Paddling the headwaters of the Wisconsin River pt.3

As with parts one and two, check the Google Map and use the satellite view.

After reaching mile 19, I got in my car and went home for a good night’s sleep. We were staying in a resort just 30 miles away, so I didn’t even think about camping out. The next day, I returned to do the next 16 miles (Co. K to Co. G).

Now, sixteen miles is a lot of water for part of a day, but I didn’t hurry to get started.  This stretch  lacks the sharp differences of the first 19 miles. The river is pretty constant, with enough water and current to move you along, enough meanders to keep you occupied, but very few identifiable mile markers.

As you can see from the Googele Map, you soon move away from the highway, so it is quiet, with no development or houses. The only real mile markers are the two canoe campsites at mile 23 and 25. I didn’t see the mile 23 campsite at all, so when I stopped at  a campsite, I was misplaced. I didn’t think I was making very good time. As I was pulling in here, a group of seven young women in three canoes were pulling out. I used the facilities, rested and stretched then set out to catch them A convoy moves at the speed of the slowest ship, so a lone kayak should be able to catch them.  Plus I think that a kayak makes better time than a canoe in such constricted waters. It is just easier to maintain speed through turns. I took about 45 minutes before I passed them.

A mile or two  after mile 25, the river approaches the highway. After the quiet, the sound is very apparent, though you never see the road. Looking at my map, I realized where I was and that I was making better time than I thought. This was a relief, but put me in the wrong frame of mind. I was only half way through sixteen miles.

Thr river worked west and the road tended east, so quiet was slowly restored. This was where a compass and a better look at satellite  images would have helped. I could hear airplanes from the Eagle River airport, which is near Co. G, so I started to be anxious to be done, when I still had another 5-6 miles to go.

Suddenly, the river changed. Not the water so much as the banks. The distant pines closed in and grew leaves. Instead of a broad valler with distant pines, I had large trees right on the banks, some of them dropping into the river. This is familar teritory for me, since it resembled the Plover River, which I paddle often. A few cottage and houses appeared, leading me to think I was nearly in Eagle River (nope).

Still, this is pleasant water to paddle. Family safe, pretty and fairly open. Good current even in August and clear paths through downed wood. The Co. G bridge is just after a bend (most of the river is just after a bend), so you get no warning you have arrived, but also no sense you are almost there. I felt like a living example of Zeno’s paradox.

When you finally arrive (as I did after making good time – 16 miles in 5.5 hours) the Co. G landing is a good one. Nice paved parking lot, toilet and tables. Missing only water.

Below this landing, the river widens int0 a flowage caused by the Otter Rapids dam. I had no interest in paddling a long lake through a city, past banks paved with cottages. Part 4 will pickup below the dam.

Paddling the headwaters of the Wisconsin River pt.1

This is a brief account of my paddling the headwaters of the Wisconsin River, specifically the first 19 miles from Lac Vieux Desert to the Co.K bridge in Conover. Check the map of  the Headwaters of the Wisconsin River for some of the location and be sure to use the satellite view. For larger copies of the photos, check my Flickr set.

Some background: I grew up on the lower Wisconsin and have canoed the stretches around my hometown of Boscobel a number of times. The river there is large, sandy and not developed. It is quite possible to spend a day on the water and not see another boat or approach a house. So, it has always been a desire of mine to do the entire Wisconsin River, which runs for 430 miles from Lac Vieux Desert of the Michigan border and ends up in the Mississippi River near Prairie du Chien.

North of the city of Eagle River, the river flows freely. West of Prairie du Sac it also flows without hindrance. For its other 300 miles, it is interrupted by 26 dams. At some points, they come fast and furious (Du Bay, Stevens Point, Whiting, Plover, Biron, Wisconsin Rapids, Centralia, Port Edwards and Nekoosa all within about 40 miles). Besides the need for portaging and the danger that dams pose to paddlers, they create flowages, where there is little current, many power boats and sometimes windy conditions. Not my idea of good paddling water.

