# Alcohol Ban



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

Shoeman said:


> There better be plenty of signage at the livery, in the canoes, the buses and at the launch sites!
> 
> I bet Hinchman and Gott's will take a major haircut in Mio. Those people float to party!


I know Bosmans on the Pine river make sure people were educated on the rules before they took them to the river. Like no glass bottles and only so many cans of beer. So I imagine they all will do the same. But you can only tell folks the laws, it's up to them to follow them. I'm sure there will be alot of " We won't get caught" type that will still take there beverage of choice on there trips.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

stickbow shooter said:


> I know Bosmans on the Pine river make sure people were educated on the rules before they took them to the river. Like no glass bottles and only so many cans of beer. So I imagine they all will do the same. But you can only tell folks the laws, it's up to them to follow them. I'm sure there will be alot of " We won't get caught" type that will still take there beverage of choice on there trips.



True that, but those extreme penalties for trying to sneak a 1/2 pint? I get the litter part and the drunken behavior of many and trying to curtail the abuse. Limiting the amount sounds like the answer, not a complete ban. 

Maybe they'll start holding prayer meetings at the access sites? :lol:

Pure Michigan!


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

I get where folks are going to be upset over this law, I use to float the rivers and party also. We had a blast. But it has become a very popular thing to do the last couple years. Thousands of folks are doing it, so I can see where it can be a huge problem. The amount of beer cans ,bottles in log jams or along the shoreline is crazy.
We always kept bags to put emptys in on or trips. But then that didn't help all the time. People would flip and there goes the trash and empty bag floating away. The salmon run time along the Big river is a very sad time , with the shore line becoming a dumping grounds for @$$ holes. Beer cans,broken bottles, batteries and fishing line to bad it wasn't included in this time line.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

I agree that the penalties sounds crazy. But that's probably the max and will never be imposed. Like the saying goes, come to Manistee on vacation, go home on probation.


----------



## Tilden Hunter (Jun 14, 2018)

stickbow shooter said:


> I agree that the penalties sounds crazy. But that's probably the max and will never be imposed. Like the saying goes, come to Manistee on vacation, go home on probation.


What matters regarding firearms ownership_ is_ the maximum penalty, not the sentence handed down.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

Tilden Hunter said:


> What matters regarding firearms ownership_ is_ the maximum penalty, not the sentence handed down.


Dam didn't know that. That's F`ed up then.


----------



## jeffm (Sep 20, 2008)

stickbow shooter said:


> I agree that the penalties sounds crazy. But that's probably the max and will never be imposed. Like the saying goes, come to Manistee on vacation, go home on probation.


Tawas had that reputation years ago.


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

jeffm said:


> Tawas had that reputation years ago.


Ah, Judge Ernst....LOL


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

Just came through Along M55 and reminded myself, *River Rat* has one hell of an investment in the area.


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

Although it may be necessary due to citizens failure to behave in a socially acceptable manner, it does seem like an overreach by a bureaucracy. I guess we get the government we deserve.

by the way, prohibition has always worked everywhere it has been tried. 

Bottom line, it is up to the citizens to have some restraint and virtue for a republic to work. Are we losing it?


----------



## laserstraight (Jun 17, 2004)

Salmon fishing in Aug at Tippy will never be the same!


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

I can picture the Forest Service signs at Elm Flats landing already


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

The "up to" fines certainly seem outrageous. Personally a $100 fine and community service in the form of a river clean would be better. But maybe this will drive some of the slobs away.

I have read dozen of comments on Facebook. People are saying the will cancel trips etc etc. Is alcohol consumption that important?


----------



## brookie1 (Jan 26, 2011)

The penalties in the order are max 5,000 fine and up to 6 months in jail, so I don't know where the 5 year max penalty came from. Here is the link:

https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd608863.pdf


----------



## mfs686 (Mar 15, 2007)

Boardman Brookies said:


> The "up to" fines certainly seem outrageous. Personally a $100 fine and community service in the form of a river clean would be better. But maybe this will drive some of the slobs away.
> 
> I have read dozen of comments on Facebook. People are saying the will cancel trips etc etc. Is alcohol consumption that important?


