Sierra Club Wants Moore, by Tom Thompson, Kansas Chapter Political Chair
Club Endorses Tom Sawyer for Governor
Chapter Recommends the Endorsement of Jim Phillips in the 1st District, by Tom Thompson
Sierra Club 1998 Legislative Questionnaire
Sierra Club Identifies Snowbarger as "Must-Be-Defeated", by Steve Baru
Comments… on Surface Water Quality Standards, by Charles Benjamin
Sun Newspaper Publisher Steve Rose to Speak, by Steve Baru
Voices Needed For a Healthy Missouri River, by Greg Bryant & Chad Smith
Trains, Lanes, Planes and Octanes: The Y2.01K Problem, by Wayne Sangster
Join Me In 1999 For A Guatemala White Water Expedition, by T. J. Hittle
Kanza Newza, by Tom Thompson, Kanza Group Chair

In 1996 the Kansas Chapter of the Sierra Club sent questionnaires to the candidates running for the Third Congressional seat vacated by Rep. Jan Meyers, a Republican from Prairie Village. Judy Hancock, a Democrat from Prairie Village, was endorsed after she answered the Sierra Club questionnaire and was interviewed. Candidate Vince Snowbarger did not respond.

As we all know, Rep. Snowbarger won in 1996 and went on to be what we expected and less. In the past two years he engineered an assault on the Wakarusa Wetlands and has consistently voted against the environment. These include votes that helped to keep the federal budget inflated by providing corporate welfare and votes against funding family planning.

Now it is 1998. Once again questionnaires were delivered to the candidates. Dennis Moore responded, Rep. Vince Snowbarger did not. We cannot afford another term of "no response." Dennis Moore was endorsed by the Sierra Club to send environmental responsibility to Washington from the Third Congressional District in Kansas.

Dennis Moore believes that it is important to protect our national forests from depletion and unnecessary destruction. Moore believes we should have strong standards for clean air and clean water. He is in favor of reproductive choices for women and men and believes that the U. S. should continue supporting global efforts to provide these.

Moore also believes in responding to the problem of global warming. His platform supports efforts to decrease energy consumption in the United States 30% by the year 2010. He also wants research and development of environmentally friendly sources of energy like wind and solar power.

If you think it is time for an environmentally friendly representative in Congress call me, Tom Thompson, today at 913-236-9161. The Third Congressional District includes Douglas, Johnson, Miami and Wyandotte Counties. Most campaign help is in the form of making phone calls or delivering literature door-to-door.

Once again, if you want Moore, call me, Tom Thompson, at 913-236-9161 to help. Election day is November 3rd so call today!!!

Back to Table of Contents

Casey Stengel, the 1950’s New York Yankees manager, used to say, "nice guys finish last." In the case of the 1998 Governor’s race in Kansas, old Casey is right - and he is wrong. The incumbent Governor, Republican Bill Graves, is a "nice guy." So is the Democratic candidate for Governor, Tom Sawyer. One of these two "nice guys" will be Governor of Kansas for four years and the other will go back to private life. Many of us, who are not so enamored with public life, might question if going back to private life is "finishing last." If it is, then most of us are losers.

For those of us concerned about issues of the environment and natural resource usage in Kansas we must make a choice between two "nice guys" on election day. Both of these politicians say they are very concerned about environmental issues in Kansas. However, talk is cheap and action or inaction tells us more about what our elected officials really believe. So let’s look at the record.

Bill Graves has been Governor for four years. He has taken at least two actions on environmental issues that the Kansas Chapter of the Sierra Club has supported. He signed a new Threatened and Endangered Species Act in 1997 that opens up the process of listing species at an earlier date than previously and provides property tax incentives to land owners who provide habitat. Former Kansas Sierra Club legislative coordinator Bill Craven was instrumental in pulling together the study commission that made this legislation possible. The second major positive action that Bill Graves did for the environment was his 1998 "buffer strip initiative" – whereby landowners who turn their crop ground along rivers and streams into riparian areas planted in grass and trees would get a property tax adjustment reflecting the "devaluation" of their land. We commend Bill Graves for these actions.

