# Important Griggs & OSR Announcment



## Phil Carver (Apr 5, 2004)

FYI - I recieved an email from a friend stating : 

Rob Tickle from the Columbus Permits Department called me this evening. They are having a meeting at Whetstone Park on Wednesday, August 29 at 6:00 p.m. to have an open forum on wakeboarders at Griggs and O'Shaughnessy. The meeting is open to anyone who wishes to voice their opinion on wakeboarders. In talking to Rob, I found out that the residents along Griggs also despise the wakeboarders because of dock damage, so it should be a pretty interesting meeting. 

Rob wanted to try to get as many fishermen there as possible to voice their opinions on the subject, so I'm passing this meeting notice on to you. Please do what you can to get this notice out to all Region 1 clubs. Hopefully we can get the support needed to ban wakeboarders on the river.


----------



## mmmcarl (Aug 13, 2007)

Ban wakeboarders?
If anything they should limit the amount of boats aloud on griggs or any of the resoviors. What about skiers? or knee boarders? skurfers? griggs and O'Shaughnessy are probably the best public waters in the columbus area to wakeboard. I do like to fish but i wakeboard aswell and if it wasnt for the calm water of griggs and O'Shaughnessy there would barely be and good water in central ohio and i know there are better places to fish then griggs but not many better places to wakeboard
Spending time wakeboard at griggs and O'Shaughnessy i know that there are some boneheads out there who wakeboard, they think they own the water, personally i believe that these few people are what is making people angry, a select few not all. 
How would you feel if someone kicked you out of your best fishing hole becuase " you were doing damage" 
I also know that in the past few years wakeboarding has grown here in columbus and it will be very hard to try and kick them out of griggs. 

Do fisherman really have that big of problems with wakeboarders? i would like to here ogf members opinions


----------



## Phil Carver (Apr 5, 2004)

Hello mmmcarl . Welcome to OGF  You see it how alot of people will . I agree to the fact that there are way to many boats in general on Griggs sometimes . The biggest problem is tha fact that peoples property is getting destroyed from the wakes put off from this group of boaters . Property owners are constanly having to replace their docks as well as sea walls due to this problem . The river is just to narrow for the wakes to calm down before reaching the shore line . 90&#37; of the time it seems that people are wakeboarding within 50-70' from the shore . I will have to admit that I personally do not wakeboard but I do not discriminate those who do either . I understand why people like to Wakeboard at Griggs as well but what is wrong with the larger lakes in the area such as Alum Creek or Delaware . You hardly ever see anyone wakeboarding at these places . 

This year has been to worst as far as boat traffic is concerned on Griggs . One evening while I was there I counted 41 different boats between the bridges either sking or wakeboarding . Everyone was just following close to each other going up and down the river . I see potential dangers there as well due to the fact that many of the people opperating the boats will not be able to hear their spotter due to their sound systems .  

I believe there is a way to make most people happy witout banning any type of activity from these bodies of water but some changes need to be made soon .


----------



## StuckAtHome (Apr 29, 2004)

I don't have a cure for this, but when I owned a little alum. bass boat, I tried fishing griggs, and after one trip never went back because its too narrow to disperse traffic and waves, and too many times I had the trolling motor down, within 20 feet of shore and some fool wake boarding or skiing would pass within 30 feet of me or closer, making me dive to the bottom of the boat to avoid getting thrown. Alum is the worst of all, I never went south of 36/37. Whats the fix? Griggs is different because of its layout, if you ban wake boarders, I would think you would have to ban skiers too, or just have an area(I think they do already) for them, I think thats fair. Got to be careful also, next they will want to ban bass boats and fishermen who throw lures at their docks, I know I can't cast too well,lol.


----------



## dKilla (May 1, 2007)

Wakeboard boats are specifically designed to create the largest wake possible...with so many of these boats on such a small body of water the wave action becomes non-stop. This causes damage to docks, bulkheads and excess erosion from the banks....it also makes it nearly impossible to fish during the busier times. I don't know that they should be banned but perhaps restricted to operating during specific hours or limit the total number of boats allowed on such a small body of water at the same time.


