The Lakes Community - Powered By XMB
Committee Submits Plan For Lake's Future
LCNN -
1-28-2010 at 10:48 AM
FRANKFORT, Ky. – An advisory committee that is working to improve tourism and economic development in the Lake Cumberland area has developed a plan
for the lake’s future.
The Lake Cumberland Tourism/Economic Development Advisory Committee is working with local, state and federal agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Gov. Steve Beshear, U.S.Congressman Harold “Hal” Rogers and U.S. Congressman Ed Whitfield.
“Our goal is to help the Lake Cumberland area recover so we can provide tourism and economic development opportunities for the residents in this
region,” Gov. Beshear said. “It’s important that government agencies hear the concerns from representatives of the people who live in this area and
work toward finding solutions.”
Because of required repair work on Wolf Creek Dam by the Corps of Engineers, the water level of the lake was lowered in 2007, causing a reduction in
the number of tourists in the region. State government has been working in the area to help promote the lake and tourism opportunities.
“Lake Cumberland is the economic backbone for the communities that depend on tourism to keep afloat,” said Congressman Rogers. “In these times of
economic uncertainty it is vital that we work together to promote tourism and bring life back to the region. While there have been obstacles at the
Lake, people need to know that Lake Cumberland is open for business and that it is still the crown jewel of southern and eastern Kentucky.”
“Lake Cumberland has long been a vital part of the local economies surrounding the lake and a vibrant part of the Kentucky culture,” said Congressman
Whitfield. “As Kentucky communities continue to face tough financial times, we must do all that we can to help spur economic growth around Lake
Cumberland while assuring the safety of residents downstream. I am pleased to work with the Lake Cumberland Tourism/Economic Development Advisory
Committee as we work toward these shared goals.”
The committee’s “Lake Cumberland Economic Security Plan” makes recommendations for marketing, maintaining visitation levels, parking and other issues
involving the lake. (The report is attached to this document below)
Gov. Beshear, Congressman Rogers and Congressman Whitfield thanked the committee for its work and said they fully support and would work to implement
the plan.
The Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet is facilitating the committee, which will continue to discuss and make recommendations to state and federal
agencies about ways to improve tourism and economic development in the region.
The committee members include: James Flatt, Russell County; J.D. Hamilton, Burnside; Charlie Denny, Wayne County; Tony Sloan, Clinton County; Rodney
Casada, Pulaski County; Jeff Crowe president and CEO of TOUR Southern and Eastern Kentucky; Martin Shearer, Executive Director of Somerset-Pulaski
County Economic Development Foundation; Chris Girdler, Field Representative of Congressman Rogers’ office; Sandy Simpson, Field Representative for
Congressman Whitfield; Steve Carter, director of the East Kentucky Office for the Economic Development Cabinet; Tourism, Arts and Heritage Secretary
Marcheta Sparrow and Jeff Belcher of Gov. Beshear’s office.
Lake Cumberland Economic Security Plan
We have the utmost confidence that the Army Corps is well on its way to successfully rehabilitating Wolf Creek Dam. Repairing the dam and keeping
downstream citizens safe is of paramount necessity. With this we take no issue. Nothing in this plan to protect and promote the people’s economic
wellbeing of the Region and the Commonwealth of Kentucky interferes with this critical mission priority.
Much has been communicated by many in previous resolutions, letters and meetings at the State and local levels about the need to address in a
meaningful way the current and long term economic hardship the Wolf Creek Rehabilitation project has caused this State and the Lake Cumberland
Regional Economy. It is time to move forward with a solution.
This plan provides the solution to secure our economic future. It lays the foundation for a sustainable long term economic recovery of the region. It
will allow development of new opportunities, help businesses grow and families of the region find long term employment. This plan will help secure a
bright economic future for ourselves and our children.
1) Preserve existing visitation levels. The Corps primarily relies on private market partners such as marinas to provide the necessary capital,
risk taking and professional management needed to provide facilities and high quality services to the recreational visitors. Marinas account for 78%
of visitation hours on Lake Cumberland. It is important to ensure marina operators can maintain their facilities, operations and high levels of
service to sustain the current visitation levels. We fully support H.R.2821. We support suspension of rent and reimbursement to the Counties. We also
believe it is unjust and unnecessarily damaging not to reimburse these key stakeholders for the Economic damage caused them by the project. Support
like that envisioned in H.R. 2821 is just and necessary to ensure the health of these key stakeholders during this critical time.
