BCITORGB wrote:
Tink, more great ideas!

Thanks, I'll have an extra addition to my house built up on top of
the
van before this is over. GRIN

Cheers,
Wilf
===============

Good, I will get more of that futures stock in Great Northern Timber
2x4! You did plan on building stairs up to that addition, and I also
have plans for a deck when you are ready! TnT

Terrific glad to hear it worked out.

Ken.

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Back to my original "dead weight" question.

I tried paddling solo with 24 liters of water as dead weight in the
forward cockpit. The conditions were ideal for this experiment, and I
can report complete success. The rudder on the Amaruk is AWESOME.
Further, I did not feel that the bow was riding too high.

Trip Report:
C:\My Web Sites\pedalpaddleinbc\k050314buntzen.htm

Cheers, and thanks for the help
Wilf

You are correct - I was referring to the plastic version. I forget that it
actually refers to ALL types of pipe.

Ken

"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...

On 16-Mar-2005, "No Spam" wrote:

At any rate I think the schedule 40 pipe on the car is
the ticket because it will not rust and it should hold just fine.

Sched 40 can rust if it is steel. You'd have to get sched 40 in stainless
if you don't want rust. Sched 40 specifies the dimensions, not the
material.

Mike

Aw you been watchin Nascar haven't you. --- They put the second story up on
the carriers to see the race from the infield.

Ken

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Tink, more great ideas!

Thanks, I'll have an extra addition to my house built up on top of the
van before this is over. GRIN

Cheers,
Wilf
===============

No Spam wrote:
Aw you been watchin Nascar haven't you. --- They put the second story
up on
the carriers to see the race from the infield.

Ken

"BCITORGB" wrote in message
ups.com...
Tink, more great ideas!

Thanks, I'll have an extra addition to my house built up on top of
the
van before this is over. GRIN

Cheers,
Wilf
===============


It will give the Mrs. a place to set while he is out zooming around the
lake. A little roof, some windows, should be cheery. TnT

No Spam says:
=================
Aw you been watchin Nascar haven't you.
=================

There's much I might be watching, but NASCAR is not one of them... here
on the left coast, we're much to latte-sipping for that sort of thing.
We hear tell that amazing political transformations occur if you watch
too much NASCAR. Is that true? GRIN

frtzw906

On 16-Mar-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

You would want to locate the 2x6 directly on one of these,
otherwise it would just be the skin of the van supporting the load. The
skin on these newer vehicles is so thin, it will easily bend, and you
will end up with a van with a concave roof. Not good where it rains a
lot!


Since the 2x is about 60 inches long and about 1.5 inches wide, the
bearing area is about 90 sq. in. Two of these means the weight is
carried on 180 sq in. With two 90 lb WW canoes - that's only
1 psi average pressure. Not as big a deal as you might think.

Contrary to Michaels suggestion, I would still recommend that the
logitudinal runners of the existing stock rack, support the crossmember
whether 2x4 or 2x6. These longitudinal runners span from one body

Sorry for the confusion, but I didn't mean to not use the longitudinals.
Rather, don't use the crossbars. They are not strong or stiff.

I know folks who have attaches a 2x4 to the longitudinals running
the length of the vehicle and then 2x4s as crossbars - the whole
thing held in place by bolting to the existing roof rack. Much
stronger than a factory rack.

Mike

Michael Daly wrote:
On 16-Mar-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

You would want to locate the 2x6 directly on one of these,
otherwise it would just be the skin of the van supporting the load.
The
skin on these newer vehicles is so thin, it will easily bend, and
you
will end up with a van with a concave roof. Not good where it rains
a
lot!


Since the 2x is about 60 inches long and about 1.5 inches wide, the
bearing area is about 90 sq. in. Two of these means the weight is
carried on 180 sq in. With two 90 lb WW canoes - that's only
1 psi average pressure. Not as big a deal as you might think.

Contrary to Michaels suggestion, I would still recommend that the
logitudinal runners of the existing stock rack, support the
crossmember
whether 2x4 or 2x6. These longitudinal runners span from one body

Sorry for the confusion, but I didn't mean to not use the
longitudinals.
Rather, don't use the crossbars. They are not strong or stiff.

