As posted on several groups, Sailor's scouting report which sent to fs Mark Rey: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ April 15, 2007 Mr. Rey, Two weeks before Thanksgiving 2006, I was asked by Mr. J. Kline to travel 2000 miles from my home to visit/scout/review sites in three states which the U.S.FS are offering as potential encampment areas for the Rainbow Family of Living Light annual July 1-7th 2007 Gathering. Further, that this action was in accordance and agreement to an email sent by you to Mr. B. Adams, Oct. 30, 2006[1]. It was stated by Mr. Kline that by doing this scouting, a “spirit of co-operation” would be affirmed providing sufficient “evidence” of good intent on the Family’s behalf for you to “seriously consider appointing a resource or recreation forester as incident commander”[2]. I am sad to see that my efforts, and those of two good friends who joined me in this endeavor, were wasted; it appears, no “spirit of co-operation” has been established and another law enforcement officer has been appointed to oversee this year’s gathering. To be honest, when I met you briefly a few years ago at the library in the Haight area of San Francisco, I thought that perhaps you had gained some understanding of the problems that accelerate the economic costs to the U.S.FS in managing Rainbow Gatherings. That you had gained knowledge of how the current permit system being administrated, with no regard to “alternative manner”, and subsequent law enforcement actions act to inflate the budget beyond common reason and what you personally could do to reduce cost. Apparently I was wrong, so I offer to you two suggestions that may still work to reduce the 2007 management cost to the U.S.FS. First, help locate a site not on U.S.FS property by full filling a request (via interagency contact) initially made to Mr. G. Monk[3] for information and maps of “all publicly owned lands” available for recreation (inclusive of river and lake flood plain areas) on Army Corps of Engineer and Department of Interior Lands. Second, act on your proposal to “reserve some of these sites in advance”[4] and “work out details with our resource staff in an operating plan”[5]as it relates to McClellan Creek National Grasslands. A property, which by my understanding, is not “owned” by the U.S.FS but is “managed” by the U.S.FS. This site should contain all the elements required for a large scale encampment (Gathering site) if “in the spirit of co-operation”, the requests sent to Mr. N. Wagoner, Regional Forester, R-8 were/are honored. These requests, sent via email, fax and phone message last fall were: that about one-third of the dead wood from the cottonwoods being felled (due to minor fire damage) be left on the McClellan Creek National Grasslands site for gathering usage, and that Lake McClellan be allowed to fill to its maximum capacity this spring. Actual scouting for a useable site is scheduled to begin April 21, as agreed by consensus at the Thanksgiving Council, with a rendezvous of those interested in offering suggestions and traveling to check various areas meeting at Haley’s Ferry in the Sabine N.F. If “in the spirit of co-operation”, you decide to act upon the interdepartmental request for information on public lands available for recreation, especially Army Corps of Engineer Lands, please have this information directed to: <snip> The rest of this report is a critique of the six sites proposed by the U.S.FS that were scouted/reviewed, along with commentary regarding criteria used to select sites. Skim over the material if you desire and you’ve available time, but in reality, the rest is more appropriately directed towards the U.S.FS field personnel who might want to review/reassess their offered potential site list and perhaps take another look in their region/district based on the information included on site criteria. So please pass it along accordingly. Regards, Sailor ------------------------------------- [1] See appendix A [2] See appendix B [3] See appendix C [4] See appendix A [5] See appendix A ------------------------------------- U.S.FS SUGGESTED POTENTIAL SITE REVIEW--- ARKANSAS : CARTNEY ACCESS--- Using a DeLorme Gazetteer we located the single road access to the proposed site. From the state highway we dropped north toward the river on a one lane with occasional turnout, steeply declined, gravel road. We drove thru one creek which possibly would be dry in July. At the second creek with its three foot waterfall we turned around and left. Visit complete, the access not being able to support gathering traffic it was senseless to venture further. We did, at the Uof T map room in Austin look at the topo of the area and it did not appear that there was much more than a small crescent shaped open beach area at the end of the access road. Also, the White River at this point is broad flowing and deceptively dangerous. PINEY CREEK--- We parked at the U.S.F.S. campground across the paved road from the proposed site and walked in. A confluence of steep ridges formed a narrow bottom in which Piney Creek flowed. The “open” area was small and contained dense clusters of blackberry bushes. After estimating the amount of “campable” space which would be lost by even a minimal set back, we determined there simply wasn’t enough land available with acceptable slope range for camping. Other disqualifying factors were: The steep winding state road that would