2) Restore the ‘Lake Cumberland’ Brand with a significant marketing campaign. While the lower water has had deleterious effects there is still
plenty of water for recreation and time has allowed Mother Nature to improve the aesthetics with vegetation. However no significant measures have been
taken to counteract the damage done to the ‘Lake Cumberland’ brand. The barrage of negative press generated by the lowering was National and severe.
The ad budgets of the marinas and local tourism offices are insufficient for this task. The Lake Cumberland Association estimates it would take a
multi-million dollar campaign to counteract this brand damage.
3) Expand the Overnight Visitation Demographic by approving Static On Water Accommodations (SOWA’s) within leased areas. These economically
critical visitors primarily seek an on-water accommodation. Because of natural geographic topography and current Corps policy the only available
option is the traditional houseboat experience. Consequently current overnight visitation faces two large market barriers. First, it requires
significant boating experience. Second, the price for a weekend has skyrocketed. The rise of the Internet and the cruise line industry has created
significant competition to this business model.
A) Floating SOWA’s such as “floating cottages” would lower prices considerably perhaps by 50 percent and requires no expertise. This would
vastly expand the vacation demographic opportunity for Lake Cumberland.
B) Land based SOWA’s like that proposed in the development of Potato Knoll allows for water views and access with the unique experience of an
island. It requires no boating experience and this condominium type accommodation is very familiar to vacationers worldwide. Economically this would
provide Pulaski County with $1.4 million in revenue from the sale and approximately $400,000 per year in property tax. In this case there is no
unique habitat destroyed and no species threatened. The proposed project is green and a good example of balancing environmental concerns with
responsible development. There are no bridges or causeways. The land is in the middle of a commercial lease and in the city of Burnside. It would be
unique signature development for Pulaski County.
4) Allow and Support Growth Stimulative Projects with Positive Socioeconomic Impacts proposed by local governments. One such project we support
is the approval and construction of a 10,000 seat outdoor amphitheater at Pulaski County Park. A venue to accommodate national acts, festivals and
local events would attract an entirely new visitation demographic seeking on water entertainment and not solely on boating and the typical lake
experience. It leverages the existing visitations to the area, creates a unique entertainment venue and significant market differentiator for Lake
Cumberland and the region. It would also enhance usage of the commercial air service into the Cumberland Regional Airport. It would enhance the
quality of life for current citizens by providing an amenity commonly enjoyed by urban citizens. Additionally it would provide a great economic
development tool to draw people and businesses to the Lake Cumberland region.
5) Expansion of parking facilities will be necessary to foster increased visitation. The topography of Lake Cumberland, the Corps cut–fill
policy, the high cost and business economics associated with parking has limited its availability. It is not practical for marinas to fund parking
lots. Every major expansion on Lake Cumberland was done with government funds. The state is spending $1 million to expand parking at State Dock. The
Corps is providing no such assistance to the federal concessionaires. An offset excavation project should be implemented immediately to ensure the
public need for more parking no longer conflicts with Corps cut-fill policy.
6) Clean up the shoreline of logs and debris. With 40 ft. of shoreline exposed for 1,280 miles over a six year period. There is great concern
about the impact this will have on boating hazards when the lake level returns. The Corps should continue and expand shoreline cleanup program.
7) The expenditure of Federal and State resources involving any aspect of Lake Cumberland should be concentrated to execute this targeted plan.
Economic mitigation has been under resourced. However the very limited resources both human and financial spent to date have been disconcerted and
random. Some have been ineffective and wasteful. It is critical we concentrate our resources within the strict context of executing this strategically
targeted plan. Each local government executive shall appoint a member of the Lake Cumberland Association to an Economic Coordination Committee. This
committee will serve as the working group for the plans implementation.
E-man -
1-28-2010 at 11:53 AM
On the water cabins? to boost tourism?
What a stupid idea. Very telling of folks that probably dont do any market research.
Does Hal own these things or his family or Beshears or what? To increase the lure of the lake, how about mandatory clean water, trash enforcement,
mandatory sewage compliance?
refohone -
1-28-2010 at 12:02 PM
J D Hamilton, owner of Lees Ford Marina, has been pushing the floating cottage idea for several years. He is on this committee. The last I knew he
wanted to put Park Model trailers on floating docks around the island.