----------



## Bassnpro1 (Apr 6, 2004)

They have to limit the number of boats. That body of water is too narrow to have that many boats running. I am surprised that I haven't heard of any accidents since these boats just follow one another. Even considerant wakeboarders and skiers are a problem since there is simply nowhere to get away from everybody.

As far as fishing, it can be like Erie. At times my trolling motor is coming out of the water and waves are coming over and into my boat. I have no idea how to make everyone happy though.


----------



## mmmcarl (Aug 13, 2007)

thank you for welcoming me to ogf i have only been a member for a few days and everyone has answered my threads and has been a great help already. i aggree that ther eis a huge problem at griggs just a few years ago there were half as many boats and lots of room on griggs and oshaunassy to wakeboard and ski freely. no that there is so much traffic i agree that somthing needs to be done. 

The reason wakeboarders dont ski at bigger lakes like alum or buck or deer is becuase the water quality is horrible. just like in fishing water conditions affect the way you catch fish. In wakeboarding the calmer the water the beter it is to wakeboard. griggs and oshaunassy most of the time are the calmest water around. And yes it is very dangerous to wakeboard when there is so much traffic. i have wakeboarded there and had boats follow us from bridge to bridge if you fall it doesnt give the boat following a lot of time to react.

AS for the damage i know many of the boats that wakeboard live on the water i see numerous boats docked at private lots every time i go to griggs. Also with the water being so low i am suprised people are getting so close to shore.
I dont know what the answer is but i definatly think it is not far to ban wakeboarding or skiing all together.


----------



## XRacer (Feb 12, 2007)

The biggest problem I see in banning someone from any body of water due to damage from wakes you would have to limit the size of the boats and the horsepower they can have or make the entire area a no wake zone. It would not be fair to say no wakeboarding because they have (can have and usually do have) the largest wakes because boat pulling a skier can produce a large wake just like a bass boat can produce a large wake. That being said I have been buzzed plenty of times at Griggs by the wakeboarders and skiers. I dont enjoy it and sometimes grumble under my breath but I have also be nearly run over by other guys in fishing boats too. I dont want to lose Griggs as a place I can boat since it is the closest to my house and if the wakeboarders have to go its only fair I should be banned to since my boat makes a wake and there are times I actually enjoy just running up that glassy water at Griggs wide open playing with the trim and the tabs seeing how fast I can go. 
Fair is fair if the problem is wakes then Griggs should be a 9.9 no wake zone Lake which doesnt sound like fun to me. Brian


----------



## GPtimes2 (May 14, 2006)

If they ever build those manmade lakes (earthen?) up north (Deleware erea) that they have talked about over the last 10 or 15 years , for water supply, they could thin them out a little. They would be good for water sports (encourageing them) and not so good for fishermen (no structure = discouraging). I think about ten 5000 acre ones should do it!


----------



## Danshady (Dec 14, 2006)

all the lakes in columbus are too heavily populated with boaters, not just griggs, although i found it interesting because i didnt know that those boats caused more wake. i myself only take my jon out to alum, delaware, oshay, or griggs early in the am or at night, to avoid all waves from all the boats on all these lakes! quick fix, fish early!


----------



## StuckAtHome (Apr 29, 2004)

The upland water supply "ponds" you are referring to for Columbus water, will not allow ANY boats, or fishing on them, they will have liners to prevent leaks and anything bad getting in. It would have been nice if there was a way to allow it, but there is not.


----------



## 10bender24 (Nov 8, 2005)

Quote from mmmcarl
The reason wakeboarders dont ski at bigger lakes like alum or buck or deer is becuase the water quality is horrible. just like in fishing water conditions affect the way you catch fish. In wakeboarding the calmer the water the beter it is to wakeboard. griggs and oshaunassy most of the time are the calmest water around.

You avoid larger lakes because the water is too choppy/rough,so you go to a calm body of water generate a 2' wake,with total disrespect to home owners property,the bank erosion and the safety of other boaters for yourself gratification.If you went to the larger lakes that already had the 2' wake for you it would be better wakeboard conditions.Try lake Erie for some ''wake'' I hear they got some good wake up there,dude think of all that air you could grab up there.