present a dangerous traffic situation if it had to be employed at any point for a parking/shuttle situation. Also we found no active springs either within the proposed site or at elevations above it. ROCK CREEK LAKE--- This is the only proposed site being considered for a second look in the spring. It contains almost all required elements, missing only adequate “open” area. However due to time constraints we did not track to source the in flowing water courses to validate spring heads. Nor did we check for private property or environmental, cultural or historical issues. The three of us who checked this site agreed that a short description of one possible usage scenario should be included in this report[6] to, hopefully, serve as a suggestive example/guide to any district or regional forest service employee who might be charged with reading this report, reassessing site possibilities, and/or compiling a new “potential site list”. The approach to the lake is from Alpin via road 207. The site is located between two east/west gravel roads. The northern most road is a county road which runs from state route 9 to state route 7. The southern most road is forest road 858 that runs approx. 3 miles and dead ends with an adequate turn around. The lake is located between these two roads being slightly closer to the county road. Between fs858 and the lake(approx. 1 to 2 miles) there are two sets of ridges running parallel to the road broken by two sets of in- flow feeder creeks that supply the lake. A majority of the camping and kitchens would probably be developed on the rolling bottoms and glade benches of these ridges. The southern forest service road could also act as a supply and large kitchen drop off access point. Possible spring heads would be scouted for development and filtration, as well as the source of the creek coming off Link Mountain to the south. If no spring source can be found in April/May that was known locally to still be active in July, the site would not be viable. Filtering lake water that campers would swim in is not an acceptable option. We did see one small spring along the lake access road toward the north eastern end of the lake; however it looked doubtful that it would still be active in July. Meaning no disrespect to whomever wrote the U.S.F.S. evaluation of this potential site, available parking is one of its best features. From the lake access road, the county road running eastward is two and a half lanes wide with shoulders broad enough to park a vehicle such that all four wheels would be off the gravel. As the parking moved farther east a shuttle system would need to be employed to transport people and gear to the lake entry road, re-designated as an entry trailhead, closed to vehicles to avoid dangerous conditions for foot traffic. There is a second entry road to the potential site off the county road that dead ends at the lake’s spillway. It sits in a small bottom with some open area and potentially could serve for a bus village/handicapped parking area. Again, the major drawback to this potential site, that which puts it in the “we can make it work if we have too’ category is the lack of open meadow area. There is a crescent shaped opening along the eastern edge of the lake that continues into an approx. 5 or 6 acre area. Reality is, if there are no alternatives and the water and other considerations check out OK, it wouldn’t set precedent; sites have been used in the past with very small to no open areas. TEXAS : Two potential sites were offered in Texas , the old 1988 site and a site in the Sabine NF at Haley’s Ferry. The Reservoir 1988--- We had no desire to return to the Sam Rayborn Reservoir for even one moment. We also felt it was an affront by the U.S.FS to even suggest the site, due to previous events there. The site didn’t work in 1988 and there was no reason to believe it had changed. Also, we felt a lot of family would have a difficult time using the site in view of its history. Personally, watching the flat bed semi’s with cages mounted on them come rolling out of the morning fog at the back door in preparation for mass arrests is something I’ll never forget, and hope to never see again. Additionally, assuming the U.S.FS monitors the family newsgroup and had recently read the post concerning NoGuns being at death’s doorstep in Santa Cruz , we considered it insulting and crude to suggest this site. HALEY’S FERRY--- Interesting from only one perspective, it was located in a U.S.FS district composed of only one person. This was a new one for us, it was the first time any of us had heard of a district that had only one person running the whole show. The site itself is actually a F.S. campground located on the end of a point sticking out into the Sabine Reservoir, complete with boat ramp and out houses.. The boat ramp would be a major problem as we felt we’d really have no right to deny access to its use. That would mean vehicle traffic driving down the center of the site, a potential dangerous situation. Also there was no open area to speak of and little parking. No potable water. Additionally, the site abutted private lands developed with both summer cottages and year round live-in homes. Friction between land owners and gatherers would be unavoidable. McCLELLAN CREEK NATIONAL GRASSLANDS[7]--- On our way west, after Thanksgiving council in Austin , Texas , three of us decided to check a few areas that showed some potential while doing map review at the Uof T map room. We found this site to contain all priorities necessary for a successful gathering and have suggested to the U.S.F.S. that it be included on the “reserve” list they desire to create. Further, we asked that two conditions “in a spirit of co-operation” be implemented. First, the current removal of damaged cottonwoods (due to a minor fire on the west end of the site) allow approx. one third of the dead wood left on site for gathering usage. Secondly that the lake be allowed to fill to a maximum this spring and pre-July summer, currently the lake covers approx. 