I know folks who have attaches a 2x4 to the longitudinals running
the length of the vehicle and then 2x4s as crossbars - the whole
thing held in place by bolting to the existing roof rack. Much
stronger than a factory rack.

Mike

Yeah Mike, I think we got it sorted out, and I agree with what you say.
Especially regarding the stock cross bar. They are usually held in by
some plastic parts, and if you pull very hard, the whole cross-bar will
come off. That will give you pause, if you have been lashing your pride
and Joy to it, and driving down the road at 55.

Did you follow my suggestion about using 2x4 runners that would extend
further to the front. Most of the standard rack, are only 4 or 5 ft max
between cross bars. That leaves alot of a 18 ft double or longer,
unsupported.

Frtzw seems to be gitting the hang of this, we will see what he comes
up with. TnT

Tink recommends:
===============
Did you follow my suggestion about using 2x4 runners that would extend
further to the front. Most of the standard rack, are only 4 or 5 ft max
between cross bars. That leaves alot of a 18 ft double or longer,
unsupported.

Frtzw seems to be gitting the hang of this, we will see what he comes
up with. TnT
===============

I'm with you re the runners, but now what? So I've got runners
extending forward, past the standard short rack -- I like that idea.
But, what do you recommend I do with these 2X4 ends... since my bow,
curved as it is, will likely sit several inches above these 2X4 ends.
What/how do I construct to fit on these ends to support the bow. Just
foam perhaps? I'm stuck.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink recommends:
===============
Did you follow my suggestion about using 2x4 runners that would
extend
further to the front. Most of the standard rack, are only 4 or 5 ft
max
between cross bars. That leaves alot of a 18 ft double or longer,
unsupported.

Frtzw seems to be gitting the hang of this, we will see what he comes
up with. TnT
===============

I'm with you re the runners, but now what? So I've got runners
extending forward, past the standard short rack -- I like that idea.
But, what do you recommend I do with these 2X4 ends... since my bow,
curved as it is, will likely sit several inches above these 2X4 ends.
What/how do I construct to fit on these ends to support the bow. Just
foam perhaps? I'm stuck.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========

Evening frtzw, you would want to install a cross 2x4 at the ends of the
2x4 extended runner. What you are trying to accomplish is to have your
kayak supported as far forward and as far back as possible on the top
of your van. The cross 2x4 could have the foam hull supports attached
to them for the kayak to actually set on.

If you recall in the other thread, Wolfgang made a comment about his
kayak being 9.5 ft. long, and setting just fine on the standard van
rack. And he is proably correct. the problem is yours is twice as long,
meaning you would have a long unsupported overhang of the boat beyond
the standard rack, which was evident in your picture of the kayak on
you van. He could get away with driving all the miles he did with his
kayak, but you will eventually have trouble and damage your boat, and
especially if you tighten the ropes on the bow and stern to much.

I have made a similar rack for my vehicle previously, and used for bike
rack, ski rack, and now kayak, wind surfer, and other misc junk. I dont
feel that it is necessary to fit the cross piece to the curve of the
top. Just bolt it on top of the runners near the end, as far forward
as you can get it. It should clear the curve of the roof, and extend
out as wide as the van body, maybe even a couple of inches wider, and
gives you some clearance to get a tie down rope or strap around the
cross piece. The cross piece this way rest on the extended runners
which transmits the weight to the body support structures, and not just
the skin.

Sort of a big square frame on top of your van. All this needs to be
attached to the existing rack. If you have gutters, I suggest using
turnbuckles and strapping to make a tiedown between the extended cross
piece, and the gutter. This will keep the front of the rack from trying
to lift off while driving down the road.

The main advantage of the rack is you do not have to tie the kayak down
by passing ropes through the windows and across the inside the van.
Depending on where these would go through, you may not be able to get
your doors open. This result in the accompaning amusement of watching a
short plump guy crawl in and out through the drivers window. Personally
I have trouble seeing that, or as in my case, a big plump guy! With a
rack, you tie the kayak down to the rack, and use the bow and stern
lines to maintain the kayak on top of your car, and not flying off as
you drive down the road, which is usually not considered to be
desirable.