Thus my desire to see the headwaters, which is definitely wild territory. Few houses or even bridges. No crowds, like the Kickapoo, which can sometimes resemble a theme park ride. So when we went on vacation near St. Germain, I took advantage of the opportunity to paddle the first 19 miles of the river.

Some resources: Paddling Northern Wisconsin a great book that sems to be out of print. The author has a nice description of this section (and eighty others), but for some reason the map is incorrect and shows a different portion of the river. Fortunately, the Wisconsin Valley Improvement Corp. provides decent maps of the area. Not as detailed as I would like, but worth carrying. Of course, you can also scout the river using Google Maps and such.

Some notes about equipment. This is a small river and more of a creek, so I was using a Perception Prodigy, a 10 foot recreational kayak. I don’t think there would have been much of an advantage from a larger boat, since the stream meanders quite a bit at points. The Prodigy has a wide cockpit, which is nice because I needed to get in and out several times. It also gave me easy access to my water and food, while my dry bag rested comfortably between my legs where I could consult the maps. It also has adjustable padded seats, which are worth their weight in gold, and knee brace pads. Plus, a paddle holder, so you can strap the paddle to the side of the boat. The Prodigy comes with a drain plug, which I used to get the incidental water out of the boat. For a rec boat, the Prodigy tracks well, handles the many 180 degree turns easily and carries a heavy paddler and his equipment. Just about everything I could want for this kind of water.

I was paddling solo, which is not such a good idea. Safer to be in a group. The dry bag was a good idea, since I got water in the boat just getting in and out and I needed to be able to see my map and be sure I would have access to different clothes as the day went on. I used a pair of bicycle gloves, since my hands blister during long paddles. I started the day in long sleeves, since it was cool, and kept them on for a while to keep the sun off. I brought some OFF (wipes), but didn’t really need them. Brought two quarts of water, which I didn’t fully use, but was glad to have. In adition to a lunch, I brought some grapes (sugar and fluid), carrots (crunchy) and my secret weapon, peanut M&Ms. Don’t leave home without them. I don’t have one of those nifty whitewater style life jackets, but I like the sportsman’s model I use. Lots of pockets and doesn’t get in the way. No reason not to wear a vest when it is where you keep your immediate supplies. I have an old pair of glasses I saved for this kind of use and I usually wear a hat to keep the sun off my head. It also discourages the deer flies, which like my shampoo (or lack of it). My dry bag had a second shirt, real shoes in case I needed to walk and my maps, displayed through the clear plastic. My food was in a semi-water proof lunch box, all sealed up in bags. What did I miss? Forgot my sunscreen, probably because the day started cool and cloudy. I would have enjoyed a compass since it would have made map reading easier. I had to rely on the sun for directions. For the first time I used a paddle strap, since I was alone and didn’t want to lose my paddle at a critical point.

Lac Vieux Desert – The lake and the headwaters are easy to find, not far off Hwy 47 and there is a parking lot for paddlers. A short path takes you to the lake. You can put in on the lake and paddle to the outlet, where there is a small dam to control the outflow. You can put in at the dam and paddle 100 yards to the parking lot. Or you can start at the parking lot, where the creek runs through a culvert under the road. I wanted to paddle the entire river, but wasn’t interested in two portages in 100 yards, so I started after the culvert.

Yes, that is the entire flow of the Wisconsin River at this point. It is labeled Wisconsin Creek on the map, which is fair. Of course, this was August and Wisconsin is in a decade long drought, but the gauge on the dam read .75, so this wasn’t an inadequate flow.

Just below the culvert.

This is the small pond just below the culvert. The stream is narrower than this, but it show the general landscape. Marshy banks rising above the stream. Trees like bluffs on either side, but only alders and marsh grasses along the banks.

There is a small beaver dam in the early going, but not that much fallen wood in the water. The trees are too far away to fall in the water, so you see branches but not too many big trunks. I did find two trees that had fallen across the river. One I was able to get under pretty easily, but the other knocked my hat off and I ended up taking on some water. Just a little too tall and not flexible enough to get all the way under. The marshy banks do not encourage portaging. Thank goodness for the drain plug, which soon had me dry. This is where a paddling partner would have been nice.