To some it is. I've had a few people ask me to take them out to teach them how to handline for walleye. When I tell them no alcohol on my boat they complain and some didn't go. 

I don't see this ban working as well as they may think. I think a lot of people will just move to a different section of the river. Literally "kicking the can" downstream. One area will clean up and another will get dirty.


----------



## flyrodder46 (Dec 31, 2011)

The bad part of this for me is the rivers that are not included in this. Those that want/need to have alcohol on their river trips are just going to go someplace that the alcohol ban is not present, either on a different section of river or a totally different river, which will make for a more congested river and/or a bigger mess to clean up at the "new" float locations.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

jimp said:


> Just came through Along M55 and reminded myself, *River Rat* has one hell of an investment in the area.


I don't know what's more amazing , they spent so much money on them places or there still in business.


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

Be interesting to see if anyone challenges this. Alcohol is pretty big sales dollars for the stations and stores around these popular canoe spots.


----------



## Waif (Oct 27, 2013)

stickbow shooter said:


> I get where folks are going to be upset over this law, I use to float the rivers and party also. We had a blast. But it has become a very popular thing to do the last couple years. Thousands of folks are doing it, so I can see where it can be a huge problem. The amount of beer cans ,bottles in log jams or along the shoreline is crazy.
> We always kept bags to put emptys in on or trips. But then that didn't help all the time. People would flip and there goes the trash and empty bag floating away. The salmon run time along the Big river is a very sad time , with the shore line becoming a dumping grounds for @$$ holes. Beer cans,broken bottles, batteries and fishing line to bad it wasn't included in this time line.


Netted me some full cold beers out of the Pine thanks to others.

It is not a placid easy going river for non keel canoes run by inexperienced inebriated tourists.
But it is available to them. And I don't object to the access. 
But Cripes...watching multiple canoes roll under a sweeper with folks not having there wits about them almost bothered me even.
If not so busy netting flotsam and jetsom , while maneuvering my own canoe it might have bothered me more.
Not that I would let anyone be submerged too long...


----------



## FISHMANMARK (Jun 11, 2007)

flyrodder46 said:


> The bad part of this for me is the rivers that are not included in this. Those that want/need to have alcohol on their river trips are just going to go someplace that the alcohol ban is not present, either on a different section of river or a totally different river, which will make for a more congested river and/or a bigger mess to clean up at the "new" float locations.



Yep. If people weren't a-hole slobs this wouldn't be an issue.


----------



## Zofchak (Jan 10, 2003)

sullyxlh said:


> No one needs alcohol to fish or float or do whatever on any river
> 
> The whole "HAVE to have alcohol" thing by some has kept a ton of good people off off the river
> 
> ...


 
Well, if that's the criteria for banning activities on public land why not ban all recreational activities? After all, no one really "needs" to kayak, fish, bike, hike, camp, etc. We do these things because they are enjoyable, the same reason that many of us have a few beers or a glass of wine. Because it's enjoyable. Many fly fisherman would be fine if all bait fishing was banned. Many hikers would be thrilled to see mountain biking trails made off limits, and I would guess the majority of bird watchers would probably be ecstatic to see duck hunting banned as well. Banning something just because you don't happen to like it can have unintended consequences.

There are laws on the books to tackle public drunkenness, and there are laws against littering. How about we enforce those laws instead of making criminals out of those that are doing nothing wrong?


----------



## Rasputin (Jan 13, 2009)

Zofchak said:


> Well, if that's the criteria for banning activities on public land why not ban all recreational activities? After all, no one really "needs" to kayak, fish, bike, hike, camp, etc. We do these things because they are enjoyable, the same reason that many of us have a few beers or a glass of wine. Because it's enjoyable. Many fly fisherman would be fine if all bait fishing was banned. Many hikers would be thrilled to see mountain biking trails made off limits, and I would guess the majority of bird watchers would probably be ecstatic to see duck hunting banned as well. Banning something just because you don't happen to like it can have unintended consequences.
> 
> There are laws on the books to tackle public drunkenness, and there are laws against littering. How about we enforce those laws instead of making criminals out of those that are doing nothing wrong?