E-man -
1-28-2010 at 12:26 PM
nuf said....it is getting very transparent that all you ever have to do anymore is follow the money.
boater4life -
1-28-2010 at 12:26 PM
Hamilton is pushing his own agenda. He also to destroy the Great Blue Heron Nesting site. I have never heard one person say, "Gee, I would come to
the lake if only there was a water cabin I could stay in." I have heard folks say they won't come to the lake until June because of the trash and
logs in the water. I have heard folks say they would like to be able to get a drink with dinner. I have heard folks complain about boaters who dump
their untreated waste in the lake. You know, I bet we could get a pretty good list of things that we have heard people say that if dealt with would
result in increased tourism. We could also add things that people like and wish there was more of on the lake or in surrounding areas.
RE3 -
1-28-2010 at 01:00 PM
Once I got to 3) I realized what this is all about. Nuff said.....
Cc350 -
1-28-2010 at 01:32 PM
Just what the Lake needs, a bunch of shacks. Now if they allow the Marinas to do this will it also open up for private cabins ???? Or a one sided
deal for Marinas? Can't see a lot of good from this.
RELAX -
1-28-2010 at 02:28 PM
So Frankfort has come up with a special committee to improve toursim and economic developement.
Looks like the only economic development will be for the people on the committee.
Wonder if the COE will like the plan. Or is it a done deal once Mr. Rodgers approves it?
Lock5 -
1-28-2010 at 02:34 PM
They have cabins on Green River already, I don't think the corps will stop this.
boater4life -
1-28-2010 at 02:54 PM
"The most feared words in our language, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help.""
Ronald Reagan
Captain Ahab -
1-28-2010 at 04:40 PM
SO... if it upsets you guys as much as it does me 
, are you just going
to whine about it on the forum or is there something more substantial we can do as individuals or as a group........?
I for one will send out some letters and/or e-mail, but others will have to step up to facilitate a change…
MarineAssist -
1-28-2010 at 04:51 PM
I am not sure how the system actually works, but I do know, based on the couple meetings I have been to in the past with the Corps, these things
dealing with the use of the lake do not fit the Corp's "management plan" for the project.
Now, how that gets changed was supposed to be partially by public input. Remember, I posted about how the Corps was looking for input from the public
on modifying the management plan a year or two ago. At the time, no one seemed interested on here about attending any of the meetings, so from what I
remember, the management plan for this project has not changed.
So whether this proposal will really make any difference or not is questionable, in my opinion.
JabezBoy -
1-28-2010 at 05:27 PM
Jabezboy's SEVEN TO HEAVEN PROPOSAL:
1) Modify the cut/fill requirements to allow for widening and improved roads down to EXISTING ramps, including more parking and better, wider, better
grade ramps.
2)Strictly enforce and eliminate any waste or runoff into the lake of waste.
3) Clean up the shores NOW before the water level raises. Could use prison crews, volunteers and also federal funds;
4) Free (or small fee) and frequent boating safety courses, boating certification courses, etc. Perhaps some incentives for boaters to take courses
(not requirements, INCENTIVES)
5) No interest loans immediately for existing marinas affected by the water level.
6) After lake back up, no interest loans for marinas to make upgrades to more modern equipment and facilities.
7)Improvement and widening of roads in the counties surrounding/adjacent to the lakes.
I believe all of these contribute to one or more of the following:
Cleaner Lake
Safer Lake
Easier to Access Lake
JOBS
Better Facilites/Partners with the Corp,
and in the END (drumroll please)
MORE TAX DOLLARS BACK TO THE FEDS, STATE, and LOCALS!
Lock5 -
1-29-2010 at 07:56 AM
If they really want economic development, then allow private docks. Come up with a standard for construction say steel frames, wood decks and poly
floats. Give the Corps the regulatory powers to remove them when in disrepair. Lake view is nice but lake access is "King". Oh, and don't give the
Herrington lake as an example because there are no regulations on Herrington. This could be done in a very responsible way, by the way I also feel
that the cabins can be done in a very responsible way. The real problem with the cabins is they will destroy the Houseboat industry, granted there are
several on this site that go out on their houseboats, but if you all want to be honest with each other there are more that never leave the dock. There
are very nice HB's at all the Docks that haven't left the slip since being parked, so they are in a sense cabins now. If you go to Green River and
see the ones built there I think you will change your minds.