If you tranport your bikes much, you can make some brackets using bike
axle and quick release for much less than Thule parts, and bolt them on
to the 2x4 cross pieces. (I'll try to dig one out for you and take a
picture and email.) On your Aerostar, you could probably put 6 bikes
on top. Try pricing out a 6 bike Thule, and this whole thing can be
made for less than $20 plus if for bikes, maybe $10 more/bike. plus
tiedown rope and foam blockes that you already have. Add one kayak,
stir, and have a good time. When you get the second kayak, and you will
have a second one, you will be set, maybe even a third, when you have
another buddy go with you! Which you should! Definite safety in
numbers! And even more fun!

Hopefully this clears some of your questions, TnT

Tik recommends:
===================
Sort of a big square frame on top of your van. All this needs to be
attached to the existing rack. If you have gutters, I suggest using
turnbuckles and strapping to make a tiedown between the extended cross
piece, and the gutter. This will keep the front of the rack from trying
to lift off while driving down the road.
======================

Thanks Tink. After my last post, I got to thinking about what you and
Michael had suggested and I realised that a frame/box was what you were
getting at.

Clearly I'll have cross pieces fore and aft (as far in either direction
as possible). I'm also thinking about adding another cross piece
somewhere in between, near the center of the hull. Or do you guys think
that would be overkill?

I'm also getting the impression that most people don't care too much
whether the cross pieces reflect the curvature of the hull. I was
thinking at least a bit of a "V" (keeping in mind that the load should
be carried by the keel, not the sides of the hull -- so a wider "V" as
opposed to a deeper one). Again, is this overkill?

Finally, Michael, I think, recommended 2X6's for the cross pieces. That
makes sense to me in terms of "meeting" the upward hull curvature of
fore and aft sections.

So, if I can just get you guys to sign off on this project, I'll be off
to the lumber yard.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========

On 17-Mar-2005, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

Did you follow my suggestion about using 2x4 runners that would extend
further to the front. Most of the standard rack, are only 4 or 5 ft max
between cross bars. That leaves alot of a 18 ft double or longer,
unsupported.

There's no point in supporting the hull further apart than half its length.
For an 18 ft kayak, that means no more than 9 ft between crossbars.

Realistically, four or five feet between crossbars is plenty. If it gets
much longer, rocker might get in the way. You should be tying down the
bow and stern anyway, so you'll be providing plenty of support for
the vessel against wind, bumps etc.

Mike

On 18-Mar-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote:

I'm also getting the impression that most people don't care too much
whether the cross pieces reflect the curvature of the hull.

I do!

I was
thinking at least a bit of a "V" (keeping in mind that the load should
be carried by the keel, not the sides of the hull -- so a wider "V" as
opposed to a deeper one). Again, is this overkill?

You want the most support you can get. This is especially true with a
plastic hull. You can either cut into a deep crosspiece (like a 2x6)
or make a saddle that bolts to the crosspiece. The latter will be more
flexible in allowing for lots of different configurations.

If you have a skin-on-frame kayak or a canoe, you don't need a saddle
since you can carry it upside down on its gunnels. Not many factory
kayaks have a flat enough deck to carry upside down easily on a flat
crossbar. I know folks that do this, however. If you rest the
kayak on its side (as with J racks or stackers) you only need padding.

Mike

Michael suggests:
===============
You want the most support you can get. This is especially true with a
plastic hull. You can either cut into a deep crosspiece (like a 2x6)
or make a saddle that bolts to the crosspiece. The latter will be more
flexible in allowing for lots of different configurations.
============

See what you think about this: I cut deep into the 2x6 crosspiece
(rectangular cut) and then create a sling using a fairly wide webbing
strap (perhaps 1.5" wide to correspond to the 1.5" cross-section of the
2x6).

I don't know if this qualifies as a "saddle", but it would seem to
conform ideally to the hull curvature and also transfer the mass of the
kayak, via straps, to the crosspiece. The issue here, I guess, is
ensuring that the straps can be securely mounted to the crosspiece
(grommets etc, eh?).

Or am I getting too complicated (and perhaps flimsy) here?