I decided a "Like" wasn't enough, so I decided to quote this. Amen brother. This country needs more rules like we need more criminals.


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Going to ruin a lot of businesses and make some rivers even worse. Putting a limit on the amounts would have made a lot more sense. Some may not mind but I know of 3 groups already changing plans that they have had for 20 plus years and they dont even drink much but bs you cant drink a 6 pack in a 4 hour float.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

My group did the Pine for almost 20 years. The core group of 6 guys were there from the start in about 85 or 86 and we finally called it a day when we sold our cabin in 2004 (4 of us). We always had at least a 12 pack of beer in each canoe and the gals would bring jello shots. We brought trash bags and picked up others trash at every stop we made. It was a party, but we floated from about 10 or 11 to about 4 or 5 in the afternoon. There was seldom anyone fishing those hours on a Saturday, and we never had a run-in with anyone that was. We always had a couple designated drivers to get us back to the cabin. Some years we would have close to 50 people camped in tents and some would bring their RV's. Other years we might only have 16 to 18. Many of these friends drove up from Kalamazoo, Lansing, or Detroit to spend the weekend. We dumped a ton of cash in the Oak Grove, the Elk, the Horn, and the Stockade. We spent a bunch at the Vagabond and Wellston Inn and the General. Jarolims liked us too.

No beer would have been a show stopper for us. Sure glad they didn't have laws like this when I was a younger guy. I agree, apply the laws that already exist.


----------



## Tilden Hunter (Jun 14, 2018)

HUBBHUNTER said:


> Are you saying that if you're charged with a felony but plead to a lesser non felony charge you are no longer allowed to own a firearm?


If you're convicted of a crime that has a maximum sentence of 1 year or more, be it a felony or misdemeanor. If you plead to a charge that has a maximum penalty of less then that you may still own firearms.


----------



## AdamBradley (Mar 13, 2008)

So what happens if folks just make plans for a different drift? Prime example of concern: tippy down, versus hodenpyl to red bridge. That float to red bridge is flat out 100% more dangerous than the lazy float tippy down. I’m worried and curious to see where this goes.


----------



## whitetail&walleye (Dec 13, 2017)

Treven said:


> I'm for no alcohol on the water, just like Canada. I say make it an entire Michigan thing. I despise the drunkards and their trash, attitude, and noise. Disrespectful PsOS...
> 
> I'm not saying everyone is like this. But the ones that are, have ruined it for everyone. This is why we can't have nice things...


would be pissed if i couldn't crack a cold one trolling sag bay on a 80 degree day.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

whitetail&walleye said:


> would be pissed if i couldn't crack a cold one trolling sag bay on a 80 degree day.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Canada....


If you need clarification on alcohol and boating law, it is illegal to drink alcohol on a pleasure boat when it is underway. You may only have open alcohol aboard a boat that is equipped as a residence (ie. sleeping area, permanent cooking facilities and a fixed toilet with pump out). Consuming liquor in other than a licensed premise, residence or private place carries a hefty fine and operating or having care and control over a boat underway with an open container of liquor will also carry a fine.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

$5,000 fine and five years in jail is more that one sometimes gets for manslaughter. Another overreaching, overreaction of the government.


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Going to ruin a lot of businesses and make some rivers even worse. Putting a limit on the amounts would have made a lot more sense. Some may not mind but I know of 3 groups already changing plans that they have had for 20 plus years and they dont even drink much but bs you cant drink a 6 pack in a 4 hour float.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

TK81 said:


> My group did the Pine for almost 20 years. The core group of 6 guys were there from the start in about 85 or 86 and we finally called it a day when we sold our cabin in 2004 (4 of us). We always had at least a 12 pack of beer in each canoe and the gals would bring jello shots. We brought trash bags and picked up others trash at every stop we made. It was a party, but we floated from about 10 or 11 to about 4 or 5 in the afternoon. There was seldom anyone fishing those hours on a Saturday, and we never had a run-in with anyone that was. We always had a couple designated drivers to get us back to the cabin. Some years we would have close to 50 people camped in tents and some would bring their RV's. Other years we might only have 16 to 18. Many of these friends drove up from Kalamazoo, Lansing, or Detroit to spend the weekend. We dumped a ton of cash in the Oak Grove, the Elk, the Horn, and the Stockade. We spent a bunch at the Vagabond and Wellston Inn and the General. Jarolims liked us too.
> 
> No beer would have been a show stopper for us. Sure glad they didn't have laws like this when I was a younger guy. I agree, apply the laws that already exist.


