaining fisheries. There are plenty of places to go with these "machines" without expanding into a one of a kind Boreal Forest....and if you've ever truly gotten in deep and felt what I am talking about then I am sure you can understand. Like I said it's just my opinion so take it for what it's worth.
Tom

[Leaky]

I personally don't want to see anything changed. The big water surrounding the BDub should be open to 25 horse, the interior shouldn't.

Let's leave things as was spelled out in the 78 compromise. If I could change anything, it would be to start non-motorized zones at the end of portages rather than some invisible line out in the middle of the lake.

But you're right, there are groups, as we speak, that are looking to further reduce and elimate all motorized access. With a million acres to roam and Quetico right next door, if a person wants solitude and to not see anyone else, they only have to go far enough in.

------------------
IBOT #129, B-Dub Chapter. (Or is it Metro Chapter? - I'm so confused)

[ewirz]

I agree with Cheffery.
The whole point of a Wilderness is not to exploit it like the rest of natural resources in this country. The point is to experience nature in its pure form; untouched, unmanipulated, un-harassesd by humans. Anyone ever read "The Singing Wilderness" by Sigurd Olson? If you have, you know what I'm getting at.
As soon as you start lifting limits, every yahoo will be tearing around, bringing as much as possible with them (which means garbage). Look at the ATV situation in the state. The responsible ones use them for work and pleasure, within reason. The *****s tear around swamps, destroying an ecosystem that takes decades or longer to rebuild.(Two guys from Deer River last year for example)

Sorry for ranting...
The point of preserving wilderness is to experience it, not to exploit it.

[Surface Tension]

here we go again.
Leave the 78 compromise,(if you want to call it that) as is.
Theres something like 80 or 90 entry points and less then 10 allow motors. Pick one that meets your wilderness experience standards and have fun.

[Dr. Bob]

Ya you got it Frank, "Here we go again".

I say leave it the way it is too. Those lakes that allow motors are to big for canoes anyway! The last time we were on Basswood, the USFS told us that 2 canoes had swamped the day we were coming in. It was very windy and stayed that way for the whole week. I saw folks in canoes out in that blow who had no buisness out there! These are people who have probably never been in a canoe in there life, out trying to cross big water that can be hairy at times with a 16 foot motorized boat.

BTW - We brought lots of gear and "garbage" with us. We also packet it out and left the lake in better shape than we found it.

I am headed to Basswood again in 2 hours and 15 minutes. Yahoo.

.

[Northlander]

Bob I hope your weather holds out. Have a blast the eyes are starting to move and are hungry from what Ive been hearing. Dont foreget the leeches!

[Animal]

There will always be the debate between the two prevailing opinions of motor vs. non-motor pulling each other in opposite directions. We have seen that occur in recent years when they closed the Trout, Four Mile and Prairie truck portages, only to reopen two of them a few years later. It seems to me that there is a good balance right now with the way the B-dub is being managed. However, I am sure that someone will eventually try to tip the balance again as many groups have over the last 50 years.

Personally, I would like to see the B-Dub expanded because when the land is gone...It is gone. We need to be thinking about those who will follow 100 years from now. How an expansion would occur would, I’m sure, would be very controversial.

If anyone wants to read a good short history of the B-dub and the controversy and debate that has occurred over the years read Jackpine Bob's, Root Beer Lady, the story of Dorothy Molter.

[This message has been edited by Animal (edited 07-02-2004).]

[WCT]

Just thought I'd put my two cents worth in. I favor leaving the motorized zones and mechanical portages as is. As to the expansion of the B-Dub, I don't think that is needed but I would favor some restriction/moritorium(sp?) on lakeshore development. The idea that everyone can have a "place at the lake", over time destroys the very reason people like being at the lake. Let's stop it now while there is still some undeveloped shoreline left. Here ends my rant for the day.
Ol'Sneller

[Dr. Bob]

Thanks Nort .