Michael, you have an uncanny ability to "send me back to the drawing
board". Thanks, I appreciate the input.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========

BCITORGB wrote:
Michael suggests:
===============
You want the most support you can get. This is especially true with
a
plastic hull. You can either cut into a deep crosspiece (like a 2x6)
or make a saddle that bolts to the crosspiece. The latter will be
more
flexible in allowing for lots of different configurations.
============

See what you think about this: I cut deep into the 2x6 crosspiece
(rectangular cut) and then create a sling using a fairly wide webbing
strap (perhaps 1.5" wide to correspond to the 1.5" cross-section of
the
2x6).

I don't know if this qualifies as a "saddle", but it would seem to
conform ideally to the hull curvature and also transfer the mass of
the
kayak, via straps, to the crosspiece. The issue here, I guess, is
ensuring that the straps can be securely mounted to the crosspiece
(grommets etc, eh?).

Or am I getting too complicated (and perhaps flimsy) here?

Michael, you have an uncanny ability to "send me back to the drawing
board". Thanks, I appreciate the input.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========

I think Michael is right about fitting a saddle for the hull to fit in
is a good idea. when he spoke of curvature before, fitting the top of
the van, maybe I missed what he was saying. To support the hull with a
saddle spreads out the weight of the kayak from just resting on one
very small area, and can overload that spot causing distortion. You
accomplish a lot with the foam pads. They do make high density foam
blocks that you can use for the hull also.

If the rocker interferes with the roof top, move the cross memgers
closer together. You can get an idea for spacing, just set the kayak on
the ground, and slide some 2x4 blocks under to determine the clearance
issues. Generally I think longer is better, but again Michael is
correct to say that the bow and stern lines are what actually hold the
kayak on top of the van, the rack just provides something for it to
rest on.

================================================== =====================
And Walts recommendation to drive a few miles and then stop and check
it is the best and most important!
================================================== =====================

And don't forget that it is up there. I say a 'yaker pull into an
underground parking garage one time. The low clearance was a big ouch!

One other thing I do, is using a bicycle cable lock, through the rack,
and various holes in the kayak, I lock it on. Serves as a safety if the
ropes come loose, and when you stop for the pizza, some numbskull
doesn't think that he can grab your kayak and make a quick get away.
Really ruins your day if you come out to your van and your pride and
joy, is gone! TnT

Tink suggests:
=============
One other thing I do, is using a bicycle cable lock, through the rack,
and various holes in the kayak,
===============

You have HOLES in your kayak!? I thought the objective was to avoid
holes!

frtzw906

On 18 Mar 2005 11:51:54 -0800, "BCITORGB"
wrote:

Michael suggests:
===============
You want the most support you can get. This is especially true with a
plastic hull. You can either cut into a deep crosspiece (like a 2x6)
or make a saddle that bolts to the crosspiece. The latter will be more
flexible in allowing for lots of different configurations.
============

See what you think about this: I cut deep into the 2x6 crosspiece
(rectangular cut) and then create a sling using a fairly wide webbing
strap (perhaps 1.5" wide to correspond to the 1.5" cross-section of the
2x6).

I don't know if this qualifies as a "saddle", but it would seem to
conform ideally to the hull curvature and also transfer the mass of the
kayak, via straps, to the crosspiece. The issue here, I guess, is
ensuring that the straps can be securely mounted to the crosspiece
(grommets etc, eh?).

Or am I getting too complicated (and perhaps flimsy) here?


Maybe too flimsy. If you're using big wood for strength, cutting into
it seems somehow wrong to me. Bolts through it, maybe?

I am not a woodworker or all that great at mechanical things. A whole
shaker of salt might be advisable with my above comments.

Michael, you have an uncanny ability to "send me back to the drawing
board". Thanks, I appreciate the input.

Cheers,
Wilf
===========


Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink suggests:
=============
One other thing I do, is using a bicycle cable lock, through the
rack,
and various holes in the kayak,
===============

You have HOLES in your kayak!? I thought the objective was to avoid
holes!

frtzw906

Well actually, you need one for each of the crew! :) Even canoes have
great big long holes, amazing they even float!

Now if you look inside these holes, you might find a seat support or
center post that you can thread a long cable around. Otherwise, some
kayaks have fittings or handles on the bow or stern for lifting that
you can put a cable lock in!