RE3 -
1-29-2010 at 10:29 AM
I hear what you are saying about the HB's, Lock. However, they are in slips at marinas. What I would hate to see happen is the shore line being
dotted with a lot of stuff. Cumberland's lack of access from the shore is part of what makes it so beautiful, IMHO.
macpirate -
1-29-2010 at 11:58 AM
It read that the cabins would be in commercial "leased" space, which sounds like only at marinas. No private docks with cabins dotting every shore
of the lake. That being said, I don't think floating cabins is the solution, but with them stating that 78% of the lake's visits come from
marina's....they have some ground to stand on to produce new revenue.
My feeling is "more tourism"? Lake seems crowded enough. Perhaps the area needs to focus on getting more money out of the folks that already enter
the area...i.e. Food service, alcohol sales, golf courses, nicer accommodations. Perhaps promote other venues (such as Mill Springs, Fort Harrod,
Lincoln Birthplace, etc).
I also like the comments about making what we already have nicer...cleaner water, less debris. I live closer to Taylorsville Lake or Nolin and Rough
River, but it's the water and natural scenery that attracts me to Cumberland...it's why I bought property, pay local taxes, eat at local restaurants
and buy local groceries.
Bluebird -
1-29-2010 at 12:45 PM
I agree with Boater-4-Life/JabezBoy/ MacPirate / RE3/Others ---Cleaner water, less debris & no private docks.
Today Lake Cumberland has a unique huge expanse of water for everyone - boaters, skiers, swimmers & fishing.
The guests at my cabin always say that is what makes the lake wonderful & so different than other lakes.
I would never want a house on every horizon to have a dock on the lake.
(I don't have a private slip & have dealt with this inconvenience for 30 years)
Bailey -
1-29-2010 at 09:41 PM
Maybe they should start with a fair way to apply the personal property tax that is asessed on some but not all, and each county is different. this
alone over the last few years has run many off to Noris lake. Contray to popular belief, most boaters are not rich, they just choose to use their
vacation dollars at the lake...when the yearly tax is applied, it just might not be worth it anymore....
I love the lake just as it is, the floating condos would be ok but I'm afraid this may get out of hand if they start dragging them out in coves.
People will come back when the economy comes back and the water comes up....Please don't ruin a good thing...
Nautiques R Us -
1-30-2010 at 02:31 PM
I think putting these cottages on the lake will only bring in more drunk, inexperienced boaters. I have been coming to the lake for 30 years. What
brought me here was time to spend with my family on a beautiful lake that looks much like it did when it was first built. The lake is still beautiful
but I don't think it is safe anymore. The lake is packed full of inexperienced boaters, drunk boaters and boaters with a need for speed. Many of
the people I know who have left the lake have left because they can no longer safely take their families out on the lake for fear of being run over by
someone who is drunk or inexperienced or both running a boat down the lake at break neck speed...way to fast to see a child or adult in the water
learning how to ski or wakeboard. I would rather pay more money to have the drunks kept off the lake and to have boaters licensed than to have the
lake continue down the path it is on now ...being ruined by overcrowding and those who have the money to buy a boat but lack the sense to learn how to
properly operate it in a safe, sober fashion.
onlymoney -
1-30-2010 at 05:09 PM
This is a clear example of a group of greedy people that do NOT understand why the Ohio Navy and Local Use of the Lake has grown to where it is today.
If people want cabins and docks then go to Norris Lake, Telico Lake or others. You can not boat there without feeling like you are in
someone'sbackyard. I drive from Michigan for this very purpose, to enjoy the outdoors and the nature without having the feeling of sitting in my
neighbors yard.
J.D. has already destroyed a lot of natural beauty around LFM and clearly has only demonstrated a bland commercial focus.
Lake Cumberland has this Forum, not only because of great moderators and support but, because people going to Lake Cumberland choose to go to Lake
Cumberland for the uniqueness of the lake.
Inevitably, the region does need growth so, why does NO one in the committe speak about attractions or jobs that are aligned with the Boating and
Tourism Nature of the lake. I will say that the outdoor ampitheater is interesting but, that will not make people drive from miles away to put their
boat in and spend a week in the area!
Nicer Marina facilities, including upgraded cottages would be nice.
Cleaner standards for dumping in the Lake. Many make fun of Lake Cumberland as compared to Dale Hollow or Lake Norris due to the less stringent
discharge rules.