Griggs and O'Shay are no place for out of control conditions such as tubing,jetski's and wakeboarding.They are way to small and narrow (less than 1000 acres).And I do agree they are both way over crowded and the speed limit should be reduced and strictly enforced!!


----------



## StuckAtHome (Apr 29, 2004)

I was thinking the same thing, you go there to get calmer water, what about the fishermen and other boaters looking for the same? I don't know a fair settlement but only way to protect from large wakes is either a no wake zone or a HP restriction or electric motors only. But if you look at the majority of people using the water they have motors bigger than 10HP and a ban would clear most of the people out who use it now, tough call. Make it a KAYAK ZONE!!!!!!
Mike


----------



## Orlando (Apr 12, 2004)

Make it idle speed only no HP restriction


----------



## Timmypage16 (Jul 12, 2005)

I would have to say dont live on the water if you are worried about erosion or dont put a dont put a dock in if you dont want the wake to hurt them. I mean who are we to say they cant use it and we all are. That is the problem with everything anymore. Someone doesnt like something so they ruin it for everyone. Quit whinning and let them people have fun. Shoot we cant smoke anymore in bars, and soon stip clubs wont be worth going to because a few people decided they didnt like them so now no one can.


----------



## Orlando (Apr 12, 2004)

Timmypage16, you as a boater are responsible for any damage done to docks etc from your wake. They outlawed jetskis there, I suppose because it was to crowded and unsafe?


----------



## Timmypage16 (Jul 12, 2005)

Ya but my point is that if i bought a piece of land behind a shooting range and built a house there i would expect my house to get shot, and everyone would laugh if i tried to shut down the shooting range. So if you live on the water you should expect damage done by wake to what ever is in or near the water. And by the way i am not a wake boarder i am a fisherman that has no feeling for wake boarding. It just really bothers me when people think that what they want/believe is more important then others rights.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Orlando said:


> Timmypage16, you as a boater are responsible for any damage done to docks etc from your wake.


Say what? That's the biggest line of horsepooey I've seen on here in a while.
I don't jet ski, wake board, water ski....I don't even own a motor larger than a 9.9. But I respect the fact that others also like to enjoy the water and sometimes in ways different that mine. 

If the home owners are in such a ruckess, maybe they should look inward. I'm on or around the Scioto almost every day, and the guys I see wake boarding there also LIVE on the river and have their own dock.

If they REALLY want to reduce the wake then its quite easy...make it a no wake zone. Simple as that.

Now you guys go tell all those people who spent over 1 million $$ to live on the Scioto and another 50K on their dock, and another 50K on their boat...that they'll not be able to use their boats anymore.....aint gonna happen. Wy do you think there are docks on the Scioto to begin with? Probably because those people have boats. And if anyone really thinks that 10 boats all wake boarding is going to make significantly more wake than 10 boats water skiing, I suggest that you are kidding yourselves.

Just a bunch of rich dudes trying to keep everyone else out of their pool.
Quite honestly, I'm surprised to see they have so many supporters on here.


----------



## Skunked ...Again (Aug 11, 2007)

I can see both sides on this one but a ban on ski boats and wake-board boats seems harsh. I fish the shore at Griggs a lot and to tell ya the truth the fish respond to the wake washing in worms and insects I've noticed. They'll hit on the third wave usually; I think the wildlife is adapting and so should we. I personally have screamed every obscenity in the book at wake boarders that have been too close to shore and washed out my spot but but that's all part of the challenge of this G.D D...B city fishing.


----------



## dKilla (May 1, 2007)

Like I said....I think the easiest and best option for all involved would be hour restrictions. Most of the good fishing is from sunup til 9am and then from 7pm to dark during the summer. Most of the wakeboard/skiing is done during the heat of the day. I would gladly give 9am-6pm to the wakeboarders if I were guaranteed 2 good, watersport-free hours of fishing in the morning and 2 in the evening.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

How would restrictive hours help the people whose docks are supposedly being destroyed?