Every year there is someone on Mountain Buzz who put their kayaks on
the car night before a trip, to come out in the morning, and they lost
their boats overnight, or at the pizza pl, or motel. That would be
heartbreaking! TnT

Cyli confesses:
==============
Maybe too flimsy. If you're using big wood for strength, cutting into
it seems somehow wrong to me. Bolts through it, maybe?

I am not a woodworker or all that great at mechanical things.
================

I'm not a woodworker, and I positively suck at mechanical things.
Perhaps I'll wait for Michael's learned input on this one.

But keep in mind, the "cut" was to be into the top, mid, section of a
2x6 -- either a "v"-like cut to accommodate the shape of the hull
resting in it, or a rectangular-like cut to accommodate a webbing strap
which would, in theory (my theory) conform even better to the shape of
the hull and negate the need for foam or other cushioning material.

However, my concern is less for compromising the structural integrity
due to the cut into the wood (what do I know?) but more over how to
ensure that the webbing strap can be affixed securely on either side of
the cut. [as i type this, I'm thinking of extending the webbing strap
along the top of the 2x6 and screwing a 2x1 strip over this bit of
webbing strap and into the 2x6].

Like I've said before, this is beginning to take on the semblance of,
at minimum, a porch extension.

Cheers,
Wilf
=============

On 18-Mar-2005, Cyli wrote:

Maybe too flimsy. If you're using big wood for strength, cutting into
it seems somehow wrong to me. Bolts through it, maybe?

If you do it the way I describe, the wood is cut to match the curvature
of the roof and is supported at every point on the roof. Hence, the
wood doesn't need a lot of strength. Cutting into it won't be a big
deal as long as there's about 2" or so of wood left.

Mike

On 18-Mar-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote:

See what you think about this: I cut deep into the 2x6 crosspiece
(rectangular cut) and then create a sling using a fairly wide webbing
strap (perhaps 1.5" wide to correspond to the 1.5" cross-section of the
2x6).

The sling idea is a good one, but I'd consider a combination of cutting
a bit into the top of the 2x6 and also making little towers of wood to
hold the ends of the webbing.

Also, the ideal place to support the kayak is at the bulkheads - just
behind and at the front of the cockpit. The bulkheads provide plenty
of strength and stiffness to keep the hull from deforming.

The issue here, I guess, is
ensuring that the straps can be securely mounted to the crosspiece
(grommets etc, eh?).

If you make a couple of "towers" to hold the straps, then this is easy.
Bolt the towers to the crosspiece (two bolts will do it - sloping the
towers to the outside will allow for more length to distribute load).
The towers could be 2x2 or 2x4 and only need to be tall enough to clear
the hull from anything underneath. Round the tops of the towers and
run the webbing over to the outside. Double (or triple) the webbing
by folding it over and use a hot nail to burn a couple of holes in
it. When you cut the webbing, use a lighter or match to burn the
cut end and melt the webbing so it won't fray.

Screw thru the holes with stainless steel wood screws and use
stainless versions of these things (cup washers):
http://www.leevalley.com/hardware/page.aspx?c=1&p=40096&cat=3,41306,41316&ap=1
to hold the webbing.

Don't forget to allow for a place to attach the webbing that will
hold the kayak down on the rack. This can be big stainless eye bolts,
for example.

Mike

Michael suggests:
================
If you make a couple of "towers" to hold the straps, then this is easy.
Bolt the towers to the crosspiece (two bolts will do it - sloping the
towers to the outside will allow for more length to distribute load).
The towers could be 2x2 or 2x4 and only need to be tall enough to clear
the hull from anything underneath. Round the tops of the towers and
run the webbing over to the outside. Double (or triple) the webbing
by folding it over and use a hot nail to burn a couple of holes in
it. When you cut the webbing, use a lighter or match to burn the
cut end and melt the webbing so it won't fray.
==============

As always, much obliged!

Cheers,
Wilf

On 19 Mar 2005 13:35:19 -0800, "BCITORGB"
wrote:


As always, much obliged!

You do realize that this could take more in time and money than it
would to just buy the Thule racks and extender, right?

