On the positive side, there are a number of traditional venues that provide safe, easy put-ins and take-outs and hassle-free stretches for paddling enjoyment. This list includes popular portions of the Middle Fork, Des Plaines, Fox, Pecatonica, Kankakee, Kishwaukee, Nippersink Creek and other streams. On such waterways, thousands of paddlers have a great time every season, without worrying about difficult access points and about reluctant, occasionally quarrelsome owners of shoreline property.
In the Illinois Rivers, Lakes and Streams Act, the state has provided a list of 48 waterways that are considered “navigable” and “public” and thus open to boaters, fishermen and other recreationists. The list includes many streams and lakes that few people would have any interest in paddling – the Illinois and Ohio rivers, for instance – but some of the familiar canoeing standbys also appear there, such as the Fox, Rock, Des Plaines and Kankakee. (If you’re interested, I’ve included the list as one of the appendixes in my guidebook, Paddling Illinois).
One of the problems is that a stream found on the list may in reality be minimally accessible for various reasons: a succession of dangerous dams, a lack of adequate, safe places to put in and take out, etc. There are a number of excellent canoe landings in the state, thanks in part to the Department of Natural Resources, hardworking paddling organizations, individuals like Gary Mechanic, Sigrid Pilgrim and Tom Lindblade, and recreationally supportive counties like Winnebago. But the sad fact is that, when compared with progressive states like Wisconsin, accesses are pitifully few and the number of first-rate, problem-free paddling sections is relatively limited.
Another problem is that, legally, if you canoe or kayak on a stream that is not included on the official list – and a great deal of the actual paddling done in the state is in that category – you can easily find yourself in a trespassing situation. Most of the time this is no big deal, if the stream side property owners have no objections, if paddlers show respect for the private property that they pass by – and, literally, over – and if you can find decent places to put in and take out. Thus, I and others have spent countless happy hours on such unlisted streams as the Mackinaw, Little Vermilion, Mazon, Covel Creek, Big Bureau Creek and the south fork of the Vermilion by putting up with lousy accesses and minding our river manners in order not to incur the animosity of property owners.
As a native Illinoisan transplanted to Wisconsin and Arizona, I’ve long lamented the fact that my home state has always been so backward – yes, that’s the word – in promoting the enjoyment of its many beautiful rivers and streams. Among other things, such promotion would necessitate a concerted effort to improve public access to rivers and streams, whether or not they’re on “the list.” I know that’s a tall order, particularly in view of the state’s politics and the deeply entrenched, seemingly sacrosanct special interests of riverine property owners. But it doesn’t have to happen all at once. If the governor, DNR and Department of Tourism were to recognize the desirability of promoting the use of the state’s best paddling venues, both by Illinoisans and out-of-staters, it would be a matter of identifying just a few target streams and then working in an organized fashion with all interested parties, including landowners, to improve accessibility.
A new threat?
As if this weren’t enough, a new situation is playing out in Illinois that could further restrict access on seven rivers. The current situation is a result of two tragic events that occurred in May and August 2006, both of which I described in past columns in Silent Sports. In one horrendous incident, three people drowned at the notorious low-head dam on the Fox River in Yorkville, and in a later occurrence, three more died at the Wilmington Dam on the Kankakee. Both structures had claimed many victims over the years, and these and many other dam-related deaths had generated a lot of talk about improving dam safety. Little had been done, however, and the sheer magnitude of the tragedies in Yorkville and Wilmington proved to be the last straw for state legislators. (As an aside, the state has undertaken a major rebuilding project at the Yorkville Dam to make the structure safer. I’ll describe the project and provide photos in a future column.)
In the year following the horrendous accidents in Yorkville and Wilmington, Public Act 95-20 was passed, amending Section 23b of the Rivers, Lakes and Streams Act. Subsequently signed into law by Gov. Blagojevich, the new Section 23b requires the Department of Public Resources to identify nonfederal dams on the public waters of the state, i.e. the list referred to above, that are hazardous and then prepare “administrative rules setting forth appropriate safety devices to be required at each dam.” The DNR is directed to “establish specifications for signs and devices that provide warnings of the presence of dams for persons using the public waters of the state” and to “designate enforceable exclusion zones around dams pursuant to administrative rule. Violation of such exclusion zones shall constitute a Class A misdemeanor.”
Accordingly, the DNR drafted a set of rules to comply with the new law, 17 Illinois Administrative Code 3703, or Rule 3703 for short, which you can check out at dnr.state.il.us/LEGAL/Proposed/3703-Proposed.pdf. Rule 3703 identifies 31 dams on seven rivers: 14 on the Fox; eight on the Rock; four on the Kankakee; two on the Des Plaines; one on the Vermilion, in Vermilion County; one on the Sangamon; and one on the Spoon. I’m not familiar with all of these dams, but the ones that I do know are unquestionably dangerous, and I have no reason to question the DNR’s judgment on any of them.
The exclusion zone at these dams is defined by Rule 3703 as “a segment of the river, beginning 50 feet downstream of a dam and proceeding to a point 300 feet upstream of the dam, that no one is allowed to enter for any purpose, except those purposes exempted by this Part.”
Moreover, dam owners are held responsible for “the acquisition of abutment signs at the dam, and the establishment of a buoy line 300 feet upstream of the dam from May 15 to September 15 of each year. Owners and adjacent property owners shall be responsible for acquisition, installation, maintenance and replacement of the abutment, pedestrian, exclusion zone and restricted area signs as set out in the department’s Public Safety at Dams, Signage and Warning Devices Manual. The rule also makes provision for adding other dams to the list, when appropriate, and for potentially removing a dam from the list if a petitioning dam owner submits various information that includes a “statement of why the dam does not pose a hazard to the general public, with accompanying documentation, sealed, signed and dated by a Registered Professional Engineer.”