----------



## dKilla (May 1, 2007)

andyman said:


> How would restrictive hours help the people whose docks are supposedly being destroyed?


It wouldn't...but at least it would make it an enjoyable resource for all. 

Like numerous others have said...ALOT of those docks have ski/board boats on them. In that instance, the owners of the docks are part of the problem. In my mind the big issue here is between the weathly homeowners who have board boats vs. the ones who don't. They've each spent $1million+ to live on a lake house with a dock. Some of them are boaters and some are not....they each have a right to live a peaceful life without someone damaging their property....but then again, they each have the right buy their 19 year old kid a $60k wakeboard boat with a overpowered soundsystem and let them drive in circles around the lake with the radio blairing.


----------



## ShakeDown (Apr 5, 2004)

Andyman brings up a good point..a big portion of the wakeboarders are residents on the river...prolly 80&#37; of the homeowners have wakeboard/ski boats tied to their docks.

However, anymore there is a substantial difference in a traditional ski boat and wakeboard specific boats. A lot of the newer wakeboard boats have ballast tanks that guys fill to the brim for the sole purpose of throwing more wake...if you've seen guys wake surfing, you know what I mean. That wake is twice the size of anything a traditional fishing or ski boat throws.

It's a real tough sell if anyone thinks the majority of dock owners would support a wakeboard ban. I would think their voice is much louder than those of us who don't live on the river.


----------



## dKilla (May 1, 2007)

Correct on all counts.




ShakeDown said:


> Andyman brings up a good point..a big portion of the wakeboarders are residents on the river...prolly 80% of the homeowners have wakeboard/ski boats tied to their docks.
> 
> However, anymore there is a substantial difference in a traditional ski boat and wakeboard specific boats. A lot of the newer wakeboard boats have ballast tanks that guys fill to the brim for the sole purpose of throwing more wake...if you've seen guys wake surfing, you know what I mean. That wake is twice the size of anything a traditional fishing or ski boat throws.
> 
> It's a real tough sell if anyone thinks the majority of dock owners would support a wakeboard ban. I would think their voice is much louder than those of us who don't live on the river.


----------



## StuckAtHome (Apr 29, 2004)

Let me ask this question, Griggs is a public lake run by the city of Columbus, right? Do the landowners have more of a right to dictate rules on this public lake, or should the rules be for the good of all Columbus residents?


----------



## ShakeDown (Apr 5, 2004)

SAH...depends on if you're looking for fact or opinion.

The general tax paying residents of Columbus should have the same rights as landowners on the river, since it is a public waterway. Whether or not that is reality is probably another issue. Money usually speaks REAL loud, and the houses on that river are quite substaintial.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

StuckAtHome said:


> Let me ask this question, Griggs is a public lake run by the city of Columbus, right? Do the landowners have more of a right to dictate rules on this public lake, or should the rules be for the good of all Columbus residents?


I don't think the City of Columbus has a damn thing to do with Griggs resevoir. Most likely the ODNR Division of Watercraft, I believe.
Although enforcement can be carried out by any law officers within their territory jurisdictions.

Here's a WAY too lengthy document that MAY shed some light:
http://ordlink.com/cgi-bin/hilite.p...ITLE09/Chapter_921_WATERCRAFT_ON_RESE.html#66


----------



## Ultralight (Jun 8, 2005)

Columbus PD patrols those waters.

City of Columbus manages the dock permits, both public and private docks.

http://recparks.columbus.gov/rentals/docks.asp

So, yes, City of Columbus does have a damn thing to do with Griggs Reservoir. 





andyman said:


> I don't think the City of Columbus has a damn thing to do with Griggs resevoir. Most likely the ODNR Division of Watercraft, I believe.
> Although enforcement can be carried out by any law officers within their territory jurisdictions.
> 
> Here's a WAY too lengthy document that MAY shed some light:
> http://ordlink.com/cgi-bin/hilite.p...ITLE09/Chapter_921_WATERCRAFT_ON_RESE.html#66


----------



## Net (Apr 10, 2004)

andyman...ODNR manages the wildlife there (to a small degree) but that's pretty much it. Columbus manages the rest.