How does getting drunk make canoeing more fun?


----------



## 6Speed (Mar 8, 2013)

Petronius said:


> How does getting drunk make canoeing more fun?


It makes the girls take their shirts off...


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

Sparky23 said:


> Going to ruin a lot of businesses and make some rivers even worse. Putting a limit on the amounts would have made a lot more sense.  Some may not mind but I know of 3 groups already changing plans that they have had for 20 plus years and they dont even drink much but bs you cant drink a 6 pack in a 4 hour float.


The pine already had a limit, something like 3 cans of beer. No glass bottles.


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Ok didnt know that. Knew bout glass. Not sure how 3 cans of beer is bad


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

Sparky23 said:


> Ok didnt know that. Knew bout glass. Not sure how 3 cans of beer is bad


They wanted to keep the pollution down on the pine. But hardly anyone paid attention to it. Another thing that was bad was all the jello shot plastic cups. Those things are everywhere alone that river.


----------



## TK81 (Mar 28, 2009)

Petronius said:


> How does getting drunk make canoeing more fun?


 You really need to get out of the basement more.


----------



## jeffm (Sep 20, 2008)

stickbow shooter said:


> They wanted to keep the pollution down on the pine. But hardly anyone paid attention to it. Another thing that was bad was all the jello shot plastic cups. Those things are everywhere alone that river.


Never noticed the plastic shot cups. Must be a west side thing


----------



## Ranger Ray (Mar 2, 2003)

No more drunk, naked ladies in rafts? Left a lasting impression.


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

jeffm said:


> Never noticed the plastic shot cups. Must be a west side thing


There are tons of them between Mio & 4001 but you have to climb into log jams or go up on shore where people party to find them. They aren't the first thing you see in jams or on shore, look for partier sign first; toilet paper, cig butts, beer cans, liquor bottles, energy drinks and tampon applicators will led you to jello shots.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

GVDocHoliday said:


> It's a local Federal Order only. Feds are the only ones that can enforce it. Want to complain? Call the Huron-Manistee National Forest Supervisor in Cadillac. It's her order.


So one bureaucrat makes a bone headed decision like this with no over site? The feds only own a fraction of the land along these rivers, yet they can dictate law along the whole stretch? This really irks me. The real stupidity of this ban is that it will likely result in even more litter. Anybody that drinks along these rivers now will certainly toss their empties along the way to get rid of the evidence. Kind of like what drivers do when they are driving while drinking. The only bright side is that it will increase business at other rivers where the idiotic feds don't have control. Who ever made this law should be fired.


----------



## Lumberman (Sep 27, 2010)

BMARKS said:


> You cannot use marijuana in public, only private property. and you cannot posses it on national forest land.


haha, 

Oh well they didn't follow that rule last year I doubt they will now.


----------



## BMARKS (Nov 6, 2017)

Lumberman said:


> haha,
> 
> Oh well they didn't follow that rule last year I doubt they will now.


I believe you there.... im sure they will. i was just clarifying that you cannot have either beer nor marijuana on the property of these national forests. i maintain that you can have said things on the water. just not on the land around the water that is owned by the feds.


----------



## kingfisher 11 (Jan 26, 2000)

I have no problem with the rule. It does bring up something I argued with someone from hear a few years ago. They said they would of rather the feds own the public land over the state. I disagreed since I heard nightmares of how they run the federal land out west. At least within MI if the land belongs to the state you do have a easier recourse to change it. Once the feds sink their teeth into something it can be tougher to change.