So why aren’t we endorsing the incumbent Governor? It is because Bill Graves has failed to show leadership on two very important environmental issues. Specifically, Bill Graves could have vetoed H.B. 2368 - the bill sponsored by the Kansas League of Municipalities and the Agribusiness Alliance designed to weaken 1994 water quality standards by suspending key provisions of those standards until a commission was set-up whose purpose was to justify the permanent weakening of standards. Bill Graves did not appoint anyone to the commission who favored strengthening water quality standards but instead appointed several people who clearly favor weakening water quality standards. Tom Sawyer opposed H.B. 2368, made statements on the floor of the House in favor of strong water quality standards, and has made strengthening water quality standards a central message of his campaign.

The rapid expansion of the corporate hog industry in Kansas has the potential to be the greatest environmental threat the state has ever seen. The Graves administration has gone out of its way to provide economic and tax incentives to facilitate this expansion. This despite the fact that citizens in 21 out of 22 counties, where there have been local referenda on the expansion of the corporate hog industry, have voted overwhelmingly against it. Bill Graves has done nothing to close the loopholes that allow Murphy Farms, Inc., to get around the will of the people by claiming to be a family farm. Bill Graves also has done nothing to stop Murphy and Seaboard Corporations from getting around the will of the people by contracting their large production units to independent producers. KDHE Secretary Gary Mitchell, Bill Graves’ appointee, issued a permit to Murphy in Hodgeman County, despite the fact that the citizens of Hodgeman county said no to corporate hog factories. Mitchell refused to grant the citizens of Lane County a public hearing before giving Murphy permission to operate two large production units. These actions and inactions of the Graves administration in favor of Murphy and Seaboard have forced the citizens of Hodgeman, Lane and other counties to spend their hard-earned dollars hiring attorneys to protect their rights against these large corporations. Bill Graves refused to support a two-year moratorium on permitting swine production facilities. The moratorium idea came from the people of western Kansas who wanted a simple "time-out" until the industry solved its odor problems, the K-State lagoon seepage study was completed and an audit determined the true economic impacts of the industry on the state. Tom Sawyer favored a moratorium and has indicated his support for closing the Murphy and Seaboard loopholes.

In short, Bill Graves is "a nice guy" and is likely to win this election. Nevertheless, it is clear from his policies, when push comes to shove Bill Graves tends to favor the interests of polluters over the interests of those having to live with the pollution. Tom Sawyer has shown that he is, and will continue to be, a true friend of the environment. Tom Sawyer, also a "nice guy", will probably not win this election. However, that should not stop Sierra Club members, and others concerned about environment and natural resource issues in Kansas, from supporting Tom Sawyer for Governor.

Back to Table of Contents

The current congressman in the First Congressional District helped to get a plan for building the South Lawrence Trafficway through congress. He has further shown that he is not a friend of the environment.

The Kansas Chapter Ex-Comm voted to recommend an endorsement of Jim Phillips to the National Sierra Club PAC because he is a friend of the environment.

He believes that voters should be able to decide whether to permit large scale hog farms in their communities. He believes strict standards for these facilities should be enforced. Furthermore, he says he would vote against fast track on international trade agreements as they are currently written.

Jim Phelps can be contacted at PO Box 1893, Garden City, KS 67846 or phoned at 1-888-263-4610.

Back to Table of Contents

The following is the questionnaire that was sent to a select list of Kansas Legislative races. The questions required yes or no responses and allowed for comments. If you have an opportunity to communicate with legislative candidates you could use these to question them. What is considered the appropriate answer is in parentheses, although comments could indicate that a candidate has an even stronger position than reflected in the question.

