VANCOUVER ISLAND WINDTALK

Sorry to pipe up so often but I think part of the point has gotten lost in the rhetoric. I am hearing people say - Just leave it as it is. It works fine. Don't change anything. - personally, I can live with that. We can always find a place to shinny into as KUS has said even when it is at it's busiest.

The message I got from Paul wasn't about our comfort or micromanaging the site.

Last year, someone, a young lady I think, got hit on the by a falling tree branch. She was injured but not badly. The ministry is terrified that someone is going to get seriously injured by a branch or falling tree or their tent is going to get backed over by a late night arrival or something, and that they will be sued for neglect of a campground that is under their control! Get it? They want to minimize their exposure to that possibility and one way to do that is to set boundaries and up the level of management.

Leave it alone is not an option as far as I can see. Over and out.

mortontoemike wrote: Last year, someone, a young lady I think, got hit on the by a falling tree branch. She was injured but not badly. The ministry is terrified that someone is going to get seriously injured by a branch or falling tree or their tent is going to get backed over by a late night arrival or something, and that they will be sued for neglect of a campground that is under their control! Get it? .

She will like the "young lady" part.

This actually happened to my wife in August of 2005:"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.

I don't think that you can eliminate this type of hazard, it is just something to be aware of. I would imagine that you have the same issues in any forestry campsite.

My last 3 posts have just been to correct some of the facts. I have personally been involved in running the site and as stated, the branch fell on my wife, so feel qualified to correct some of this.

Really over and out.
Feel free to pm me if you require further history.

As a fairly new user of Nitnat I support the possibility of improvements, such as clearly defined campsites and more of them. When I pay ten dollars a night to sleep in the back of my truck on the side of the road because someone else has taken over a large area by stringing up a tarp and has 3 tents and 2 picnic tables in his area and paid the same price as me its a bit disheartening.
If cutting down a few trees will make the park more accesible and safer to all users I'm all for it. They're not looking to clear cut the park, besides if we're all that concerned about the environment there would'nt be so many gas guzzling RVs and 4x4's in the park every weekend.

First off lets get some other facts straight. I hear or "read" references to other parks namely provincial parks. This is a recreation site managed by the ministry of sports, tourism and the arts. It does not fall under the juristiction of provincial parks nor does it meet the standards for a provincial park. If you want to visit other parks hey fantastic, there is a whole world out there to explore. If this park were to be made to provincial standards they occupancy rate would be minimal, absolute set boundaries and under no circumstances any devation for rules, gates locking up, etc etc. Oh and of course a much higher fee. Once again I will state that there are a large group of users that have been coming to this site for a very long time and have had it to themselves, primarily a windsurfing crowd. If things had stayed the same, the population on the Island remaind constant with 1990 figures, and Kiteboarding didn't come about, this discussion and need for change in the park would not be necessary. The reality is that the occupancy rate is climbing rapidly and yes not all are wind users, I logged in many that were just camping, quite a few fishermen, some in June most in mid to late august and september. 10% of the beach campers where hikers coming off the trail, so to think you are the only users, that is not the case. AS to the comment, nothing has ever changed, hmm, can't agree there, alot of change has happened, not alot in the development of the park, but alot in the background of government, and operational. Change has been venhemently opposed, as is the case with some on this forum, even to the point of saying goodbye to nitinaht we will go elsewhere. Why is Nitinaht such a sought after desination, cause on a good year the wind is the best silky smooth place to be. Of course there is alot of other desinations that offer different things, I hope to explore these places as well, but I still want to be able to come and enjoy the "magic" of nitinaht and if preservation and planning does not come into place that magic may dissappear. As for the trees not improving, ummm, no they can get healthier, just like a human, if you you let a scab heal it goes away, usually with a scar but you heal and get better. Trees are a little different but they still can recover. I am speaking mostly about the sitka, the hemlock I don't care to much for, they are a weed in my book. Even if the sitka don't get better, we certainly can slow down their decline but taking steps now to prevent further unnecessary damage. Penguin, I am really surprised at your pessisim about the "change" or "lack of". Frankly the dude who wrote the email to the ministry, in particular, Paul Tataryn is taking the most constructive route.

nuff said for now

Dale

Oh yeh, in consulting our database, the busiest day that I logged on the books was One hundred parties (which averaged 2-3 people).

SORRY DALE -When I said parks I was being general, I meant forestry parks. And yes they are different- but the rules I was talking about were forestry campsite rules. They are not being followed. My comments remain the same.

I think there has been a bad example being set out at nitinaht with all the SEMI-PERMINANT trailers,busses and equipment trailers taking up valuable
space. This problem has been creeping for a few years now and this is contrary to forest park rules. I am hoping this trend stops now. If not then I have the perfect trailer for the campsite next year. If you can't beat em join em.

mortontoemike wrote:So the total would be 65 - 70 clearly identified camping pads with fire pits and picnic tables I am assuming at the end.