Good discussion. I hope an OGFer can attend the Wed meeting and report back here. IMO, an outright ban is unlikely. A compromise would be good.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

I stand corrected. 
I didn't think a municipality could "own" any portion of a navigatable waterway.
But I've since found out the since the "waterway" is dammed, its now considered a resevoir, hence it is indeed run by the City of Columbus.
This, taken from a document on Griggs, also initially confused me:
_Every law enforcement officer, within the area of his authority, may enforce the provisions of this chapter and Chapter 1547 of the Revised Code, and rules adopted by the Chief of the Division of Watercraft, and in the exercise thereof may stop and board any vessel subject to this chapter, or Chapter 1547 of the Revised Code and rules adopted under it. (Ord. 805-05 § 1 (part).)
_


As I think about it more....I say they just blow up all the dams and let her flow like she used to.
It would definately solve the wakeboarder problem.


----------



## StuckAtHome (Apr 29, 2004)

Griggs and Hoover are run by columbus. I had a run -in when I was 21, drinking, fishing, rafting in cold water, all the stupid things you could do, buddy almost died, columbus at the time didn't have a boat on hoover, my buddy had to wait, barely holding on for his life out there while they went and got a boat from griggs. Now I'm not blaming them, what we did was dumb, and it almost cost my buddy the ultimate price, but thats how I found out Columbus runs it, and if you remember ODNR or the state wanted to change Hoovers HP restriction a few years back, and the city held its ground if I remember right.


----------



## Phil Carver (Apr 5, 2004)

Update

Just wanted to let everyone know that I recieved a invitation letter asking me to attend the meeting . They said to invite everyone that would like to come . The meeting itself will not revolve 100% around the issue that this thread was started about . The meeting does revolve around waterway use and safty for the most part , but will open up to the opportunity for other topics that the public would like to address . 

With that last statement , I would like to ask any and all tournament anglers that can attend to please do so . As you are all probably aware of . This year the city has steeped up and and made notice that no money will be collected or distributed as well as no awards can be handed out on Griigs Res. , O'shaunessy Res. or Hoover Res. Being a tournament director myself , I I know just how difficult it is for anglers to pay an entery fee for an evening tournament by mail in advance . You never know if you will be able to make the event on time or if you have to work late that night ect . I will be there to address this issue and hope to get some support . I ask that if you want to try to get this issue turned around so that tournaments can opperate as needed at any of the Columbus Patroled waterways to please attend and support tournament anglers to please try to make it to the Whetstone Park Of Roses Shelter House on Wednesday August 29th at 6 pm .


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Phil,
Do you have any other fishing/environmental organizations attending? 
American Water Resources Association.....The Ohio Smallmouth Alliance....?

Would you like any other organizations to attend?


----------



## Phil Carver (Apr 5, 2004)

Hello andyman
I would welcome anyone that would like to attend . I am sure that anyome who has applied for a permit to host a special activity on any of the waters that Parks and Rec's work with has probably recieved a letter as well . I just hope to see some of them thee at the meeting . Thank you for asking .


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

I'll be there as an interested observer.
I don't really have a dog in this race, but it should be interesting to hear what is brought up. REALLY interesting.
I suppose my take is that there should either be no restrictions, or a complete HP restriction. 
Restricting just one type of watercraft or one specific activity probably wouldn't sit well with me.

But again, I'l quietly sit in the back and just observe.

PM on the way. I MAY have some good intel for you.


----------



## CARP 104 (Apr 19, 2004)

I can't count the number of times I have been out on griggs tight to the bank and these boats literally come within 25ft of me when the center of the river was wide open. If I wasn't quick to jump on the trolling motor a few times my aluminum boat would have some nice dents in it.

However, it is not fair to home/propertyowners along the riversystem to ban one of their leisure activities. I propose there needs to be certain restrictions/operating hours put in place, and a distance requirement that wakeboarders have to keep from any and all other types of boats.