This is a more typical view of the early going. Narrow stream with a little current. Alders growing from one bank and marsh grass on the other. Enough water for a kayak or canoe, but not much more. Not room for going side by side.

This is a little more of a problem. Here the branches meet over the river. Makes you feel like Marlin Perkins as you push them aside and up to fight your way through. Nice to be able to strap the paddle onto the boat here. Good news is that the water is only 1-2 feet deep, so there is a limit to the trouble you can get in. This is typical for the first 2-3 miles.

Then suddenly, the river changes. From a narrow stream, it becomes a first a stream with marsh weeds, then a wide pond, flowing (kinda) between the forest on either side. No trouble telling where to go, since it doesn’t branch off, but almost no current either. A very quite area, not near the mile 5 bridge yet. The water is surprisingly deep in spots and the only barrier is that there is often no channel and you must paddle through the lily pads.

This area is very pretty, but not fun paddling. Slow going. But I must note that I didn’t get a single mosquito bite throughout the entire day, despite the marshy surroundings. One more photo.

After a mile or so of this, you hit a very long but not very high beaver dam. It is well established, but if you follow the sound of water, you can run into a gap and pull yourself through. Beaver dams are always a little tricky, since at some point you find your nose in the water and your tail up on the dam. The natural stability of the boat disappears and you need to get back into water to restore it. I hit a total of six beaver dams on the day, but none were high and they posed only a minor problem.

Beaver dam at about mile 4

After the dam, the marsh becomes a river again and you can hear the mile 5 bridge (Hwy 47) ahead. There is a small boat landing at a park downstream left just after the bridge. Not much there. No water, but tables and a toilet. There is an ice cream store across the road and a tanning salon(!). I ate lunch, stretched and realized I had spent 2 1/2 hours going the first 5 miles and I had another 14 to go. I knew that this strech was rated 8-10 hours, but I was hoping to hit the low end of that, so didn’t tarry.

Mile 5-19 in part 2

We thank our American Heroes (for Jon and Trina)

My daughter-in-law and grandchildren were featured on the local TV station and it is useful to remember that many deployed service members have heroes waiting for them at home.

This is a link to a video that I am having trouble embedding. They want to make it download-proof, which makes it hard to embed. So follow the link and click on the featured video.

http://www.wxow.com/global/story.asp?s=10646862

Here is a link that runs the piece after a short ad.

Catholics and Obama, part the first

On dog-whistles and weasel words.

The Sunday before the election, our bishop had a letter read at every parish at every Mass. No problem with that, though I had already voted. Of course, waiting until the last moment to speak your piece might be considered an authoritarian trick, meant to end discussion instead of promote it.

The letter (since removed/unlinked for the diocese’s website) said some straightforward thing. The bishop and the diocese do not endorese candidates or political parties. We should look at the candidates’ records. We should learn, explore, consider.  No problem with that. It is totally in line with the Church’s documents on Faithful Citizenship.

Then there were the dog whistles, the nudge-nudge, wink-wink and the weasel words.

To begin with, there was the contention that abortion is the only issue that matters in this election. Some concern there. That is contradicted by Faithful Citizenship and 2000 years of tradition. As Chesterton said, a truth too closely held becomes heresy.

Next, the subtext that the bishop would certainly have endorsed the Republicans if it wouldn’t have cost the Church it’s non-profit status and that we should all understand this. Nope. If it is a matter of the murder of millions and the fate of the eternal souls of the members of his diocese, am I to understand that he isn’t speaking out because it might cost the institution some cash? If so, he belongs in one of the lower circle of Dante’s Hell. That would be a degree of moral cowardice that I can not consider him capable of. So…I find him innocent. He said what he meant and he meant what he said, just like Horton. No endorsement, covert or otherwise.

Next, the unspoken thought that only the Republicans are dedicated to reducing abortions. If that were true, abortion would indeed be rare. Since Roe vs. Wade, we have had Nixon, Ford (Carter) Reagan twice, Bush, (Clinton twice) and Bush twice. It is not those who say Lord Lord, but those who do something who enter the Kingdom. Given all those votes and all those years, the Republicans have put five Catholics on the Supreme Court, but not taken any substantial actions to reduce abortions. One might almost think that Republicans require this issue to keep their party together and would be fools to seek a resolution. It is not necessary to condemn Republicans as hypocrites, it is enough to point out that they are not accomplishing what they say they will do.