1. The Sierra Club supported H.B. 2925, which was a compromise between sand and gravel dredgers and environmentalists and canoeists concerned about the impact of dredging on the river. HB 2925 preserved certain parts of the Kansas River for recreation by prohibiting dredging in those parts. Do you support recreation as a priority use for the Kansas River? (yes)
2. Do you support the concept that dredging is harmful to the Kansas River and should be prohibited in certain recreational corridors? (yes)
3. Would you support appropriating state money to develop access points to the Kansas River for recreational purposes? (yes)
4. Many Kansans go to the more fully developed state parks in surrounding states rather than utilize Kansas Parks. Money is lost to other states in the way of park fees as a result. Communities near the parks also lose due to lost business. Would you vote for legislation that dedicates some of the state sales tax to provide a more consistent source of funding for Kansas Wildlife and Parks so that they can stop the deterioration of equipment, increase handicap accessibility, and construct needed new facilities? (yes)
5. To better develop the outdoor resources of Kansas would you support legislation that would allow for the completion of the Prairie Spirit Trail and its inclusion in the Kansas State Park System? (yes)
6. The state of Kansas is moving toward the deregulation of the utility industry. Electric companies will be posturing themselves to avoid expensive sources of electricity so they can sell cheaper more profitable electricity. Wolf Creek produces the most expensive electricity in Kansas. Would you support legislation that would prevent utilities from passing on the high expense of Wolf Creek to consumers or taxpayers? (yes)
7. The Sierra Club believes that outer belt freeways contribute to leap frog development and the artificial and unnecessary extension of community resources. It believes in providing transportation services that lend themselves to orderly development should growth occur. Do you support the use of KDOT funds for building outer-belt freeways around urban areas? (no)
8. The Sierra Club believes that renewable sources of energy are preferable to burning more polluting fossil fuels and expensive nuclear energy. Energy sources such as wind energy would be cleaner and serve consumers well if the economics of marketing were structured appropriately. Would you support legislation to establish a net metering system that would allow producers of surplus renewable energy to receive a greater return from larger energy producers? (yes)

Providing for a Clean and Healthy Environment

9. Increased congestion is projected on highways in the more urban areas of Kansas (like I-35 and I-435 in the Kansas City area). Increased congestion has contributed to an increased number of days that qualify for air quality alerts. Would you support using KSOT funds to help pay for commuter rail lines that would alleviate traffic congestion and decrease automobile generated pollution in the air? (yes)
10. Would you vote for the necessary budget to allow the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to have sufficient technical support so that they can effectively enforce Kansas environmental laws? (yes)
11. The Sierra Club has supported a moratorium on the permitting of large swine operations until the odor problem was solved and studies of lagoon seepage and economic impact on communities were completed. Counties in Kansas through county referendum options have been rejecting corporate hog production by a margin of 72%. Would you support these communities by voting for legislation that would tighten controls on the size of Hog farms, the seepage rates, and the odor emitted by these facilities? (yes)

Making Politics Fair

12. Do you support campaign finance reform that includes tightening limits on campaign contributions, putting tighter limits on PAC contributions and full disclosure and identification of all organizations with media campaigns to influence elections? (yes)
13. Do you support legislation that allows residents in Kansas Counties to vote in a binding referendum to determine whether factory hog farms will be allowed in their county? (yes)
14. The Sierra Club supports the concept that those using our highways support their full cost rather than using money from the state general fund. Do you support having money from the state general fund being used to pay for new highway projects? (yes)

Back to Table of Contents

Sierra Club will be conducting an Independent Expenditure Campaign (IEC) in support of former Johnson County District Attorney Dennis Moore for the 3rd District Congressional seat. This United States House of Representatives seat, held by Congressman Vince Snowbarger since 1996, was previously held by Jan Meyers, a very good friend to the environment. In Snowbarger’s brief tenure he has demonstrated his lack of care and understanding for clean air, water and the environment in general.