9 acres of its potential 27 acre area. There seems to be little to no agriculture around this lake area, nor are there homes or ranches that this lake supplies water too, it appears the lake was created simply for the purpose of recreation. This potential site is located just off I-40 in the panhandle area of Texas ( Gray County ) and although it is not N.F. property, it is administrated by them for reasons unknown. There are no towns or areas of residency within 30 to 40 miles of this site. There is a store/gas station a few exits to the east, major supply would, probably be located in Amarillo , Texas . This site would certainly be different than any other site we’ve previously used for an annual gathering as it is actually an established (but little used, as its run down condition indicates) campground complete with camping sites, fireboxes, picnic tables, piped well water and one electrical drop box area. There is also a boat ramp that fails to reach the lake by about 200 yards due to the low water level. The site contains adequate parking on several off shoot roads and excellent handicap access as well a separate area below the spillway for a bus village compound. Open area is available on the western end of the lake (actually part of the original lakebed). Adequate shade is available from existing cottonwoods as well as from some man made structures. There are out houses on the site that could be used if agreement to service them could be arranged with either the U.S.F.S. or the local contractor they use. There doesn’t appear to be any habitat issues involved but that remains to be checked as well as historical and cultural (American Indian) issues. Overall, this appears to be an excellent potential site as deserves a second look this spring. A map of the area is included as appendix E. OKLAHOMA Two sites offered: Red Slough and Panther Creek. Not sure if the recommendation of these sites simply represents a particular type of humor akin to Oklahoma or if they were in fact serious considerations in the minds of those who suggested them. Either way they were both a waste of time and money to scout. RED SLOUGH--- Red Slough turned out to be one square mile of U.S.FS property in the middle of a multimillion dollar State of Oklahoma rehabilitation project. The site itself was nothing more than an open square shaped field with a thin line of trees along the edges. No water for either bathing or consumption. Access was via a trail across the Red Slough Project. Parking would only be available along the major gravel road servicing the project as well. Did I mention the alligators? PANTHER CREEK--- Panther Creek offered no parking, no potable water, and no open areas. Access is via a logged off ridge road that fractures into many dead end roads built at the time the area was initially logged. The main gravel road drops down to Little River where camping would be available for perhaps 1,000 folks if they camped adjacent to each other, the rest of the proposed site was too steep in general, offering camping for possibly another 1,000 across the entire drainage area of Panther Creek. Parking, at best would be about six to eight miles south on Highway 259. --------------------------------------------- [6] See appendix D [7] See appendix E ------------------------------------------------------------------- Site Criteria and Other Suggestions “In the spirit of co-operation” I, as an individual who volunteers on occasions to look for large scale encampment sites for Rainbow Gatherings, have chosen to pass along the following general criteria hoping that future site suggestions by the U.S.FS will not be so wasteful of time and money to review. Each year different areas of the country are chosen for gatherings, this, in itself, often dictates some of the parameters for sites. For example, a western area generally means high elevation will be required to find a spring not “owned” or developed and in use for summer grazing. For an eastern site, this, again generally, is not a concern, but finding areas of national forest without intrusive private property becomes an issue. This year a southern area was chosen, so the “ideal” site needs to include a body of water large enough for campers to immerse in as heat will be a factor of consideration. Criteria List: Road If there is no “Gathering grade” road to within a few miles of the site, it isn’t a site. A gathering grade road is one and a half to two lanes wide, capable of supporting large RV type vehicles safely. The road surface is immaterial, paved or gravel, even dirt is fine as long as it can support two-way traffic into a parking area. From a parking area to the actual trailhead, a one lane road is OK in conjunction with a “shuttle” system. Shuttle systems are wasteful and to be avoided if possible, a