Next, the letter is based on an analysis of the Freedom of Choice Act, which makes it clear that it will maximize abortions, practically demanding that doctors kidnap women off the street. On further investigation, this analysis was prepared by the Family Research Council, the political arm of Dr. Dobson’s Focus on the Family and seconded by hard right Catholics. Sorry. I don’t take political advice from Focus on the Family. The track  record of their analysis is right up there with Fox News – wrong just about all the time and badly askew. I also don’t take religious advice from Dr. Dobson and neither should Catholic bishops. Shame on them for finding data to wrap around their policies. Very unorthodox.

Next, the notion that the solution that America needs on abortion is criminalizing it. Just arrest enough women and the problem will go away. Just vote to criminalize it and your hands are clean, even if nothing ever happens. Very unBiblical. Very unChristian. If Christians and Catholics oppose abortion, they should be working every day to make certain that no woman ever feels the need to have one, that circumstances never make abortion seem the best alternative. Their money and their time should be dedicated to that end, not the election of one political faction. Then our hands would be clean.

Finally, opposition to FOCA will be fierce. It is a half loaf that will satisfy hunger. It will leave the way clear to set strict limits on late term abortions (centered on viability, not trimesters). It will hit the political and moral sweet spot that will sufficiently satisfy people that action has been taken, that abortions can and will be reduced. This is a middle ground that sets aside criminalization. I think that it will find support within the bell curve of our country and the criminalization crowd will go fa-nuts.

To my mind, until we abandon the entire concept of criminalization, we will make no progress on abortion. If we as Christians do, we can start acting the way Jesus would and show the world that we care about life, not just elections and power.

I’m baaaaaack

OK, so no one noticed I was gone.

Well, I’m back. Been very busy lately with non-blogging activities. Spent a day or three canvassing for Obama, which I felt compelled to do. If my sons can spend 2 years in Iraq, I can walk around town for a couple days to participate in the election of their commander-in-chief.

Plus, I have been working on a publishing project. It involves reprinting an out of copyright book with additional content (lots more photos and an appendix). Since this was always going to be self-published, it involved a learning curve on a number of issues and in some ways was more work than actually writing a book.  Preview it here – Grit, grief and gold

So now, back to business. Expect some reviews soon. I have some comments about the election (how can I not), though I don’t intend to make this site political. I’ll be covering the process of self-publishing, but don’t want to be too informative until I have more information. The proof copy is being printed now and the proof is in the proof.

Baby Boomers Vs Gen Jones

OK, I have a bone to pick here and a soapbox to mount. While Baby Boomers is a term often used to cover everyone born between 1946 and 1964, actual demographers (as opposed to pop culture talking heads) now use the term to mean only those between 1946 and 1953 (or 1954), while those born 1954-1964 are demoted to such names as Generation Jones (how anonymous) or Shadow Boomers (defining them as shadows of their older siblings).

Those of us in Gen Jones are tired of being tarred with the Baby Boomer brush, which doesn’t really apply.

Let’s start with a Wikipedia quote: “While 1945-1965 reflect the post-World War II demographic boom in births, there is a growing consensus among generational experts that two distinct cultural generations occupy these years. The conceptualization that has gained the most public acceptance is that of a 1942-1953 Baby Boom Generation, followed by a 1954-1965 Generation Jones. Boomers and Joneses had dramatically different formative experiences which gave rise to dramatically different collective personalities.”

To get personal with this, I am from the first age cohort of Gen Jones, born in 1954. I remember seeing Jack, Bobbie and Teddie Kennedy during the Wisconsin primary in 1960, but I was only five at that point. I was eight for the Cuban Missile Crisis and nine (third grade) when JFK was killed. Yes, I saw Oswald shot live on TV and ran to tell my parents. The Summer of Love, RFK’s and King’s assassinations took place just after I graduated from grade school. Kent State happened on my 16^th birthday. I never faced the draft, but I was able to vote in the 1972 election.