----------



## Orlando (Apr 12, 2004)

CARP 104 , Iknow what you mean about them getting to close to shore. By las on Griggs and O'Shay it is no wake, idle speed within 100 ft from shore.


----------



## 10bender24 (Nov 8, 2005)

There will be several people from the OHIO BASS FEDERATION at the meeting.

Also,I heard from another tournament director of a very large organization that all bass tournaments will be limited to 15 boats next year.Have you heard this Phil.

Between the 15 boat limit and no money at the ramp,sounds like they have started to ban bass fishing at Griggs.


----------



## GarryS (Apr 5, 2004)

How did the meeting go? I couldn't make it.


----------



## Phil Carver (Apr 5, 2004)

Meeting is next week Gary . I have found that for all the concerns that the tournament directors have , that it will be better to schedule a seperate meeting . I still want something to be done about the issue at hand though . Even if it is for the city to patrol better and make some effort to keep all of us under control and abide by the rules down there .


----------



## GarryS (Apr 5, 2004)

Ooops..... I was thinking it was this week.....  Thanks Phil..... I never know what time I will get off work so I don't think I will make it.... I'll keep checking the forum....

Thanks
GarryS


----------



## 10bender24 (Nov 8, 2005)

I agree Phil,
The scheduled meeting should address the matters that it was intended for,wakeboarding and the safety of all boaters and people using the public waterway.There are other circuits that use the river that are concerned with the tournament issues as well as the safety issues.If you hear of a scheduled meeting addressing those issues please inform or post and I will do the same.


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

BUMP.

I'll be there. Always interesting to see how many OGFers will show up, too.

I'll be the average looking suburban dude with a blue striped golf shirt on. make sure you say "Hi".


----------



## HOTTFINGER (Apr 14, 2004)

I am a very interested bystander. Our small couples club usually fishes O'Shay 2-3 times per year. We travel over from Dayton because we really like some features the lake offers. First the catching there is way above average. Second, the place is never really extremly crowded like Caesar Creek,CJ Brown, Alum, Indian, and East Fork can be between Memorial and Labor Day. Third, we don't have to contend with jet skiers and the number of water skiers is usually small. We also think that the 45 MPH speed limit helps keep the wave action down and keeps those monster speed boats that run round and round at places like CC away. There are plenty of no wake areas as well. The parking areas and ramps are also well maintained and clean. All in all it looks like the Columbus Parks people have done a good job with the lake. You've got a really good thing going on there IMO. I hope they don't change a thing there.

I guess Griggs is a different story. I'm told the catching there can be excellent but the boat traffic there can be hazardous. I'm sure the entire public feels that all public water should be available to them for whatever their boating or fishing pleasure. When there is a "disputed" lake, it's very hard to find any answer that makes every one happy. One idea I would suggest is to allow "power" boating on alternating days with 10MPH or no wake operations on the others(odd/even) etc. They do this on Eastwood here in Dayton. It keeps the pleasure boaters and fishermen seperated to a certain extent, thereby relieving one major chance of confrontation. Additionally they only allow you to run the lake on "power" boat days in a counter clock wise direction which means boats should come at you from only one direction--thereby adding a little more chance for safe operations.

Anyway, I'll be watching to see the outcome of this. Good luck to us all.


----------



## XRacer (Feb 12, 2007)

The meeting was well attended with at least 50 people. The group holding the meeting is strictly an advisorary board so the city can do what they want to but it seems the board has been involved in the decisions for the last 40 years. I dont see a ban on any wake boarding activities in the near future. It does seem the city does not want to promote any events on the 3 water ways they control. Everyone there presented their points well and I was pleased to see everyone listened to those points. It seems that most agree education and enforcement of current regulations would go a long way. I look forward to hearing how the city will treat the money paying events the topic was skipped since the person from the board/city was not at the meeting last night. I hope the city/board at least sets up some kind of comunication channel so all the groups involved know whats going on. All of those in attendence were given the option to be on an email list I will pass those emails on if you guys want me too. Final comment on the conditions at Griggs. It is probably a good thing the City of Columbus does not promote Griggs every other body of water I have been on that are as close to a major population center as Griggs is has 2 or 3 times the traffic. I do find as a whole the boaters on Griggs to be very polite. Common sence has got to be used dont expect flat water on Sunday afternoon in the ski zone and dont be shy to report anyone breaking the regulations. Speaking of those regulations is there a way to post those here since it seems almost difficult to get a copy. Brian PS I am sorry I didnt get to meet anyone from the OGF site work called and I had to go after the meeting.