site needs to meet most all other requirements to merit this transportation nightmare. Potential sites with roads through them are not viable unless the U.S.FS is willing to work with gatherers and determine if an area closure or specific road closure is required for safety or environmental protection. Parking There is no such thing as a parking lot in the woods; therefore a creative solution is always required for dealing with four to six thousand vehicles. “Ideally” a large open clear cut or non-fragile (cattle graze) meadow is fine. Roadside parking is the least desirable solution, but unfortunately most often the case. Any road, federal, state or county, if it allows for all four wheels to be off the road is often used. Logistics Experience has shown that the best case scenario for gatherings is one where individuals arrive, park, walk-in and don’t leave the site until final departure. A site far from private property and towns is “ideal”. Also from the parking lot or trail head a one to five mile “walk in” to the actual camping area is preferred. Water Springs emanating from elevations above the use area are the “ideal”. This allows for a gravity distribution and filtration system to be employed. Creeks, rivers and lakes can be used as a potable source but tends to create more difficult distribution and filtration. Also any private claims to water sources need be addressed before a site is chosen for use. Open areas and Slope “Ideally” a site should encompass at a minimum one large area of meadow or clear cut for use in ceremony and feeding purposes. Also any site that contains slope of 20% or more over the whole area is not conducive for tent style camping. Down Dead Wood No live wood is used at Rainbow Gatherings so a fairly large (10 cords?) amount of wood is required in normal situations. Gatherings, due to fire bans, are increasingly shifting toward propane so this criterion should be considered as minimal. Percolation Slit trenches, as defined by the US Army Large Scale Maneuver Encampment Guide, are used at Gatherings, so the composition of subsoil is important, and areas that do not percolate need to be identified. Flora and Fauna Sites containing large areas of endangered flora or fauna are not to be considered. If such sites have a limited area of habitat that can be flagged off to prevent degradation, it needs to be done before anyone moves into the area. Additionally, any historical monuments need to be identified and labeled as such. Land Claims Any sites with prior claims such as areas of private property or American Indian issues need to be noted so that a use decision can be made by campers on an individual basis.
<more> Other Suggestions to U.S.FS employees responsible for finding potential sites; * * a. If the roads in the potential site area are actually marked using county routes, please use them when writing directions to the site. * * b. Actual mileage between turn-offs is a good thing. * * c. Please do not list as U.S.FS contacts LEO’s or Public Relocation Officers. If a person scouting actually calls a district or regional office, it is most likely for directions to a potential site, or to question land ownership, or an environmental issue – none of which a LEO or PR person can answer. * * d. Please avoid asking anyone to check or review potential sites in the middle of hunting season. * * e. If at all possible, provide a contact that can be reached on a weekend as many who look for sites work during the week. * * In Summation; * * Rarely are all “ideal” criteria met. Most often a choice of compromises between least undesirables is made. There is however some criteria that automatically eliminate any suggested area. These are: * * No usable road to site. * * No water on site. * * No “safe” parking within 10 miles. * * Too much private property within proposed area. * * Cultural or habitat issues that cannot be resolved. * * I hope this list of criteria and suggestions are a useful reference for future USFS employees charged with searching their districts for potential large scale encampment areas. * * Regards, Sailor
that was very interesting to read all the different considerations and descriptions of places you guys have looked at. There are some big festivals here and I remember some of the considerations that had to go into choosing where and when to hld events so it is fascinating to read about it in other places. Thanks.
tu, some very interesting reading. im interested in this supposed "alternative site list" the usfs wants? so it seems from this that the only feasible site seems 2 b rock creek lake in arkansas. the only major drawback being it's light on meadow space. i remember the 96 national in missouri near there we had a really small main meadow as well. tu for scouting. its gotta b an incredible amount of time, money, research, and sweat.
Thanks to those who do this part,,, just wanted to say, howdy,, makin preparations from this end,,, am so excited,,, lovin to all!
Thanks, brother. I have been more excited about following the progress this year than last year. I'm still hoping for Arkansas even though the spots pose dangerous terrian. Everyone just needs to come prepared (proper foot wear, etc.). I don't know if I want to go to TX. Not just because of the 1988 history, but because it's going to be crazy hot. Atleast in Arkansas there will be a cool mountain breeze. Again, thanks for doing your part!