I just picked up a fresh pound of creatures this morning.

[1DIRTBALL]

Personally, I think the BWCA should be left as it is except for one change I would like to see. I will admit it is purely for selfish reasons. I've been going to the BWCA since I was age 20 and I'm now age 66. Fell in love with it right away and always left it cleaner than I found it. Since reaching my advanced age, I've developed a bad case of tennis elbow.(tendonitis) No longer can I paddle a canoe all day or make those long portages. Would like to see some kind of system put in place where a somewhat handicapped person like myself(anybody got cheese to go with my whine) could get a permit to use an electric trolling motor. They make less noise than 2 people paddling a canoe. Finally got that off my chest. Just my opinion for what it's worth and in light of the fact that the 4th of July is almost here, Isn't it great to live in a country where all of us have the RIGHT to have one?

------------------
YOU CAN'T BS AN OLD BS'ER!

[thedeadsea]

1dirtball,

Good points.

I wrote a letter to the editor a few years back when the portages were initially closed, which prevented my dad, grandpa, (now both gone) and myself from taking trips to Basswood and Trout. Laws that protect the beauty of the BWCAW I am in favor of. Laws that exclude all but the physically fit are not fair.

Dr. Bob brings up an interesting point "Those lakes that allow motors are to big for canoes anyway!" Why then is only part of Basswood open? Lac La Croix is bigger than Basswood and motors are only allowed on a very small part. Saganaga(partly no motor) is no puddle either. Knife Lake is long and straight and turns into a wind tunnel with even a modest breeze. (Anybody paddle the entire stretch of Knife against the wind in 18 inch rollers? I have several times.) Thats why I suggested the international border lakes open to small motors, these are mostly big water lakes that can turn hairy with a little wind.

Obviously everyone is not going to agree on something like this. I asked the question because I was looking for your opinions. By surface tension and Dr. Bob's comments I will assume this subject has been mulled over in this forum before.

Anyway I am off to the BWCAW this afternoon. I will be motoring where I can and paddling from there on. Hope everyone has a safe 4th weekend.

Steve

[scifisher]

I would like to see the Motor Issue remain true to the language of the 78 compromise. I would also like to see the motorized portages rein*****d.

I took my 78 year old grandfather into Basswood early this summer for some walleye action and we really had a great time.

The trip wouldn't have been possible unless there were some options to help us get about easier.

[SledNeck_X]

Electric motors should be legal in every bwca lake. No noise no pollution,so whats the big deal?

[Redlantern]

While I like the idea of the BWCA being larger and including less (or no) motors, I say leave it be. This battle has gone on long enough.

------------------
Erik Torgerson

[BDub]

Good question, but this has been discussed many times.

I agree with Leaky. Other than making better sense of the split lakes (the imaginary lines must go. Restrictions should start at the first portage). Same for the restriction around U.S. Point. The only reason for that was to get at the locals.

Animal – It’s interesting that you bring up the Root Beer Lady book. This summer I started working at the Dorothy Molter Museum, telling her story to visitors. It’s been great.

WCT – your suggestion of less development brings up the possibility of another land classification – backcountry designation that would limit development but not restrict recreational uses or logging for timber management.

1DIRTBALL – The use of an electric trolling motor would be great. If a person wants to haul in that extra weight, why not.

Thedeadsea – “Why then is only part of Basswood open? Lac La Croix is bigger than Basswood and motors are only allowed on a very small part. Saganaga (partly no motor) is no puddle either. Knife Lake is long and straight and turns into a wind tunnel with even a modest breeze.”

Again, the restrictions on the lakes were drawn up by preservationists. Read Troubled Waters. They brag about how they deliberately screwed the locals with the insane split lake motor restrictions.

------------------
Conservationists with Common Sense - 'Preserving access to and multiple use of public lands and waters.'