----------



## XRacer (Feb 12, 2007)

The other topics of discussion included regulations for walking on the ice and how to handle ice fishing if there is a regulation put in place. Putting in a downtown canoe rental area that would be run by the city. Allowing the larger skulling boats to go all the way to the Island on Griggs. Brian


----------



## Net (Apr 10, 2004)

XRacer said:


> Speaking of those regulations is there a way to post those here since it seems almost difficult to get a copy.


 Here you go http://ordlink.com/codes/columbus/ 
Title 9, Article III, Chapter 921 - Watercraft on reservoirs


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

The meeting was interesting. My takeaways:

The wake boarding issue is a stalemate. There's no way to really enforce what type of boats are doing what without restricting length, which they already do, or restricting speed which isn't going to happen.
Quite honestly, the wake board contingent was well prepared, and had solid, logical arguements. The homeowners however, came off looking not so great.
It seems that better signage at the ramps wil be the answer to let boaters know how and where they are to operate.

I was really more interested in the bass tournament issue. It was on the agenda, but whoever put it on the agenda failed to show up for the meeting, which kind of pissed me off. So it never got discussed.
I really wanted to know if there's just one Metro Parks guy with a hair up his butt, or if they are really serious about the no money changing hands. 
I know more than one group of tournament anglers funds their whole group from the proceeds from tourneys.

Anyway, very interesting meeting that was represnted rom every available group of water way users.

After the meeting, I was approached by one of the members of the Advisory Board to join the board. They try to have at least one member from each contingent on the board (boaters, skiiers, canoers, rowers, fishermen, home owners, etc...)
I'm not planning on taking them up on it (my and TOSA's issues are really more stream related) BUT someone needs to be on the advisory board that has more than a passing interest in fishing the City waterways (Griggs, O'Shey, Hoover). I gave the business card to one of the tournament fishing guys who said he might be interested, but someone REALLY needs to make sure that's followed up on.
It's too good of an opportunity to have a legitimate voice with the people who are legislating and enforcing the laws and regulations to pass up.
Somebody step up.


----------



## Show (Sep 3, 2007)

Gentlemen, this is my first post on your forum. I was at the Advisory Board meeting supporting towed water sports and conducting events on Griggs. So Im kind of from the other camp, hope thats OK. 

This forum thread has really spanned the range of interests and opinions, with of course a focus on fishing. Although the fist post was quite startling to me, in all I think youve done a good job talking through many of the issues. I hope that we can continue to share Griggs which for me is an amazing public resource. 

Id like to stay in touch with fishing event organizers on a few topics. First Id like to know more about the tournament fees/prizes issue. Can you tell me if this is an existing restriction? Ive never heard of it before. This restriction concerns me because the city is adding additional event requirements, ones that are extremely difficult for me to meet. One solution would be to increase the size of my event so more sponsors could become involved and increase the funds available to meet city requirements. If I increased the size of my event Id have to move it from the Scioto Boat Club to the east shore of the park. However, just like you we collect tournament fees, this year we made cash awards, and we made product prize awards. Next year we might have the same fees/prize problem that you face. So, we potentially have common ground on this point. 

Second, I was able to pickup quite a few rowing contacts at the meeting. By the time we were speaking room was empty so I didnt meet anyone form your group. At the meeting I asked Craig to send out contact information. I will have names, maybe some telephone numbers, and some email addresses. If youre an active fishing tournament organizer Id like to coordinate your event dates with the rowing event dates and my single towed water sports event. 