The non-partisan League of Conservation Voters (LCV) has rated Snowbarger’s conservation voting record as a paltry 17 out of 100. (The higher the number, the better for the environment.) The LCV chair, former Kansas Governor Mike Hayden, a Republican, says, "It’s time for Republicans to put the conserve back in conservative."

National Sierra Club sees Snowbarger as a weak candidate out of step with many people in this district. Polls show that Dennis Moore has a lead and a good chance to defeat Snowbarger.

Our campaign is being conducted and coordinated fully separately from Dennis Moore’s or any other campaign. We develop our own strategy, message and implementation. We use our own people. That is why we need your help. Our coordinator will need a list of names of those who would enjoy volunteering in this important effort. This can be exciting, fun and--with your help--successful. Please give us your name as a volunteer. You can do that by calling Steve Baru or Craig Wolfe at the following numbers.

Back to Table of Contents

The following are comments on the Final Recommendations of the Submitted to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment on August 13, 1998 at public hearings in Lawrence and Wichita by the Kansas Chapter of Sierra Club and the Kansas Natural Resource Council

The Commission’s report is not a work of science and does not address the legislatively mandated issues. It is a series of conclusions based on the Commission’s opinions that are not formally documented by references or sources of information. It attempts to address social issues as interpreted by the Commission.

The Commission’s recommendations rely heavily on the appointment of a permanent commission--which would be of similar composition and appointed in the same way as the current Commission. We can therefore predict the probable outcome from adopting these recommendations by looking at what this Commission has produced.

This Commission was established to explore possibilities for weakening water quality standards. Some of the recommendations may cause the state to spend a lot of money pursuing this goal. Fortunately, much of this money will be spent in vain because there is not much room for weakening the standards under the Clean Water Act. The commission is seeking to make waste disposal a high priority use of our streams, lakes and wetlands, but this is explicitly forbidden by the Clean Water Act. Similarly, the state cannot arbitrarily declare that swimming or fishing is an unattainable use just because it is inconvenient for some polluters.

We want to serve notice to the Governor and the legislature that we hope to ensure that a portion of the money spent futilely on behalf of polluters goes to pay attorneys for KNRC and the Sierra Club who will fight to see that the mandates of the Clean Water Act are carried out in Kansas.

1. The Commission recommends a permanent commission be established to advise the Governor and the Legislature on water quality issues.

2. The Commission recommends a provision be added to Kansas statute requiring and outlining enhanced stakeholder participation in all aspects of the water quality standards setting process to reinforce the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act, including the use of "Stream Teams", which would focus on collaborative learning, problem-solving and program implementation, not monitoring for enforcement.

3. The Commission recommends a provision be added to Kansas statute outlining policy considerations that must be addressed by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment when establishing designated uses. The Commission also recommends a provision be added to Kansas statute requiring Health and Environment to review current use designations in a systematic manner based on priorities established through the stakeholder participation process.

4. The Commission recommends the Kansas Department of Health and Environment develop a scientifically based, objective process to conduct use attainability analysis.

5. The Commission strongly recommends the Kansas Legislature and the Governor establish a dedicated funding base to support water quality monitoring, both chemical and biological. Rigorous monitoring is the foundation for defensible use attainability analysis and appropriate designated use decisions. In fact, Kansas has a long tradition of recognizing the value of water quality monitoring. As the State moves into the next phase of water quality improvements, more through and targeted monitoring will be necessary.

6. The Commission recommends Health and Environment regulations provide for alternative winter ammonia limits on a site-specific basis where justified through scientific data and evaluation…. The Commission also recommends that Health and Environment invite communities to propose the development of site specific criteria if the leaders of the community or Health and Environment believe the criteria may be either under-protective or over-protective for a given water segment.

7. The Commission recommends the atrazine criteria for chronic aquatic life remain at 3 ppb until more research on the range from 1 ppb to 20 ppb is reviewed or conducted.

