VANCOUVER ISLAND WINDTALK • Nitinat Campsite Discussion - Page 2
Page 2 of 3

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 6:42 am
by Gareth
I have emailed my thoughts to Judy. I am on the optimistic side. The past is the past, lets move foreward. At least the campsite is still available. Looking at the postings, most of us have similar issues and concerns, and even similar suggestions. With some luck, these will be addressed and the campsite will continue on. I would suggest that if you have negative comments, it would be smarter to forward them on to Judy, rather than to post them in a public forum, where they are more likely to harm our cause.

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:42 am
by Sister_Golden_Hair
My personal experience with Nitinat has been wonderful and my children love it there. I would hate to see it regulated like a Provincial Campground with reservations required and people turned away for "no vacancies".

I love the fact that it is never "full". In other words if there are no "sites" available you take your tent to the beach.

We come prepared with sani-wipes and toilet paper in case the outhouses are disgusting (outhouses are always disgusting) and out of tissue. Along with that we expect to tote in our own water and tote out our own garbage.

It is definitely communal living, no privacy exists, but that's okay . . . we all get to discover how bad/good our fellow sailers look in the morning and sometimes quarters are cramped enough that we even know if they snore.

As far as an annual membership is concerned I don't believe that would be a good solution. I picked up a kiter hitchhiking from Ontario this summer walking along the logging road (how he managed to get that far I'm not certain), would an annual membership require that he be turned away? Charged an excessive amount?

Maybe I'm just too easy to please but I don't know how we can improve paradise.

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:24 pm
by mortontoemike
SGH.

I think the idea of an annual membership is for frequent users, like a seasons pass at a ski hill. You get unlimited use for a one-time fee. Day users and occasional visitors would still be charged $10/day or whatever the 2006 fee is. Kitesurfers and groups of windsurfing lads from Ontario would always be welcome I hope.

While we are on the topic though, one thing that bothers me at Nitinaht is people who park their campers for long periods of time even when they are not at the lake in order to maintain a primo spot. That doesn't seem too fair.

Mike

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:59 pm
by Sister_Golden_Hair
MB, I certainly reacted in a knee-jerk way with my original post.

I really loved being at Nitinat and would hate to see it change.

The Laissez-faire attitude of the current keepers has worked (for the most part) to our advantage. Management brings regulations and restrictions . . .

However, I do realize that some regulations and restrictions are necessary - people shouldn't be leaving their RVs at Nitinat unless they are in them.

To quote (or mis-quote) more lyrics "don't it always seem to go . . . you don't know what you got 'til it's gone . . ."

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:10 pm
by Mattdog
More campsites would be good, and there are spots on the inner round closer to the beach. On the flipside, don't cut down too many of those big trees, or any trees. The way the sunlight dapples through that centre round is part of the charm. It's a chunk of real forest in the middle of the site. Don't ruin a beautiful old growth Sitka Spruce treasure.

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:53 pm
by KUS
I have erased my previous comments this morning as I got the sense they were being perceived as negative by some.....and I must admit to continued skepticism about the Band's commitment. I certainly got the sense that this posting was an effort to satisfy government's requirement for "continued and effective canvassing of site users".
Be that as it may, I do hope things work out for the better, points well taken....and yes, I will continue to pick up garbage, glass and relocate fire pits at the site and rag on people when they damage or cut trees, regardless :roll:

See ya out there, gotta pull my crabtrap, friggen wind's up again... :twisted:

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 5:47 pm
by more force 4
UMMMM, Mattdog, few if ANY of those trees are old-growth. Some of the biggest might have been too small for the original commercial loggers to bother with, there might be a couple of vets that were too big and gnarly to bother with, but most of those big trees are no older than 80 years. You'll see many of the big trees started out life nursing on old commercial stumps. Check out the rings in the trees that have fallen and been bucked - the rings are huge. It was a clear-cut not really that long ago. Ditidaht land grows BIG spruce FAST!

But I do agree with the gyst of your comment, which is the filtered light coming through big trees and the presence of any big tree is special. Any tree thinning or pruning should be done very thoughtfully. Campsites should be place between/around trees whenever possible.

We have to be more careful too camping, especially of the tree's roots. Sitka is really susceptable to root damage cause their roots are so shallow, and too often the roots are getting driven over (especially at the far windward end of the camp where people are 'pushing' out the roads), or nailed into for a support, or someone dumps a fire ring on one. I'm amazed the trees are doing as well as they are, frankly.

The camp managers will have to keep an eye on safety though too -- I remember one person was taken to hospital last summer when she was whumped by a breaking branch - I believe it was sunny and perfectly calm at the time too, which is weird. If I remember right it hit her arm; if it had been her head and she probably would never have sailed/kited again!

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:34 pm
by Bob
I think we should cut all of the trees down. That will get rid of the fire hazerds. and make room for more people.
The trees are going to burn down one day anyway

Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 9:46 pm
by Mattdog
Appreciate the constructive post there, "Bob". :?

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:09 am
by mortontoemike
Great idea Bob! Let's all kill ourselves while we are at it!

Campsite...

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:11 am
by Bobson
That 'BOB' is no relation to me....I am not HIS son!! :roll:

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:53 am
by Gareth
MF4- the branch crushed my wifes finger, requiring about 14 stitches and ending a 2 week holiday abruptly. It was blowing about 20 knots at the time. luckily it did not land on her or my sons head, as the injury would have been far more serious. It is one of the hazards of camping there, but where possible, dead wood should be removed after winter by whoever manages the site.

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:53 pm
by more force 4
Sorry Penguin, I had got some of the detail wrong - I thought it was calm. Seems to me we have a kiter member who specializes in climbing trees with a chainsaw for a living!

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:55 pm
by more force 4
Bob - I thought you must be one of several my neighbours who has cut down ALL their trees after getting scared by a couple of near-misses of their houses. Ridiculous!

Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 7:16 am
by themorb
Maybe I'd think differently if I had little kids running around, but personally I'd rather pack my own TP and camp on the beach than pay $10 per night. I mean, on a summer weekend I have to pack TP and camp on the beach anyway...