Graves Bridge - No More Warnings, Just Fines

[jpinkster]

Saw these photos circulating around last night from Graves Bridge in Calgary. Sounds like there are going to be some significant fines and an upcoming court date for this guy. This is proof that it never hurts to call this kind of stuff in. It's a small win for the good guys, and the reward $ could be significant. Time for our COs to take a no prisoner approach to this. No more warnings, just fines.

 

 

[RedBeard]

[Vitalshok]

Yeeesss finally some solid action

[SilverDoctor]

Excellent!!!

[SanJuanWorm]

What a complete ***hole.

[jpinkster]

Saw a truck parked on the downstream side of the gravel bar today when I was driving by. He was parked in a spot where he certainly would have had to drive through the water to get to. I called it in to RAP, and got a return call from the office within about 10 minutes. He was down on site and figuring out how to proceed. He mentioned that fisheries biologists had determined that the gravel has been compacted to a point where fish couldn't possibly spawn. As such, there really isn't much they can charge somebody with unless they are parked directly in the water. He mentioned he was taking some photos to send to his superiors to see if there was someway they could proceed.

 

What we really need is prescribed fines on public land-use infractions. Right now enforcement can only issue a court summons and the judge needs to make the call. We need the government to determine an appropriate fine schedule for these infractions so that officers can write tickets on the spot. A land-use violation could be just like a speeding ticket and the officers could pass down enforcement on the spot.

[bcubed]

Make them take a day in court. That is a hell of a lot more intimidating then a couple hundred dollar fine.

 

The public lands regulation is just that, it is not the fisheries act. I'm not a lawyer, but the regulation seems pretty straight forward that you will not be on the bed or bank of a river with a tired vehicle, it does not mention harm to fish and fish habitat (which would apply under other laws). Not sure why the F&W would worry about that, as is it his job to determine effects of damage?

 

It should be a court appearance regardless.

[BurningChrome]

Not sure why the F&W would worry about that, as is it his job to determine effects of damage?

Good point. When someone is caught poaching they don't have to determine the effects of someone fishing closed water, keeping more than the limit, or keeping a fish over/under the size limit. All the officer has to do is say you were doing something you weren't supposed to and issue a summons.

[Dangus]

Saw a truck parked on the downstream side of the gravel bar today when I was driving by. He was parked in a spot where he certainly would have had to drive through the water to get to. I called it in to RAP, and got a return call from the office within about 10 minutes. He was down on site and figuring out how to proceed. He mentioned that fisheries biologists had determined that the gravel has been compacted to a point where fish couldn't possibly spawn. As such, there really isn't much they can charge somebody with unless they are parked directly in the water. He mentioned he was taking some photos to send to his superiors to see if there was someway they could proceed.

 

What we really need is prescribed fines on public land-use infractions. Right now enforcement can only issue a court summons and the judge needs to make the call. We need the government to determine an appropriate fine schedule for these infractions so that officers can write tickets on the spot. A land-use violation could be just like a speeding ticket and the officers could pass down enforcement on the spot.

First, Spawn when? Its an exposed bar during all spawning periods. Second, where? It's tennis ball sized and larger rocks. Not exactly redd material.

 

Pick your battles. You're taking up enforcement time

To "protect" a 500 foot section of urban shoreline with questionable amount of habitat.

 

If it's about the city being pissed. They should really just put a better sign in, fine the odd douche and take it for what it is.

Id rather have an officer available to nab poachers and polluters in fragile habitat of native wild species.

[Dangus]

Sorry, Jordan I realize that came across as rather cold. I know all the commenters intentions are right but it's something to think about.

[bigfry]

if i decide to launch my boat a little upstream of where i normally do because there is so much traffic on the gravel bar i don't see it as an issue. i don't feel like having to reverse between people and their picnic chairs to launch my boat in the "assumed" launch stretch.

 

i don't 4x4 or drive around on the bar. i drive to launch. take pictures of me to post all over the forum so that people without boats can shake their finger at me for launching 10 meters upstream or better yet rat me out and call RAP

[bcubed]

Quite the attitude, hope people remember that next time you ask for assistance when you sink your boat...

[bigfry]

Quite the attitude, hope people remember that next time you ask for assistance when you sink your boat...

It's not attitude at all. I see what's wrong with 4x4ing on the bar. But don't see why everyone's getting their panties in a bunch over launching a few feet up because shore fishers are lined up along the assumed boat launch

 

Btw. I didn't sink my boat someone else did. Thanks for all your help. Wait a minute u didn't help. You just sat there behind your computer screen asking to see pics. Troll

[bcubed]

A few feet up is what happened to cause the initial closure, and continuing to do it will turn into not having a launch available. A few feet is not driving well upstream of the bridge to get a better shot at the far riprap bank.

[Dangus]

Bcube and bron, the trolls! High five buddy!

[bigfry]

A few feet up is what happened to cause the initial closure, and continuing to do it will turn into not having a launch available. A few feet is not driving well upstream of the bridge to get a better shot at the far riprap bank.

How do you know that's what closed It. Unless I see an actual report on paper saying this its all speculation.

 

And I have never ever fished that far rip rap bank on boat or foot.