Long as you're straight on that and enjoying yourself, good kayaking
at ya'.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

Cyli asks:
==============
You do realize that this could take more in time and money than it
would to just buy the Thule racks and extender, right?
=================

Time for sure! Money, perhaps.

And I'm ever mindful of the fact that, with my complete lack of
woodworking skills, this could all be a huge cock-up. Yes, Cyli, I'm
afraid Very afraid!

Cheers,
Wilf
============

On 19-Mar-2005, Cyli wrote:

You do realize that this could take more in time and money than it
would to just buy the Thule racks and extender, right?

Time - yes, money - no and besides, makin' stuff is fun.

Mike

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 06:53:34 GMT, "Michael Daly"
wrote:

On 19-Mar-2005, Cyli wrote:

You do realize that this could take more in time and money than it
would to just buy the Thule racks and extender, right?

Time - yes, money - no and besides, makin' stuff is fun.

Mike


Problem with making stuff is that then you want to make more stuff.
It's like enjoying buying stuff. Pretty soon you've paid a lot for
stuff or the stuff to make stuff and you've got no place to put stuff.

We do have to warn him that if this works, he might start looking at
some of the simpler plans for how to make his own kayak, don't we?

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

Cyli wrote:
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 06:53:34 GMT, "Michael Daly"

wrote:

On 19-Mar-2005, Cyli wrote:

You do realize that this could take more in time and money than it
would to just buy the Thule racks and extender, right?

Time - yes, money - no and besides, makin' stuff is fun.

Mike


Problem with making stuff is that then you want to make more stuff.
It's like enjoying buying stuff. Pretty soon you've paid a lot for
stuff or the stuff to make stuff and you've got no place to put
stuff.

We do have to warn him that if this works, he might start looking at
some of the simpler plans for how to make his own kayak, don't we?

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

We should probably start him off with some papyrus reeds! TnT

On 20 Mar 2005 22:31:55 -0800, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

(snipped)

We should probably start him off with some papyrus reeds! TnT

Is there, by the way, a midwestern US equivalent of papyrus reeds?
It'd be fun to float down river in for an overnighter on an island.
Especially if it were a day that the aluminum hatch was headed
downstream, too. More fun than doing willows and a tarp, which I have
contemplated a time or two.


Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

Cyli wrote:
On 20 Mar 2005 22:31:55 -0800, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

(snipped)

We should probably start him off with some papyrus reeds! TnT

Is there, by the way, a midwestern US equivalent of papyrus reeds?
It'd be fun to float down river in for an overnighter on an island.
Especially if it were a day that the aluminum hatch was headed
downstream, too. More fun than doing willows and a tarp, which I
have
contemplated a time or two.


Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)

I have a Folbot, SOF, so I expect that willow and tarp should work just
fine if done right.

Reminds me of the Tom Hanks movie, when he was stranded on the island.
He had plenty of smaller pieces of wood branches, with the mylar tape,
and the old life raft, any good boy scout should have been able to form
a serviceable boat that would have been better than his raft. Oh well
he made it back to civilization, so I guess alls well that ends well.

I don't know whether cat-tail reeds would float when dried. We could
suggest that frtzw use them and let him find out for the rest of us
whether they would work or not. Naw, that would be mean, he'd probably
get wet and then be mad at the rest of us! Besides I am getting to like
the guy, and nice guys are hard to come by these days. TnT

"Cyli" wrote in message
...
On 20 Mar 2005 22:31:55 -0800, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

(snipped)

We should probably start him off with some papyrus reeds! TnT

Is there, by the way, a midwestern US equivalent of papyrus reeds?...

There is a common plant called the "giant reed"......grows along roadsides
(as well as other places) throughout the upper Great Lakes region. I've
looked up the Latin binomial in the past when I thought about growing it in
my yard, but don't remember it. It shouldn't be hard to find on Google.

I have no idea of how similar it is to papyrus. As a matter of fact, I
don't know much about either plant, but the giant reed is tubular and
hollow......seems like it ought to float.