8. The Commission recommends the Kansas Department of Health and Environment recognize the impact of natural mineral intrusion on Kansas stream quality and subsequent permits. The agency should establish regional or segment specific criteria working with the Kansas Geological Survey to determine what numeric criteria is appropriate on a watershed or segment basis. Given 20 years of work done by the KGS which shows there are areas of the state that naturally exceed the criteria and have alkaline habitats, adjusting this criteria to consider natural conditions will make the standard more accurately reflect naturally occurring stream conditions…. Finally, Health and Environment should move existing language [K.A.R. 28-16-28e(c)(3)(B)] that references natural mineral intrusion to the administrative section of the standards (K.A.R. 28-16-28f) and modify the language by striking domestic water supply and replacing it with designated use.

9. The Commission recommends a reexamination of the EPA [fecal coliform] criterion to determine if it is an adequate indicator of public health risks and further recommends the exploration of the impacts of seasonal disinfection and the public health risk associated with fecal coliform spikes caused by runoff events. The criteria used by Health and Environment was established by EPA in 1986. The Commission believes more research is available that did not exist a decade ago and it should be evaluated. This could reduce the public health risks from bacteria contamination.

10. The Commission recommends that the Kansas Department of Health and Environment utilize seasonal variations where appropriate. Information brought before the Commission indicates seasonal variations are accepted by EPA and used in several other states. This should result in criteria more accurately reflecting conditions in the field.

11. The Commission recommends that if water quality criteria are to be established and are more stringent than EPA requirements, they must be justified with a risk assessment analysis, and where appropriate, a cost/benefit analysis.

12. The Commission recommends the Kansas Department of Health and Environment add a provision to its regulations to clarify that narrative criteria alone should not determine stream impairment for listing purposes. This policy will ensure both subjective and objective criteria determine the attainment of a designated use for listing purposes and clarify the true condition of Kansas waters. In testimony before the Commission, there was concern that because narrative criteria cannot be evaluated with monitoring, it should not be the sole indicator of impairment (Johnson County Wastewater).

13. The Commission recommends the Kansas Department of Health and Environment modify its [mixing zone] regulations to ensure that when data is available, actual effects take precedence over models or mathematical calculations. The Commission also recommends Health and Environment expand its variance procedure to include mixing zones and other items within the guidelines of the federal Clean Water Act. This will provide an opportunity for stakeholder participation processes to be designed and implemented. Mixing zones should relate to the toxic potential of the discharge, established dose/response relationships, actual plume character and time of exposure, rather than geometric sizes and models when this information is available. Health and Environment should also consider modifying implementation regulations so the best available science on the toxicological kinetics of pollutants is utilized.

14. The Commission recommends the Kansas Department of Health and Environment fully incorporate implementation procedures into regulation. This will assure adequate peer review, stakeholder participation and consistent application of water quality standards.

15. The Commission recommends the Legislature and the Governor place a high priority on funding the necessary components for an effective and efficient water quality standards setting process. The Commission suggests dedicated funding for water quality monitoring and use attainability analysis.

Back to Table of Contents

The Kanza Group of the Sierra Club announces that Steve Rose, publisher of The Sun Newspapers, will be the featured speaker for our new series entitled, "On The Spot". The series will feature community leaders who will speak on topics that relate to our local environment.

The purpose of this series is to help tear down artificial walls that may exist between the environmental community and civic leaders and to become better informed about opinions. This is not a roast-the-enemy type program but a chance for dialogue on environmental topics that affect our quality of life. We may reach agreement on certain issues and on others that we may not, but at least we will achieve an understanding of the thoughts and attitudes of our leaders, and they in turn may understand ours. If along the way some education happens, then that will be a bonus.

Steve Rose, our first guest, has agreed to be put "on the spot" in front of the environmental community and the public. He will share his ideas and we ours concerning certain community environmental topics in a non-confrontational and comfortable setting. This should be an enjoyable evening for all. The public is invited, so bring a friend.