Going by the number of users at maximum Dale stated, which was 100 parties, there would easily be room for that once phase 3 was finished, counting on a bunch of sites to be shared, and a bunch of tenters on the beach.

Next summer we can only expect phase 1 tho....how many sites will there be in transition? What kind of crowding thing are we going to have to pull off if the amount of available space has been reduced to phase 1 levels? What percentage of today's space will not be available if we have to exist at phase 1 until ??? the land claims issue is resolved?

More spaces,more people,More comfortable,self policing, less chance of fire hazard,more fun for all.
cheers

Self policing, Oh that is working soooooo well, gosh lets hope that continues.
I can see that I won't have a problem moving my trailer in to the park for the summer. LAND CLAIMS MAY NEVER HAPPEN PEOPLE.

Wow, I stop reading BWD for a month and look what I have missed!

Good grief, do you guys drive to the lake with your eyes closed? There are millions of trees out there! No need to go emo over 5-10 trees in the campsite.

On the other hand, there are hundreds of clear-cuts nearby too. Worry about the real logging if you must, not a few trees in the campsite!

And guess what? Trees break in the wind. Branches fall off. That's just the way things work. Nitinat is windy, branches will fall - nothing's gonna stop them. Watch your head or stay on the beach if you're really worried!

Why don't we focus on the one real problem at Nitinat - overcrowding. We could either turn people away or make the campground bigger. I'm pretty sure nobody wants to drive all the way to the lake to be turned away so the obvious choice is to make more space for camping and dig some more outhouses. That being said, we've always found space to squeeze in...

Does anybody else notice a similarity between all these "phases" and "designated camping pads" and Green Point in Tofino? Take a drive through Green Point and half the license plates are from out-of-province and about 3/4 of them don't have surfboards anywhere to be seen. What used to be a well loved camping spot for real local surfers is now just another tourist destination to park their huge RVs. It will be a sad day when we have to pay $30 a night and make reservations months in advance to camp at Nitinat!

Maybe I'll have to put some more effort into the Knob Point road after all....[/i]

I agree. Morb. Finally a straight thinker!

I think Dale should cut down every friggin tree within the bounds of the recreation site and they should pave the whole thing, spray yellow parking lines on it, and install natural gas BBQ's.

By the way, the "phases" and "designated camping pads" were my terms not the ministry's or Doug's (although the word "pad" appears in his presentation a couple of times and the word "phase" once). If these words or phrases have triggered Pavlovian responses, blame me. My role was to recount what transpired at the meeting as I remembered it.

Finally, I really doubt that Nitinat Lake, even with all it's beauty and allure, will ever become Green Point.

i think concern about big rvs is overblown. what non-sailor would drive that far off pavement to camp at some brackish, windy and cold lake, not to mention the campground is full of hairy guitar strumming hippie wierdos (and their feral offspring).

Oh, but wait, the 4-laner is going in for the Pacific Circle route to Port from LkCowichan so it'll just be the last 5k that will only be chipsealed. BTW The hippies are getting the boot with the upgraded MofTourism "street people and loitering" bylaw. The guitars won't be much of an issue either given the need to run the generators in the evening for the electronic services so they won't annoy you much.
Killer that the gas powered BBQ spots will also have the optional overhead heat lamp function behind the Palms-in-concrete designer windbreaks. Of course this luxury will affect the bottom line somewhat so unless your RV has slide outs and is over 38' you will have to camp along the skull bike trail at a nominal fee of $30. The serviced pads should run around $55, pretty fair given the sat TV and wifi. The online reservation system should be helpful to assist us in booking ahead for the 2013 season.
Sure glad the yellow-painted lines in the pavement will be backlit so you can leave your flashlight at home and avoid the scary night sky. Tennis in the oval, anyone?

Just a note for those that think this site is used only for the wind.

This weekend there are about 30 individuals in the park, with their bikes, trikes, quads etc etc rippin it up, boozin it up and overall having a good ol time. Fishermen used it throught out the season as well.

LOL! KUS, 2013 would definately be an inderesting year, oh hang on tho, you forgot that your able to still sail because of the computer controled robotic brace inserted in your knees, reaction accelerater chip intregrated in the nervous system and flex management system with the newly advanced chem-modulator added to the brain stem which allows the aging body to "rejuvenate" with additonal hormonal treatments.

OH besides, Nitinaht will not exist in 2013 due to the global warming and the sea rising. Also due to the changes in global currents and overall weather patternes the Nitinaht "wind" machine will not be firing like it once did like 2005/6. Hmmm wonder is this season was a precursor for what is to come in the future, all this debate would be moot.

Good to know those tree roots are going to heal nicely from their RV wounds with quads running over them all winter..........