The younger members of Gen Jones had even less connection with these events. They were born after the Missile Crisis and JFK’s assassination and were not even in kindergarten in 1968. Some could not vote for a president until Regan’s second term.

I am quite willing to concede that Boomers have made lousy political leaders. This would include Bill Clinton (1946), Hillary Clinton (1947), George W. Bush (1946) and Tom Delay (1947), with Jim Webb (1946) and Al Gore (1948 ) providing some counterpoint. Their formative years made them formidable politicians, just not very effective leaders. Clarence Thomas (1948 ) and Samuel Alito (1950) are Boomers, while John Roberts qualifies as Gen Jones. Gen Jones politicians include Barak Obama (1961) and Russ Feingold (on the cusp in 1953), though most of that generation have not (yet?) reached prominence.

Baby Boomers are reaching retirement age, deluging our airways with Depends and Viagra commercials. Gen Jones expects to work until they are 70 and will not really start hitting retirement until 2024, with the trailing edge hitting 70 in 2034. John McCain will be 98 by then (God willing).

I’ll close with another Wikipedia quote: In demographic terms, Generation Jones was part of the baby boom which ended in the early 1960s. However, the events stereotypically associated with generational discussion of Boomers, including protests over civil rights and the Vietnam war and the emergence of rock music took place while the members of Generation Jones were still children or early teenagers. Thus the early life experience of this group was more similar, in many respects, to that commonly imputed to Generation X.

Operational vs strategic

In CIP on the Moon, John Celli quotes noted business writer Michael Porter on the difference between management / operations / how we do things and leadership/strategy/ why we do things. I am going to break a small rule here and get political, so skip this if you want only library related thoughts.

Since this administration started the run up to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, we have been fed reports every six months about how well things are going.  New sets of tactics (called strategies, but really operational) have been rolled out regularly to great acclaim.  New types of counter-insurgency ops would make a difference. Funding local warlords would strengthen democracy. Holding elections would make all the difference (ignoring the truism – one man/one vote / one time). This is made even more opaque when the military refers to mission. Libraries/ churches / organizations / businesses may have a mission which defines them, lets them know what success is and keeps them true to their origins.

It is in the sense that our Mission / Strategy in Iraq is a failure. Not that our troops (including my sons) don’t do their best, follow orders and act in the best tradition of their services, but that there is a failure right at the top, at the strategic level.

In The Pentagon’s New Map, Thomas PM Barnett details his A-Z roadmap for dealing with failed regimes. I believe that if this administration had followed something close to this as a strategy, we might well have obtained a worthy result in Iraq.

Sadly, this administration followed more of an Alpha to Omega strategy, one which intersects Barnett’s at at least one point (invade Iraq and depose Saddam), but diverges from it just about everywhere else. No coalition building, no buy-in from regional players, no broad based reconstruction effort, no concern for security until the situation was chaotic and beyond repair, no consideration of local conditions, too much emphasis on US political considerations.

This demonstrates the importance of proper grand strategy. When you are aiming at the right target, even a near miss is effective. You can correct your aim and sight in on the target. When you are aiming at the wrong target, even a bullseye is not helpful. Mid-course corrections and adjustments just keep you on the wrong road. No matter how long we continue to pursue this current flawed strategy, no matter how effective the operations are, we are just wasting blood and treasure and time, none of which we can afford to spare.
Only a new strategy can retrieve the situation. More troops, more payouts to local warlords, more technology, more kinetics – even taken together they do not equal a change in strategy. They are just reinforcing failure, something that this administration has turned into an art form.

The American public recognizes this, without being able to articulate it. They know things are headed in the wrong direction, without being able to specify the right direction. It is one reason that Iraq is not in the forefront of discussion any more. It is a rear view decision. It was a mistake. We need to disentangle  ourselves. More of the same isn’t an option, even if it were possible, which it isn’t.

I now return you to your librarian. As always, political posts are (almost) always relegated to DailyKos.