Wolfgang

Tink says:
==============
I don't know whether cat-tail reeds would float when dried. We could
suggest that frtzw use them and let him find out for the rest of us
whether they would work or not. Naw, that would be mean, he'd probably
get wet and then be mad at the rest of us! Besides I am getting to like
the guy, and nice guys are hard to come by these days. TnT
==============

C'mon you guys! I'm in the land of the tall cedar. Why would I want to
mess with reeds, branches, etc. I'll just chop me a big old cedar,
hollow it out, and go for a quick paddle... with 10 or 12 buddlies.

Cheers,
Wilf

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink says:
==============
I don't know whether cat-tail reeds would float when dried. We could
suggest that frtzw use them and let him find out for the rest of us
whether they would work or not. Naw, that would be mean, he'd
probably
get wet and then be mad at the rest of us! Besides I am getting to
like
the guy, and nice guys are hard to come by these days. TnT
==============

C'mon you guys! I'm in the land of the tall cedar. Why would I want
to
mess with reeds, branches, etc. I'll just chop me a big old cedar,
hollow it out, and go for a quick paddle... with 10 or 12 buddlies.

Cheers,
Wilf

I assume your buddies are not tree-huggers?

Now if the tree is in the public forest, you have to also look out for
public servants with thick ticket pads that they issue for cutting down
trees.

So if you insist, you will probably want to restrict yourself to
cutting down one of your own trees on your own acreage up there. Then
you only have to worry about it landing on you, your car, your house,
your neighbors... Anyway you get my drift, you might want to stick with
reeds!

Besides, for some one that is power-tool challenged, can you say chain
saw? TnT

Tink:
===================
I assume your buddies are not tree-huggers?... So if you insist, you
will probably want to restrict yourself to cutting down one of your own
trees on your own acreage up there. ...
=====

Hmmm... good point....

In my municipality, where most people live on a slope, with "potential"
view property, everyone is a tree-hugger when it comes to trees above
their lot, and a logger as far as trees on the downhill side are
concerned. Here, you cannot cut trees (even on your own lot) without
prior consultation with the city arborist and then city permission
(which is damned hard to get!).

We've had way too many instances in the past of trees disappearing in
some kind of "cut and run" operation as people seek to create views
where none existed before. Fines can run as high as $20,000 per tree
(cheap in the minds of developers if it creates $250,000 worth of
view).

So, Tink, maybe I'll try reeds (not that any grow here).

frtzw906

On 21-Mar-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote:

We've had way too many instances in the past of trees disappearing in
some kind of "cut and run" operation as people seek to create views
where none existed before. Fines can run as high as $20,000 per tree
(cheap in the minds of developers if it creates $250,000 worth of
view).

Creating a view might also create an erosion and hillside instability
problem too. Not something very many people worry about til the
lawsuits roll in.

Mike

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink:
===================
I assume your buddies are not tree-huggers?... So if you insist, you
will probably want to restrict yourself to cutting down one of your
own
trees on your own acreage up there. ...
=====

Hmmm... good point....

In my municipality, where most people live on a slope, with
"potential"
view property, everyone is a tree-hugger when it comes to trees above
their lot, and a logger as far as trees on the downhill side are
concerned. Here, you cannot cut trees (even on your own lot) without
prior consultation with the city arborist and then city permission
(which is damned hard to get!).

We've had way too many instances in the past of trees disappearing in
some kind of "cut and run" operation as people seek to create views
where none existed before. Fines can run as high as $20,000 per tree
(cheap in the minds of developers if it creates $250,000 worth of
view).

So, Tink, maybe I'll try reeds (not that any grow here).

frtzw906

$20,000 would get you started on a pretty complete kayak rig! You know
pursuit car with racks, matching paint job to kayak, chaffeur, porter
to carry kayak on portages, and cooler with beer, pizza still delivered
in remote bay by helicopter/pizza delivery service. Now that would be
fun! You got any more money to spend, I'm sure we could figure out some
worthwhile and justifiable expenses. :) TnT

Michael Daly wrote:
On 21-Mar-2005, "BCITORGB" wrote:

We've had way too many instances in the past of trees disappearing
in
some kind of "cut and run" operation as people seek to create views
where none existed before. Fines can run as high as $20,000 per
tree
(cheap in the minds of developers if it creates $250,000 worth of
view).

Creating a view might also create an erosion and hillside instability
problem too. Not something very many people worry about til the
lawsuits roll in.