Safe Boating (at all speeds), and licensing are fine and expected in my opinion as all should be able to enjoy the lake. If you want to run 100 mph,
fine with me as long as you don't cut corners tight on the wrong side of the lake and know what the heck you are doing!! Thus, a license for all
boaters I support and at least a minimum standard for 60+.
It is disappointing that the committee including members of government have such limited views. The Natural Beauty of this Lake is what brings people
here. The Depth of its waters. The Cliffs along its shore line. The hospitality of the region etc etc.
Yes, market the heck out of it. Leverage the asset and look for complimentary activities and industries to support. But, don't screw with the Asset
and forget the millions of private docks, cabins etc. I would love to see nothing more than the Corps to buy an additional 75' of shore area for
natural protection and a ban on any cutting of trees within 500' of the Lake.
Ok, long but, I really love this lake.
Bluebird -
1-30-2010 at 06:06 PM
OnlyMoney speaks for THOUSANDS of boaters, skiers, campers, fishermen, houseboat renters & lake property owners who want to preserve the unique
pristine lake & shoreline beauty .
boater4life -
1-30-2010 at 07:00 PM
+5 OnlyMoney! +5
shorething -
1-31-2010 at 08:33 AM
I don't have a problem with floating cottages, or any good looking development for that matter, at or near the marinas, they are already commercial
uses and privacy is long gone; however I agree that the cottages should not be on every shoreline. I really don't see how cottages will attract more
"drunken" boaters??? Personally I enjoy what little of the lake that is developed for public use, this lake is so huge it can all fit, I'd love to
see the area near burnside go ahead and put SEVERAL restaraunts, live entertainment, etc. right on the water, since it has already had a lot of
shoreline developed. I am obviously pro development, but I do think it should be controlled, and only permitted in areas that it will benefit the
users of the lake and in areas that have already lost there seclusion, i.e. - marinas.
everyone comes here for there own reasons, I've had a lot more close calls by someone pulling a tube in a narrow, crowded area than a go fast on the
wrong side, actually I've never had a problem created by a go fast - most of those guys are more than qualified to handle there rig... and I don't
see some cottages effecting this one way or the other...
I used to be a die hard at Laurel, I came to Cumberland not for seclusion - but the OPTION of seeing some action...
boater4life -
1-31-2010 at 09:21 AM
The problem with development, is it is never controlled. Money talks and there are too many "controllers" and "planners" who are willing to
listen.
Dreamin-A-Wake -
1-31-2010 at 10:48 AM
I like the floating cottage idea. I have stayed in several different ones on Norris lake. BUT.... I agree our Beautiful Lake Cumberland needs cleaned
up first. All the logs in the spring is a huge problem and the shores need cleaned up from trash. Also Alligator II marina looks awful. Some parking
lot trash cleanup would be so easy to do. Instead of letting the workers sit on the bench all afternoon. Send them out to work to make the marina look
better. The docks are completely dangerous there. Someone is going to get hurt. Power wash the area around the store. All that would go along way.
fishbites -
1-31-2010 at 11:13 AM
The lake is great just the way it is - I hear people all the time talk aboutother lakes where they look and feel more like a fishbowl. We know what
we have on Cumberland - why take a chance and make major changes and then decide we don't like the changes. What then?
Roadtrip -
1-31-2010 at 12:55 PM
We have been living in the area full time for six months, and part time for going on five years. We started coming here 30+ years ago.
So, we are all in.
We have been driving by and actually stopped to look at a sample of a floating cabin up on the east side of Russell Springs on 80 that has been for
sale for quite some time. It is good for a chuckle, but the construction quality and the "coast guard certification" take the cake. It is dubious
at best. To have something like this, moored even in a marina, would not be good from our view. Who certifies and makes sure these things don't
become shanty towns, like they have elsewhere?
As for getting to the water, those of us who boat here regularily have learned to identify the rentals fairly easily. I especially liked the bridal
shower that came out of Alligator last summer on one of their double decker pontoons. Those ladies were having fun. There are plenty of options for
non-boat owner folks here already.
I agree with most of the other suggestions here. Let's clean up what we already have, starting with the shorelines. What we don't need is more
rules and regulations to attempt to enforce. Let's preserve the beauty, get the word out, and get the dam repairs completed. We don't need a bunch
of other gimmicks to make this place great.