Date & Time: Thursday, November 12, 1998 at 7:30 PM.

Place: Sierra Club General Meeting at Shawnee Mission Unitarian Universalist Church, 7725 W. 87th Street

Back to Table of Contents

You can help change the way the Army Corps of Engineers manages the Missouri River for decades into the future, if you attend and speak out at one of the public comment meetings being held up and down the river during October and November.

The first in a series of "Preliminary Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement Workshops" to be hosted by the Corps will be in Atchison on Thursday, October 1st. A workshop will also be held in Kansas City on November 9.

Several years ago the Corps held a similar set of meetings to present an earlier draft of the Master Manual for management of the Missouri River. A Corps spokesman complained that conservation, recreation and community groups did not attend those meetings, leading to Corps to believe no constituency existed for a healthy, more natural Missouri.

As a result, the Corps has assumed there is little public support for abandoning a half-century of "barge-friendly" management policy that has devastated the river ecology and put several species on endangered or threatened lists.

Chad Smith of American Rivers hopes Sierra members can help correct this misperception. At a recent meeting of the Missouri River Coalition, of which Kansas Sierra is a member, Smith asked members to spread the word and "swamp" each of the Corps' workshops with "dozens, hundreds" of citizens who want the Missouri managed for wilderness and recreation.

Those who attend the workshops will be offered a chance to make a public comment. Smith emphasized that it is important for each conservationist to speak for the record.

"The message should be brief, and not too technical," said Smith. "Tell the Corps how you think a healthy Missouri River will benefit riverside communities. Tell the Corps how important natural areas along the river are for wildlife and people. Ask them to restore habitat and natural river features, especially a spring rise that imitates the historic flow patterns so important to wildlife."

Below is the full schedule of meetings, in case you have friends upriver you can persuade to attend. Hearings at each meeting are from 2 to 5 p.m. and from 7 to 10 p.m. The starred dates also include, from 5 to 7 p.m., a public meeting on the Annual Operating Plan, the Corps' yearly plan controlling river level and uses.

NOTE: This is a tentative schedule. For final workshop times and locations, contact Chad Smith, American Rivers (402-598-5592) or Greg Bryant, KS Sierra and Missouri River Coalition (785-544- 7735).

Back to Table of Contents

The problem that awaits us with regard to computers when the year 2000 rolls around is much in the news these days. Around 2010 another huge problem, long in the making, will confront the world. According to the cover article (one of four in a special report on oil) in the March 1998 issue of Scientific American ("The End of Cheap Oil," by Colin J. Campbell and Jean H. Laherrere), world production of readily accessible crude oil (so-called conventional oil) will start to decline early in the next century. We won't be anywhere close to running out of conventional oil, but it will become increasingly difficult to get out what is left. The demand could outstrip the supply and drive up prices (and a return to gas lines as in 1973 and 1979?) unless cheap alternatives are found.

Oil industry reports are optimistic. They say we have "proved" reserves of 1,020 billion barrels of oil (Gbo) at the start of 1998. Dividing that number by the current production rate of 23.6 Gbo a year might suggest that oil could remain plentiful and cheap for 43 more years -- probably longer, because official charts show reserves growing. This calculation makes three critical errors: First, the estimates of reserves are distorted. Second, oil production won't remain constant since world demand is rising at more than two percent a year (a 60 percent increase is forecast for 2020). Third and most important, the last bucket of oil from the ground won't be retrieved as easily as were the barrels of oil gushing from the ground early on.

The authors of the Scientific American article must be respected for their analysis of the problem since they have spent most of their careers exploring for oil, studying reserve figures and estimating the amount of oil left to discover, first while employed at major oil companies and later as independent consultants. They say that over the years they have come to appreciate that the relevant statistics are far more complicated than they first appear.