----------



## Boardman Brookies (Dec 20, 2007)

Sounds like the ban not go in place just yet. 


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


----------



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

Boardman Brookies said:


> Sounds like the ban not go in place just yet.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Details?

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tilden Hunter (Jun 14, 2018)

Lumberman said:


> I’ll be the first to say the tubing and canoeing industry is out of hand. There are so many slobs that trash the rivers.
> 
> There suppose to be a time limit which last year on the PM no one was following.
> 
> All that being said this seems like an overreach and is ridiculous. So you can’t have a beer but you can smoke a pound of pot. How the times have changed.


You can't smoke a cigarette in a bar, but you can marry a dude. Yeah, times have changed.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

Boardman Brookies said:


> Sounds like the ban not go in place just yet.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app


Yep just seen it on the news. It's on hold.


----------



## Zofchak (Jan 10, 2003)

I'm glad the Feds were willing to reconsider this, as there are better options than an outright ban. Perhaps this near miss will push some of the rental companies to keep better control of their customers.


https://www.freep.com/story/news/lo...t-lived-river-alcohol-ban-delayed/2853448002/


----------



## B.Jarvinen (Jul 12, 2014)

I know this agency all too well. I have also got plenty toasted floating down the Pine, and I have turned down employment trying to manage drunken 20somethings in the campgrounds along it.

It does seem to be the American way, way too much. Because one out of ten people is an a-hole, the other 9 must suffer. The insanely stupid, but still necessary, fire rings in MI State Parks would be Exhibit A here.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the Pere Marquette was not in this announcement?

I think that would be because the land on it is way too checkerboarded for USFS to write their own laws on that river; as compared to the other 3.

It has already been said in this thread - just use already existing laws for littering and public intoxication. Simple.

But there are only about 2 USFS LEOs that can work on this on the Manistee N.F. side, probably only one on the Huron N.F. side. Good peeps.

You really want to change something about all this? Tell the liveries to keep it toned down or they lose their permits. Money talks.

Put the empties in a float bag that can be retrieved after a tip. It ain't rocket appliances. Put a game camera on the party sandbar and call out the miscreants.

And if you knew the plans for what the "River Rat" wants to do with all his investment on the Pine, you would want to get out in front of this, because it can only get worse.

I have noticed a few people in this thread who are opposed to the Gubmint having any power, but are just fine to see the younguns put in their place with this ridiculously over-reached idea. Freedom sometimes has to include the Freedom to get drunk and be stupid. Sorry not sorry.


----------



## Trunkslammer (May 22, 2013)

Put these fines and penalties towards littering on these rivers and ENFORCE it. Dont tell me where i can and cant have a beer while on public water. Problem solved.


----------



## stickbow shooter (Dec 19, 2010)

B.Jarvinen said:


> I know this agency all too well. I have also got plenty toasted floating down the Pine, and I have turned down employment trying to manage drunken 20somethings in the campgrounds along it.
> 
> It does seem to be the American way, way too much. Because one out of ten people is an a-hole, the other 9 must suffer. The insanely stupid, but still necessary, fire rings in MI State Parks would be Exhibit A here.
> 
> ...


River Rat doesn't have many friends around this area or many happy customers. #Dushbag from what I'm told.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

*FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: * Feb 12, 2019 *CONTACT: *James Hogge 231-640-9158
*United States Forest Service to Suspend Manistee River Rule*

*Washington* - Congressman Bergman issued the following statement:

_"I'm encouraged to see that the Huron-Manistee Forests decided to delay the ban on alcohol and will take the time over the next year to work with the community on ways to keep our waters safe. While it's imperative that we conserve our waterways and forests, we must ensure our public lands remain a place the public can enjoy and appropriately utilize. The Huron-Manistee Forests have long been an example of conservation done right. I appreciate their willingness to engage with my office and stakeholders in the community to better approach this situation."_

*
The following release was issued from the United States Forest Service:*

CADILLAC, Mich., February 12, 2019 –The Huron-Manistee National Forests will delay implementation of a closure order prohibiting alcohol on sections of three National Wild and Scenic Rivers until at least 2020. The delay creates an opportunity for the Forest Service to work with local communities to develop alternative means of restoring public safety and preventing damage to congressionally-protected sections of the AuSable, Manistee, and Pine Rivers.