Mike

My take on this Mike is that the neighbors might be willing to pay for
your kayak though if you do the "cut and run" routine. That way they
get the view, frtzw gets his kayak, city gets its $20,000. Everyone is
happy!

The only problem I see with this gets back to the chain saw and frtzw.
He has labored under the previous recent project, being power tool
challenged. Now I have not yet seen a picture of frtzw, so I may be
wrong on this point, but judging from what I've heard! The part about
short and pudge may be a factor as well.

I heard one time, " Those who can run play field hockey, those who
can't, coach." Now combining my wealth of information, I really have a
strange picture of frtzw running through the trees carrying a chain saw
after he cuts down the neighbors tree. :) TnT

BCITORGB wrote:
Tink:
===================
I assume your buddies are not tree-huggers?... So if you insist, you
will probably want to restrict yourself to cutting down one of your
own
trees on your own acreage up there. ...
=====

Hmmm... good point....

In my municipality, where most people live on a slope, with
"potential"
view property, everyone is a tree-hugger when it comes to trees above
their lot, and a logger as far as trees on the downhill side are
concerned. Here, you cannot cut trees (even on your own lot) without
prior consultation with the city arborist and then city permission
(which is damned hard to get!).

We've had way too many instances in the past of trees disappearing in
some kind of "cut and run" operation as people seek to create views
where none existed before. Fines can run as high as $20,000 per tree
(cheap in the minds of developers if it creates $250,000 worth of
view).

So, Tink, maybe I'll try reeds (not that any grow here).

frtzw906

frtzw, I know I will pay for all this, but I am having too much fun!

Did you ever hear about the Canadian woodcutter. He had been laboring
for his whole life cutting firewood. One day he heard about the
miraculous invention called a chainsaw. Well a few days later, he
finally broke down and went into town and bought himself a chainsaw.
From all he was told, he figured he would triple the amount of wood
that he would be able to cut, and the nice man at the chain saw store
guaranteed it in writing, or money back.

So he went back to work the next day, and he really worked up a storm,
but it was really dissapointing. The best he could do was about the
same as he had always done. But being a good Canadian, he wasn't ready
to give up and get mad at the nice man in the store, so he doubled his
effort. But alas, again the same frustrating results. After a week of
this, he finally gave up, and on his day off went bck into town to get
his money back for the chainsaw, since it was guaranteed.

He explained the situation to the nice man at the store, who said no
problem, but let me check out the saw first if there is any readily
visable problem. It seemed sharp enough as he checked the blade, so he
pulled the starter rope and it started easily and with a strong roar.

The Canadian woodsman, hearing the roar, was a little surprised, and
said,"What is that noise!" TnT

Tink jokes:
==============
The Canadian woodsman, hearing the roar, was a little surprised, and
said,"What is that noise!" TnT
=================

Chalis tabernac! But out west, here, the woodsman in the story is from
Quebec. Then you get to tell the story with thick French accent, eh?

frtzw906

Mike:
=============
Creating a view might also create an erosion and hillside instability
problem too. Not something very many people worry about til the
lawsuits roll in.
==============

For sure! In a suburb just east of Vancouver, most (all) trees were cut
down before constructing monster homes with a view. Now, when it rains
(which is very often around here), the streets running downhill become
torrents of water. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

Wilf

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 05:56:29 -0600, "Wolfgang"
wrote:


"Cyli" wrote in message
.. .
On 20 Mar 2005 22:31:55 -0800, "Tinkerntom" wrote:

(snipped)

We should probably start him off with some papyrus reeds! TnT

Is there, by the way, a midwestern US equivalent of papyrus reeds?...

There is a common plant called the "giant reed"......grows along roadsides
(as well as other places) throughout the upper Great Lakes region. I've
looked up the Latin binomial in the past when I thought about growing it in
my yard, but don't remember it. It shouldn't be hard to find on Google.

I have no idea of how similar it is to papyrus. As a matter of fact, I
don't know much about either plant, but the giant reed is tubular and
hollow......seems like it ought to float.

Wolfgang

Googled it. Invasive, too, so maybe no one would mind it being cut.
However, that easy burning part even when green is scary for a smoker.

Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: lid (strip the .invalid to email)