Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up

Posted by jasonfoley 
were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 24, 2017 10:20AM
Last week in our meeting the USACE indicated a positive assessment appeared to be on the horizon for the chance to get the feasibility study at Flannagan Dam. I received an advance copy yesterday of the assessment. posted this online today.

"Finally got my hands on and read the non-Final draft of the USACE initial appraisal for Russell Fork enhanced recreation releases and its safe to say I said wow a few times when I read it. As soon as an approved final draft is available somebody will share it but it is a very positive assessment for moving forward with a feasibility study to get downstream enhanced recreation added to the dams project purpose. It's a great day!"

it is a great day indeed folks. we keep moving this thing down the field. Were in the red zone now!

Jason Foley
Re: were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 24, 2017 10:34AM
Hell yeah brother! That is good to hear. It did sound like it was going to be positive last week at the meeting and I can't wait to see it even more now. Then it is on to the next big stage...and that will take a bunch of money coming from somewhere...
Brent
Re: were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 24, 2017 05:09PM
Awesome Baby!!! More Russel Fork Is Always a great thing! I hope it works out!

Fred
Re: were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 26, 2017 11:22AM
Brent, there is a bill in the KY house on creating a Mountain Recreation Authority to promote tourism. I wonder if there is any room in there to facilitate water recreation, too? I haven't actually read it yet. Of course the dam itself is in VA, but maybe it would help to open up access on the KY side? Or for other E. KY rivers?

HB 156 (Fugate and others)(H. Tourism)

Would establish the Kentucky Mountain Regional Recreation Authority to promote outdoor recreation and tourism by developing a recreational trail system, prioritizing locations on private property made available by license or easement by willing landowners.

-Zina
Re: were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 26, 2017 08:14PM
Thanks Zina, I will defer to Jason Foley who is on top of all things political like that. Great idea.
Brent
Re: were getting a Flannagan Dam - Russell Fork (Va/Ky) feasibility studythumbs up
February 28, 2017 10:04AM
Zina our battle is strictly in the Federal realm thankfully or our state would find a way to screw it up for us. And doubly thankfully its for a dam in VA in this case haha. Its a bad bill for business and I predict there will be a whole lot of new 4 wheeler trails come out of it because its strategy is to increase recreational activity on private land.

The regulating board (made up completely of politicians/appointees) they are suggesting prohibits anyone from building any kind of access or trail on their own in the mountain region unless the KMRA Board approves it. As soon as 16 counties sign on the KMRA will have a huge amount of political sway. Land owners come out in spades with the choice to participate or not and be rewarded if they do. The concept may be good but the landowners could extremely fragment any system quite like the Pine Mt trail is which prohibits it from being completed to its ideal. KMRA wouldn't have any power over any non-participating landowner ultimately.

My assessment of this bill is the party of less government and regulation in our state last night passed through the house a bill that creates a new regulatory authority under the guise of something else. It also doesn't do anything new than was already being done to promote tourism and it created mechanisms for users to pay fees and it prohibits individual cities, counties or governments from building their own recreation tourism without board approval. The same thing this bill does West Va allows each county to do on its own rather than tying it to a regional authority. I can tell you first hand paying them a fee isnt going to reflect any help to the businesses who now have to raise prices. It will be spent by the self-governing KMRA board. They essentially are making recreation more costly in this region and are forcing it to compete with other tourism in the state that wont levy user fees. In Kentucky we always f it up better than anyone else and this is no different.

I imagine if this passes it means one day soon zip lines, canoe liveries, climbing/kayak/raft guided trips in those counties will all have a KMRA surcharge added. Remember the old access fees at the Ocoee back in the day? 4-wheelers too but lets be honest they are the one user group that can avoid the fees and will create a disproportionate user base who isnt paying the fee. Also river access point and trail head fees. Don't panic but if they charge John Q. Tourist a fee then you can sure expect that they want something from John Q. PrivateBoater.

I watched the debate with the best intentions to find necessary and prudent needs for the industry and our state. The sponsor from Perry Co. was such a poor communicator he would spend about half a sentence answering questions. The speaker of the house actually was answering questions for him. It was obvious but sad. Still needs to pass in the Senate. I only heard the government is coming and everything will be OK. Oh yeah and pay up soon suckers...
Sorry, you do not have permission to post/reply in this forum.