The OPEC countries have faced a great temptation to inflate their reports because the higher their reserves, the more oil they are allowed to export. National companies, which have exclusive oil rights in the main OPEC countries, need not (and do not) release the detailed statistics on each field that could be used to verify the country's total reserves. There is good reason to suspect that when, during the late 1980s, six of the eleven OPEC nations increased their reserve figures by colossal amounts, ranging from 42 to 197 percent, they did so only to boost their export quotas. A staggering 287 Gbo were added to their reserve estimates, an increase more than all the oil ever discovered in the U.S. -- plus 40 percent.

Campbell and Laherrere say that at the end of 1996 we had about 850 Gbo of known conventional oil, not the higher figure that oil industry claims. Allowing for the discovery of new oil, they say only about another 1,000 Gbo of conventional oil remain in the world (the best estimate is that just over 800 Gbo had been removed from the earth by the end of 1997). This puts us close to the halfway mark in our mad squandering of conventional oil. The rate at which any well -- or any country -- can produce oil always rises to a maximum and then, when about half of the oil is gone, begins to fall gradually back to zero. Domestic production of oil in the U.S. peaked in 1970. In 1956 M. King Hubbert, a geologist for Shell Oil Co. predicted, that production in the lower 48 states would decline after 1969. Campbell and Laherrere predict a similar decline in world production before 2010.

The last half of the world's conventional oil will be used up more rapidly than the first half was, at least until it gets really difficult to get it out of the ground. There is only so much crude oil in the world, and the industry has found about 90 percent of it. We can only hope that alternatives are ready when the crunch arrives. But our government seems more concerned about when Social Security allegedly is going bankrupt (a financial problem amenable to a financial fix) than when we are going to run out of nonrenewable cheap oil. The politicians’ reaction when confronted with the prospect of gas lines in a decade or so might be: What, me worry? Just keep driving those gas hogs, guys. We don't need CAFE standards. We don't need transit and Amtrak to conserve. We'll get it from some place in the former Soviet Union (as if the U.S. had priority when it comes to using up the world's resources).

There are alternatives (such as mining for oil, better engineering to retrieve more oil from current fields and from under the deep ocean, and converting natural gas to liquid fuels), and in future installments of this column we will report on them.

Back to Table of Contents

Just quick note to say, Buenos dias and we are back, as I am sorting through 52 minutes of phone calls, 489 Email messages, and two card board boxes full of mail.

The 1998 Guatemala Whitewater trip was FABULOUS. We had six kayakers and four paddle rafters make the final cut in to Guatemala City. The water is warm and weather is cool in Central America this time of year. An incredibly magical time and place to paddle. Cheap air fares, cheap land travel, inexpensive food, and great exchanges rates don't hurt things either.

This was my 8th year to paddle Central America and the 3rd year for paddling in Guatemala. The place just has everything that most paddlers love...lots of rain, high mountain ranges and canyons all over the country, good access, no permits, cheap lodging and travel, fun things to do between trips, no waiting lines in the eddies, no rafts to dodge, beautiful people, and cheap beer!! It doesn't get ANY BETTER!!!

We ran Rio Los Esclavos on the highest water kayak descent ever. Rio Los Esclavos, a Class III-IV run at normal levels, compares to Rio Pacuare in Costa Rica. Just a lot prettier, way more outstanding rapids, jungle vines hanging over from the canyon walls, and more water falls dumping into the river. Four of us that ran it estimated that it rose from a 4,000 cfs start to an unexpected peak of 10,000 cfs during the day and night after a torrential rain. Spent the night on the river unexpectedly. Paddled safely out the next day on solid Class IV-V water. Worried the crap out of the rest of the expedition though.

We ran Rio Lanquin, near Coban. It is a Class III-V run from its source out of the caves of Lanquin. Rio Lanquin is a pristine aqua blue river that has an upper and lower section. Only the kayaks ran the lower Class IV-V section. Paddle rafters traveled to Semuc Champey, a stunningly beautiful Mayan shrine, swimming in a series of travertine pools. Did some caving too.

