Mr. Tooley -

I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say here. Are you implying
that I don't know what I'm talking about and I'm not in the position to
defend what goes on in my program? Because if that is the case, then
you are sadly mistaken. We have some very clear policies about how we
go about running our program that are firmly rooted in industry best
practice. Additionally, we spend an appropriate amount of time with our
staff training them to do the job we ask them to do.

My question was posted in good faith to gain some different perspectives
from the resources out there in the rec.boats.paddle newsgroup. I have
posted information in answer to questions there in the past and have
gained valuable information by posting questions to the newsgroup as well.

My question to you - What ARE you trying to suggest here?

Regards,

Eric Henkel

Mr. Henkel-

To be frank, given your non-ability to follow through on your original
question, I have to doubt your ability to accomplish your task. As far
as I can tell this post is nothing more than elaborate attempt to cover
your ass against educational administrators who have institutionalized
this trait.

You should either resign, or take responsibility for yourself, with all
the risks that entails.

You have today to try responding again. Elsewise I post your reply to
the newsgroup, with similar comments.

-Douglas Tooley

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Henkel ]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 8:03 AM
To: D.L. Tooley
Subject: Thoughts on volume (CFS) and river levels and such (sort of
rambling)

Douglas -

Thanks for the answer. Unfortunately, it's the experiential thing
(learning by being on the river) that I can't use. I'm trying to
find a good explanation for folks in our administration and they
don't seem to want to take the time to go paddling (I don't know why
- doesn't make sense to me! )

Having been a raft guide on the Ocoee, I know that even 100 to 200
extra CFS can make a big difference in a river. However, I'm just
having a hard time translating to non-paddlers.

Thanks again,

Eric
--
__________________________________________________ _________
Nothing is more terrible than activity without insight.
-Thomas Carlyle
__________________________________________________ _________
Eric Henkel
Director, Poplar Ridge Experiential Learning and Training
Assistant Director of Outdoor Recreation
"Soon-to-be Daddy-O"
University of Virginia -- Department of Intramural Recreational Sports
450 Whitehead Road; PO Box 400317
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4317
Ph: 434-924-3791
Fax: 434-924-3858
http://www.virginia.edu/ims



D.L. wrote:

I've received a rather strange reply from the originator of this thread
which clarifies the real intent of the original, 'rambling' post. Although
the question is still good - the reason for it is intentionally misstated.

I've challenged the guy privately in response to his e-mail and I'll wait
for his response today before I post the rest.

But do take the warning that this guy is a risk to both his students and
perhaps even yourself.

-Douglas Tooley
"Felsenmeer" wrote in message
. ..


"ChuckB" wrote


It is my understanding that the level (feet) as measured by a USGS
gauge is not standardized (across many gauges). So the level on one
gauge on a river many not have anything to do with the level on
another gauge on the same river or a different river.


That's correct- the level is based on a somewhat arbitrary datum, thus "5
feet on the gauge" just means that the level is 5 ft. above the datum.


The


datum is tied to sea level, so you might have a datum of 0 at 800 ft.


above


sea level, so when the gage is at 5 ft., the water surface elevation is at
805 ft. MSL. 0 ft. does not equate to the stream bed either, in many (if
not most) cases.