[scifisher]

BDUB

Is Troubled Waters a locally published book? Who wrote it? I'm interesting in reading it.

sci

[upnorth]

I personally have not been in the BWCA since I was a kid. But there are plenty of remote/almost wilderness place that can be reached by motorboat, leave the BWCA alone and un-motorized. If you are too old or unfit to paddle find find a way for some else to do the work for you or find another place to find solitude.

You can't make exceptions to everthing to satisfy everyones wants. I don't go into the BWCA cause canoeing is not my bag, do I complain and try to make the rules fit me no. I love the outdoors and I am not lazy or even physically unfit, I love hiking, camping and MTN biking, just don't like canoes.

There should be these total un-motorized wilderness areas and they should be left that way, period.

[MT Net]

The BWCA is basically un-motorized, except for a handful of lakes.

The BWCA is working well as it is now, ever since the area became designated as the BWCA. Why fix what isn't broken? Obviously, there is a group of people unwilling to abide by the laws and compromise set forth in 1978. Stop whining and abide by the 1978 BWCA ACT that gave us what we now have to enjoy.

[scifisher]

Alot of people lost everything they had when the 78 act was implemented. I think that this constant shove for more cheapens that sacrifice.

[Animal]

BDUB

I bet you find your job quite interesting and fun. I've stopped by the cabins several times while in Ely, but never got to visit Dorothy or the cabins when they were out in the wilderness. I've always thought that displaying the cabins between the road and the gravel pit was a poor choice given the historical significance of Dorothy and symbolism of her cabins. It sure would have been nice to have them on an island out in Shagwak so people could paddle or boat out to them. This, I think, would have been a great tourist attraction.

[This message has been edited by Animal (edited 07-06-2004).]

[thedeadsea]

Scifisher wrote "Alot of people lost everything they had when the 78 act was implemented. I think that this constant shove for more cheapens that sacrifice."

Thats the most true thing I heard on this forum.

I find it funny that people are misled or cover up the bad things caused by the 78 "compromise"(you can call it that if you want) by saying that it saved the BWCAW from development.

The 78 and previous BWCA bans and restrictions basically told the few residents of the BWCA to eat "you-know-what" and leave. The only ones that held on were Benny Ambrose, who chased people off at gunpoint, and Dorothy, who had enough friends in high places to squeak past the regulations.

I still get a kick out of the word "compromise" when used for this matter.

Lets say we are going to restrict hunting in MN. We will "compromise" it, BWCA lake style. As of next year, the only counties you can legally hunt in are Washington, Olmsted, and St. Louis counties. Furthermore, you cannot posses guns while traveling between the "hunting" areas, nor can you possess game legally taken from those areas. Does that sound fair?

Now we will compromise on the highways in MN like the portages were in the BWCA (fortunately Prarie and Trout were reversed). As of next year, you can legally possess and drive cars on both sides of the Mississippi river. It will now be illegal to cross the Mississippi River by car, but you can push your car by man power across any bridge in the state. Sound fair?

Steve

[This message has been edited by thedeadsea (edited 07-06-2004).]

[Jackpine Rob]

Sci -
The book you are asking about was written by Kevin Proescholdt, Myron Heinselman and Rip Rapson - all staunch anti-motor folks. Proescholdt was the head of one of the extremist groups (Fiends of the BW) - Heinselman was a long-time prof at the U of M.
I'm sure you can find it with an internet search.

[ewirz]

Most of you responding just don't get it. Then again, most of you don't work for the agency that regulates the BWCA either. You also don't understand a thing about managing natural resources.
As soon as you loosen the restrictions, the unique ecosystem that is the Superior/Quetico is gone. It is the only ecosystem like it in the world.
I love firing up the outboard to head my favorite fishing spot as much as the next guy, but as soon as loosen quotas and increase the number of engines, the ecosystem has changed. An ecosystem that requires decades to centuries to restore. Dorothy and Mr. Ambrose were only two people, not hundreds of thousands (which the BWCA gets in visitors every year).
It is designated WILDERNESS, by law.
Many people who visit the BWCA think of themselves as outdoors men/women. Most don't have any inclination of its connotation.