 

the way I see it it was the idiots who 4x4 or are parked on that gravel bar every single time I drive by that caused it not someone drivin directly to launch the boat.

[jln]

I promised myself to stay out of this, but will throw in my 2 cents worth. The Navigation Protection Act as I understand it provides for public access to navigable waterways, of which the Bow is included. The river and streambed is also crown land, and I am not sure of the legal implications of the city and or province imposing regulations on crown land, not to mention limiting or impeding access to a navigable waterway.I am not a lawyer, so I cannot speak to whether or not it is appropriate for the city to be limiting access to the bank to launch boats.

As a boat owner, I am concerned about the lack of access to launch facilities in the city and along the Bow in general. I am also concerned about the yahoos who view the riverbank as a good place to park. I I will also admit that my first time out this year I did launch upstream of the bridge before the sign was installed, and my second time at graves I did not see the sign, but knowing it was there launched south of the bridge. Having launched there this past weekend I will openly state that the signage is useless, one small sign on the ramp down into the launch, and the barricades are awfully close together, I wouldn't want to be making a tight turn either in or out.

I think the better solution would be to continue with trying to educate people about the fact that it is provided as a boat launch for the launching of boats, not a convenient parking spot close to the water. It is unfortunate that responsible users of the area are painted with the same brush as irresponsible users. I also feel it is a great injustice for the responsible users to be punished for this when the city fails to provide adequate alternatives.

There is a lot that needs to be done to improve access to the river, and the knee jerk reaction to shut down access will lead to bigger issues.

Sorry for the rant.

[jpinkster]

I'll jump in and add in a bit more clarity:

 

Since the floods of 2013 the Graves launch is not an approved launch. The original permissions applied to the pre-flood conditions where boats were able to launch directly off the cement pad into the river on the west side of the channel. Needless to say, the flood has changed everything. With today's conditions the only places in and around Graves that would be appropriate for a permanent launch would be at the south side of the parking lot into that back eddy or on the east side of the river. Everything else requires users to cross far too much of the river bed in order to get to the water.

 

Water Resources with The City had comprehensive data about the river bed channel and sensitive fish habitat along the Bow. Since the flood this information is no longer up to date and they are working towards an update. Until that information is obtained, it will be very difficult for additional access to be considered. Building a new launch (or even updating an existing launch) requires approvals from the province as well as the federal government. That process alone can take between 4-8 months.

 

From an official stand point anyone who has launched a boat at Graves since the floods has done so illegally. Enforcement against trailer access isn't happening right now, and I suspect that is somewhat intentional. We need to be aware of the power of an example. If Graves had remained quiet and vehicles hadn't made their way out onto the gravel bar on a routine basis, I doubt we'd be in the position we are in today. Unfortunately a lot more attention has been brought to this site, and instead of addressing the root of the problem, I suspect the approach will be to permanently shut that access down. That may be punishing the wrong stakeholder group, but wholesale shut downs seems to be the preferred government response to these types of issues (think about mass scale OHV trail closures).

 

This should send a very strong message to river users that currently access at Police or McKinnon. Post flood those launches have many of the same issues that are currently being faced at Graves. If users keep a low profile and don't draw unnecessary attention to themselves, I suspect these access points will remain open. If users choose to do things like drive through sensitive habitat, cut the chained gate when McKinnon is closed and any number of other offense...we run the risk of losing these access points as well.

[jdangler]

Hear, Hear! Well said!

[fishteck]

Calgary River Users Alliance is working on the Bow River boat ramp access issue. Go to the Alberta Whitewater Association website for an update:

 

http://www.albertawhitewater.ca/calgary-river-users-alliance

 

It has been very difficult to get a straight answer as to who initiated the closure of Grave Bridge boat ramp. Was it AEP, City Parks, lobby groups or concerned individuals. No one government entity has claimed responsibility. AEP has been reluctant to take any action to close or restrict access at Policeman's and MacKinnon's Flats because of the importance to the local fishing industry. Therefore it is puzzling to see why AEP would do so at Graves Bridge.

 

There are many river access points in Alberta, the western US states and around the world that use the river bottom under low flow condition or gravel bars to launch boats. Why is it such an issue in the City of Calgary?.

[Vitalshok]

There's a ***hole down there right now he is parked but not sure if he's in the water or not.To me it looked the front was but I had a truck full of people.

[badatt]

A very good question, why is it such a big issue? Likely because a few individuals are making it out to be. I think the damage being done to the riparian habitat by many kilometres of riprap is a far greater problem than people driving on the gravel at a couple of boat launches. This needs to be kept in perspective.

[fishteck]

Graves Bridge upgrades. New park bench, garbage bin and toilet

Also a new gate added. Will it be locked?

Go to link for details https://bowrivertrout.org/2016/07/14/graves-bridge-boat-ramp-gets-an-update/

[Dangus]

Was thinking the other day, if they don't want people driving out there, why not just dig out the ditch into the side channel that used to be there?

[bcubed]

Was thinking the other day, if they don't want people driving out there, why not just dig out the ditch into the side channel that used to be there?

 

Would require a fair bit of permitting as it's within the watercourse