“Individuals and businesses throughout northern Michigan have expressed strong interest in partnering with the Forest Service to address ongoing public safety and environmental issues on our National Wild and Scenic Rivers,” said Huron-Manistee National Forests Supervisor Leslie Auriemmo. “We welcome a practical, community-driven solution to these challenges.”

Earlier this month, the Forest Service announced a closure order to prohibit alcohol on sections of the AuSable, Manistee, and Pine National Wild and Scenic Rivers during the 2019 recreation season. The closure order was intended to address persistent public safety issues and protect natural resources on those waterways.

In lieu of implementing the alcohol closure order in 2019, the Forest Service will organize and chair a community working group consisting of small businesses, municipal officials, and private citizens from the National Wild and Scenic River corridors. By May 2019, the working group will develop an action plan to restore public safety to those rivers. The Forest Service will report regularly on the working group’s activities and will continue to promote responsible use of public waters.

During the summer recreation season, the Forest Service will work with community partners to implement the action plan. If the action plan does not improve conditions upon the National Wild and Scenic Rivers, the Forest Service would consider implementing the alcohol closure order in 2020.

The Forest Service has a statutory obligation to protect the outstanding natural, cultural, and recreational values of our National Wild and Scenic Rivers,” said Auriemmo. “We look forward to working with our community partners to ensure a safe and sustainable recreational experience for all Americans who wish to visit our waterways.”

The Forest Service will maintain several avenues for inquiries and suggestions pertaining to the working group and its activities. Interested parties may submit comments to Public Affairs Officer Nate Peeters by e-mail ([email protected]) or post (1755 S Mitchell Street, Cadillac, MI 49601). For more information about the Huron-Manistee National Forests, please visithttps://fs.usda.gov/hmnf.


----------



## Trophy Specialist (Nov 30, 2001)

My guess is that pressure came down on this bureaucrat form above big time. A Federal employee now that implements stupid regulations like this, that kills business and pisses the public off might just result in an early retirement. I'm actually surprised he wasn't fired.


----------



## kzoofisher (Mar 6, 2011)

Don’t know why he would be fired. He was protecting the river for the real owners and driving away the kind of low class ne’er do wells who sometimes forget their place. One of the beauties of our class system is that many in the bottom 90% actually believe that they have equal rights, despite ample evidence to the contrary. What is the point of being rich if you get treated the same as everyone else? The Feds are throwing the great unwashed a bone with this delay. The issue either gets fixed this summer or they bring the hammer down and say, “We gave you a chance”. Like anyone in Washington, or Lansing, or in any town bigger than 5000 people gives a rat’s patootie about a few small businesses. Sucks to be them but welcome to America.


----------



## Treven (Feb 21, 2006)

If the littering and poor public behavior isn't curtailed, I don't care one iota if this privilege is revoked. Our rivers are worth it.

And for the record, I am 100% against the government over-stepping boundaries. For what has been getting worse and worse, I don't feel they were over-stepping in the least. Get drunk and litter at home...


----------



## Sparky23 (Aug 15, 2007)

Enforce the laws that are already in place and it wouldn't be a problem more laws don't fix laws that are not enforced


----------



## Shoeman (Aug 26, 2000)

Sparky23 said:


> Enforce the laws that are already in place and it wouldn't be a problem more laws don't fix laws that are not enforced


Someone thought it might! Along with stiff fines and consequences that will follow you....


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

What they should be doing it putting cops, or some sort of "safety" officials at canoe landing areas. They could test those they believe to be impaired by either alcohol or some sort of drugs, to keep them off the roads BEFORE they can cause a problem.


----------



## Davey Boy (Jan 5, 2011)

Be careful what you wish for, you might not be able to enjoy a cold one when the fishing is done. And if people want to get drunk on the water and stand in their own urine and feces send them to Torch Lake.


----------



## DecoySlayer (Mar 12, 2016)

I have a cold water when fishing/boating.


----------