As of this writing, the only remaining step for the implementation of Rule 3703 is approval by the state legislature’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. The most recent word, prior to the committee’s June 16 meeting, was that members had some serious questions. So who knows what form the new requirements will take and how long before they’re put in place?
The usual hue and cry
Nothing related to dams is ever free of controversy. I wasn’t at all surprised, for example, to hear that local opposition has been mounted against the imposition of an exclusion zone at an infamous low-head in my old stomping ground of West Central Illinois. In the tiny community of Bernadotte, a dam was constructed on the Spoon River back in World War II to provide water to a nearby military camp. It’s not much of a dam, but it has claimed the lives of canoeists and others over the years, and there have been repeated calls for its removal. As is often the case, there is strenuous local objection whenever someone hints at dismantling the dam, especially from fishermen who angle for big catfish immediately downstream. Similarly, the possibility of an exclusion zone there has raised the ire of area fishermen who love the Bernadotte dam. (Jeff Lampe wrote a good article about the situation for Prairie State Outdoors, which can be found at www.prairiestateoutdoors.com.)
Some of the strongest opposition has come from the leadership of an organization for whom I have enormous respect, the Illinois Paddling Council. You can read for yourself some of the IPC’s objections to the new rules on the organization’s website at www.illinoispaddling.org and in the “Sounding Alarm” column in the April issue of this magazine.
In a nutshell, the council contends that the new law is poorly written; that it will have a particularly dire effect on the Fox – where, for example, it will be “a crime to paddle the route of the famous Mid-American canoe race”; that “more people are likely to die because the mandated exclusion zones will be routinely violated, and the dams are more likely to be run”; that many existing, perfectly safe portage trails around dams will be eliminated; that the mandate is unfunded and will create a financial burden for dam owners and riverside property owners; and that the DNR’s “one-size-fits-all” rules fail to recognize that some of the dams are routinely portaged by paddlers without incident.
IPC holds that, instead, the DNR should “embark on an ambitious program of removing or remediating hazardous dams,” and at the same time implement a comprehensive dam safety educational program, develop a better system of providing dam safety signage, remove criminal penalties for violation of exclusion zones, carry out a more detailed analysis of the unique safety aspects of individual dams, etc. In an effort to head off or modify the implementation of Rule 3703, the organization has urged paddlers and other concerned individuals to voice their opposition to the DNR, JCAR and other agencies and officials.
Time will tell how it all shakes out. I’ll try to keep you up to date.
If I had my druthers, I’d like to see all of the 31 designated dams – and many others that are at least as dangerous – removed or radically altered in the interests of safety, like the Yorkville Dam on the Fox. Personally, however, I think that if Rule 3703 goes through, it’s not the end of the world. Yes, it would be a darned shame if the Mid-American Canoe Race had to come up with a different route, and even worse if it were to end. But, in my opinion, many of these dams should be off limits anyway. Some are notorious killers – the dams in Petersburg, Danville and Bernadotte are among them – and should have been removed or at least put into exclusion zones long ago.
Time and time again, those of us who are passionate about paddle sports repeat the mantra “Stay away from dams!” Now that the state is doing something to enforce that dictum, I think that it’s inappropriate for us to object too strenuously, even if the methodology isn’t exactly what we had in mind. We need to remember, too, that the new restrictions are aimed not at seasoned paddlers who are savvy about dam safety, but at inexperienced – and often careless, clueless or boozed-up – boaters. Rule 3703 may inconvenience some of the former group, but it is likely to save the lives of some of the latter group.
To be sure, Rule 3703 is flawed. Everything that is the result of a hurried push through a legislature is. Is it overkill, an overreaction? Probably. Is it simplistic and inconsistent? Yes, somewhat. But if it saves some lives, which it undoubtedly will, it’s worth it.
As IPC points out, the Fox – because of its numerous dams – will bear the brunt of the new rules. But there will still be places to paddle on the river. The same is true, even more so, on the other six rivers on the DNR list. In fact, all of the best parts of the Kankakee, Rock, Des Plaines, Sangamon, Spoon and Vermilion will still be readily paddleable even with Rule 3703 in effect. No popular canoe routes will be affected on those streams.
Wholly or partially, I agree with most of IPC’s points, especially their objection to the one-size-fits-all approach. But, all things considered, it appears to me that there is more good than bad in Rule 3703. And as the old proverb says the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. There are a lot of things worth fighting for in life, but in my humble opinion, this is not one of them. I’ve certainly been wrong before. Maybe this is another one of those times. In any case, the final decision will have been made by the time you read this.
For more information
Check out the DNR presentation by Gary Clark “Dam Removal and Safety Issues in Illinois” at http://ilrdss.sws.uiuc.edu/pubs/govconf2007/session3b/GaryClark.pdf. This site contains a lot of interesting information and excellent graphics, not only about Section 23b and Rule 3703, but also about dam removal, diversion structures, etc.
I also recommend that you view the six-minute interview “Meet Sigrid Pilgrim” on YouTube. For many years, Sigrid has been a tireless leader and advocate for paddling in Illinois. In this interview, she addresses access and dam safety issues.
Mike Svob is a native Illinoisan and longtime Northwoods devotee. He has canoed and kayaked for more than 30 years in 19 states and several foreign countries but regards Wisconsin as paddling paradise and home. He now spends a majority of the year in Tucson, Arizona. He is the author of Paddling Illinois, Paddling Northern Wisconsin and Paddling Southern Wisconsin, all published by Trails Books.
top of page
Visitor Comments »
top of page
.JPG)