[Jackpine Rob]

ewirz -

We're having a nice and interesting discussion about the area, and I think you are making some unfounded assumptions about the education, experience and qualifications of some of the posters here simply because you disagree with the conclusions. I can guarantee you that the "understanding" you are lamenting is well-represented.

The BWCA is a rugged ecosystem - having been logged, burned, commercially fished, populated and depopulated, with cars, trucks, motors, airboats, airplanes, tugboats, trains, snowmobiles, chainsaws..... Somehow, after all of that, we still have something worth fighting over. You may wish to re-think some of your assumptions about the fragility of the ecosystem.

[Guest]

I would love to see them open up the same lakes that allow 25 horse motors to also allow snowmobiles. What a great trip for some ice fishing! Unless I'm mistaken, no motors are allowed in winter. This would also help the businesses in the area with more winter fishing going on.

[thedeadsea]

I dont really buy into the ecosystem part either. Being from the local area, I have strong beliefs about logging, but thats a whole separate arguement.

Here's a way for both sides to get some more of what they want:

Keep the permit restrictions the way they are, too many people in an area are much more prone to damage it than any outboard.

Keep the sleds out, they do the damage, not the outboards. Keep the planes out. Keep the big boats out, no need for more than 25 hp.

Keep the interior and small lakes no motor.

If you are worried about pollution from motors, only allow 4 strokes or electrics. Less/no emissions and little/no sound when compared to the two strokes of pre-78'. If someone is strong/foolish enough to lug a deep cycle across a portage let them!

How about the guys that got ticketed for riding mountain bikes across the ice in the spring a few years back. Reasoning: bikes are mechanized. Dont tell the officials that my fishing reel has more "mechanized" parts than most bikes.

For useless laws, how about this one: Sailboats are not allowed in the BWCAW. Boy that used to really be a problem, all those sailboats harrassing the canoists????? But you can legally put a sail and a rudder on a canoe.

Steve

[thedeadsea]

Ewirz wrote "Then again, most of you don't work for the agency that regulates the BWCA either. You also don't understand a thing about managing natural resources."

Unfortunately most of the big laws are passed by people who dont even know what a canoe is! How many senators/congressmen visit the BWCAW every year?
When the B-V bill went through congress why was the vote so overwhelming? Because of what they were presented with, the preservationists side!

What was Bruce Vento's bacground? He was a Jr High Science teacher before becoming a career politician. Not an expert on ecosystems or the BWCA by any means. Maybe he should have been worrying more about the crime, corruption, and pollution in his own backyard than trying to oust nice old ladies from their home on Knife Lake.

Did you know Vento voted against a law banning flag burning. What a patriot!

Now lets compare Voyageurs Ntl Park to BWCA. VNP has a lot more input from the local folks who actually spend time in the area. When some radical group tries something, it falls dead in its tracks. I dont hear anybody complaining over there!

Steve

[disco]

for a little more on this topic, ya might wanna check out the Outdoor Political Power forum at the bottom of the forum list on this sight..... lots of topics in there touch on or dwell on this for quite a few postings..... just might have to wade through some name callin to find the good stuff....

[Leaky]

ewirz - That was an interesting post. Do you work for the agency that regulates the Bdub? Would that be the Forest Service or the court system, cause after all the law suits over the years, that's were most of the regulation seems to have come from.

How insulting to suggest that most of us don't get it. Especially those of us who grew up and lived in Ely during the seventies when this was all taking place.

Less than 100 hundred years ago, this eco system was filled with motors, as Jackpine Rob stated, yet still hundreds of thousands still come to visit.

Far more people than Benny and Dorothy were displaced. My guess is that you either need to get a history lesson on the area, or just maybe you're the one not getting it.

No more motors, no more restrictions. Everything there is working just fine.