Ran Rio Cahabon, a 52-mile long river Class III-IV+ section. It compares to the Gauley River with up to 10X the play spots as the Ocoee River. No rafts to dodge and no waiting lines to play either. Wonderful Qek Chi Indians waving at us along the way. Met some fine folks and learned a little Qek Chi along the way. A multi-day, oar rigged raft supported trip. Did lots of side canyon hikes up to huge waterfalls and warm springs. Fabulous multi-day run through one big rapid after another, with lots of play in between. If it were in America, most rafters and paddlers would be trading in their Selway, Middle Fork, and Grand Canyon permits to run this thing.

Ran Rio Sauce, a Class III-V river canyon near El Estor. Last year, we set a highest water decent ever and this year set a lowest water decent ever. Beautiful series of extremely narrow canyons. Compares to Baker Creek to Arkansas' Cossatot River, just a couple notches tougher, 22 miles long, and lots more drops.

We hiked around the Mayan ruins of Quiri Qua between rivers and toured the colonial city of Antigua on off days. We visited Lake Attitlan, a 2,000' deep lake, completely surrounded by volcanoes. The lake that has no outlet. Some say it’s the most beautiful lake in the world. Most of the group toured a number of handcraft and Mayan artist markets along the way over the 12-day trip.

Tourism is up in Guatemala, surprisingly. However it is the many other European, Middle Eastern, and Asian citizens that are coming to visit. Everywhere you go, you are hearing strange and wonderful languages in the coffee shops, markets, and restaurants. Americans are fairly rare in Guatemala although the crime rate is low and travel is usually quite safe. The American press has seen to it that anything bad in Guatemala makes it on the front pages. We Americans seem to hold other countries up to absurdly high standards, while out own country sports the most guns and highest crime rates in most categories. Go figure!!

Everyone made it through all the critical rapids this year just fine, no raft flips and darn few swims. No major accidents, but a lot of close calls and wild but true tales of jungles, high water, fierce rapids, wonderful Guatemalan-Mayan peoples, beautiful handcrafts, and incredible jungle and mountain scenery.

So if you haven't been paddling the most stunningly beautiful, most kick-ass, rain filled, play rivers for the last two weeks solid, then join me in 1999 for a Guatemala WW expedition - late August to early September.

Hasta pronto!!

T.J. Hittle / P.O. Box 83 / Manhattan, KS. 66505-0083

voice:(785)539-7772 / fax:(785)539-6050 / Email: tjhittle@kansas.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hittle Landscape Architects Website:

http://www.kansas.net/~tjhittle/l_arch.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kansas Paddler Home Page:

http://www.kansas.net/~tjhittle

Back to Table of Contents

Go vote. There is no reason not to vote unless you aren't a U.S. citizen. Everyone knows about absentee ballots. There is also an advance ballot. To do this you get an advanced voting form from your county election office or the Kansas Secretary of State's office. You fill out the form then mail or FAX it in. You will be sent your ballot in the mail so you can vote at your convenience. Phone 334-1414 in Wyandotte County and 782-3441 in Johnson County. Obviously there are time requirements for doing this so call today. Advanced voting helps to ensure that your environmentally friendly vote is cast.

Go get involved. Dennis Moore is endorsed for Congress in the Kanza Group area as are a number of legislative candidates listed elsewhere in this "Planet." Tom Sawyer is also endorsed for Governor and has a local office. If you want to get involved you can call me at 913-236-9161. Volunteers are typically needed for delivering literature door-to-door or for making phone calls. Call today. Election Day is November 3rd.

Last but not least, our October 8th regular meeting is our New Member Fair. This meeting informs those who attend what the Kanza Group of the Sierra Club is all about. If you want to know more please attend. If you know anyone who is a new member or is interested in becoming a member bring them with you. Hope to see you then!

Back to Table of Contents