Third, I dont know that I can solve any problems but I think it would help to keep the lines of communications open so we have a chance to work through issues before some thing gets out of hand. I am a member of the Scioto Boat Club. Our general membership meetings are held from early spring through fall, on the first Thursday from 8:00 PM until 9:00 PM. Before the meeting starts we generally have a light meal starting at 7:00 PM. The next general meeting is this Thursday the 6th. The boat club members have a wide range of interests which include fishing. If you would like to learn more about the boat club, discuss your interests, explain how youre fishing tournaments work, or just meet other boating enthusiasts Im sure that you will be welcome. We sometimes have guest speakers. If someone wanted to present something to the club it would be helpful if you gave us advanced notice. 

Best regards,

Ed


----------



## andyman (Jul 12, 2005)

Ed,
I believe you were the more vocal, well spoken gentelman at the meeting....I believe the young lady got a group chuckle when she mentioned the you and she "spanned a wide age group".
If so, then I was the guy sitting over your left shoulder, alone, in the blue golf shirt.
We spoke briefly after the meeting.

The fishing tournament issue is this: On the event permit it states that no money can be exchanged for the event on city property. It has always read this way but has never been enforced. Recently though, it has been sporatically enforced.
The fishermen's issue here is how is the law going to be enforced in the future. Is this just one energetic individual? Can we simply move any money exchanges across the street off of city property?
I'm guessing it's both, but I sure would have liked to have heard that.
If it is not, than is the city and/or advisory board trying to shut down the fishing tournaments? Again, I don't think this is the case.

I'm not much of a tourament angler, but I'm active in The Ohio Smallmouth Alliance and was at the meeting as an interested party. Many of these small bass fishing clubs will pay for their entire existance from the money collected at these tournaments. And the money is small, much along the lines of a five dollar nausau at the golf course.

You might want to make contact with a guy named Smitty. I'm sure it is derivitive of his last name, so check the email list when sent.

Good luck. You are an ideal representative for your boating interest.


----------



## Skunkhat1 (Sep 4, 2007)

Gotta chime in on this one. Two of the most annoying things on Griggs:
1. Tournament starts 6:30AM and you make your run to your starting spot. 7:05AM first ski boats show up blaring radios and wreaking havoc with their water plows.
2. This is probably the worst. These people should be banned from the water. I am talking about the guys in the chase boats that scream at the rowing teams training on the river. You know the guy I am talking about, that fool in the boat that looks like somone glued it together with a 5 gallon bucket as a seat. Screaming up and down the river all morning STROKE...STROKE...STROKE.... man I can't stand him


----------



## Show (Sep 3, 2007)

Andy,

Ya, that was me. I know what the young gal was trying to say but it came out pretty funny. 

Thanks for clarifying the tournament fee issue. 

You simply cant run any kind of event or organization without cash. That goes for walk-a-thons, neighborhood parties, street fairs, as well as fishing, skiing, sailing, and rowing events/oranizations. Id like to think that all of these groups do something to make the city a little more interesting for everyone. If the city prevents any exchange of cash then the city will lose these special events. Doesnt that go against city tourism objectives? The city is trying to promote itself, see this web site: http://www.experiencecolumbus.com/ . Were already promoting the city for free. Im sure they want to continue the diversity of activities that add to our local culture.

If some kind of event were more a game of chance rather than a competition where skill and technique are required then the city would rightly have concerns. I dont think thats the case for any of the events on our waterways. We have the Destroyers, the Crew, and the Blue Jackets. The city worked hard to bring these sports to town. Why not seek other sports that regular guys as well as the mega pros can participate in?

Ive worked with the city on only two events, one last year and one this. Each time was an education. Some of the rules seem strange, but when you ask theres a good reason for each one. For example, staking a tent to the ground is not permitted you must weight your tent. Why the heck is that? Well it turns out the top soil at Griggs is really thin so you cant drive a stake in the ground very far before hitting limestone. There are plenty more rules like that, you just have to ask. 

When the city circulates contact information Ill look for Smitty. I do have most of the rowing contacts already. 

Regards


----------