Boat N Stuff -
1-31-2010 at 02:04 PM
Like others, I agree that it is fairly obvious several members of the Committee are promoting their own interests. Some of the marina owners complain
of the affects of the lake lowering and are suggesting that they they alone are suffering economic damages. What about the rest of us in the tourism
and boating business who have lost money and continue to do so? No one should unfairly benefit from this situation by receiving funding for newer,
updated facilities. The successful marinas don't seem to be having an issue with their facilities. Meanwhile, stores are struggling, houseboat
manufacturers have closed, restaurants have closed, boat dealerships have closed. Many more are on the brink.
What every one in the tourism and boating industry can agree on though is that we've all been financially impacted and the fair solution would be to
propose tax cuts or provide grants or low interest loans to help make us ALL whole again. Since it is now more difficult to attract tourists,
provide funding to help subsidize our own advertising efforts.
The economy of the entire Lake Cumberland Area has been affected and a solution should be drafted with that in mind, not one that simply benefits
those with political power.
squakmeister -
1-31-2010 at 04:37 PM
Facts In Evidence:
During a recession:
- People don't spend as much and travel to locations closer to home.
- Disposable Income becomes minimized
- Vacation travel and entertainment are considered by many as disposable income
- Unless you've been saving up and don't need this saved money for bread & butter
necessities, you probably are not going to buy a new or used boat, car, etc. Although,
there are some really good buys out there.
During more prosperous times:
People will do the opposite of what is listed above. What better time would there be to
promote the lake than when the Dam Repaired is completed (October 2012), the
economy has recovered, and people can once again afford to visit our beautiful Lake
from anywhere.
I don't care what the Gov'ment says. Our economy won't fully recover for at least another
two years, and for sure, not until unemployment falls back to at or below 6%.
To me, promoting the lake now, doesn't make much sense. We should wait to launch this
tourism campaign until times are better, more money is in the State Coffers, and folk's can
once again afford to enjoy their prosperity.
If they do it now or within the next year, the ads will fall on deaf ears and the return on any
tourism investment will be minimal at best.
As for the On-The-Water-Cottages and the USACE buying another 75 feet of land above the
elevation which they already own, I don't think the Corps will go along with it.
As for requiring Boaters to have Boat Driver's Licenses for recreational dirvers, I believe we
would be the first state in the union to have such a law. And if we did, this law wouldn't apply
to out-of -state boats operated by out-of state boat drivers, until their state enacted the same law.
Also, I don't think requiring Kentuckians to have a Boat Driver's Licenses will do much for tourism.
I could go along with a statewide boating license requirement, as long as it wasn't some
Mickey Mouse type of license and boaters actually had to demonstrate their competence
and knowledge. We might even see a decrease in BUI, reckless operation, accidents, and
thus injuries and death. I could definitely go for that, especially if their boat was confiscated
for a moving violation or first offense BUI.
Further, I would like to see a requirement for boaters to demonstrate their ability to use a GPS
if they will be using one while on the water or their boat is so equipped.
I know this is going to get me a few comments.
Roadtrip -
1-31-2010 at 06:00 PM
Long read, but it touches on most of the topics here. I found it very interesting and educational.
http://www.lrn.usace.army.mil/wolmp/pdf/DraftFinal_Rev.pdf
I found their stance on debrie to be interesting. It is "natural" and any attempts to clean it up are "temporary".
The Potato Island ESA designation(Environmentally Sensitive Area) and the floating cottage prohibition are well documented, and this committee
probably knows it all too well.
MagicMountain -
1-31-2010 at 09:12 PM
I have nothing against this committe there seems to be some good support on the team. I wonder why they do not involve the public and get some of our
views to go along with the dock owners. I feel that there are several concerned users from LC.com that have great input on this subject and feel the
committe should take value in what is said on this forum about Lake Cumberland and what we expect or have to offer on this subject.
chipmunk -
2-1-2010 at 11:57 AM
I have nothing against what the committe would like to see happen, but it seems to me that all of the money taken in by taxes, fees ect. would go to
areas surrounding the lake not to the lake. I would like to see a yearly boating tag be sold with all money going to help pay for clean-up,
maintenance of public ramps and docks and most all Water Patrol. I have had the pleasure of using this lake for more than 25yrs. And owning a
camp/resinence near the lake for the past 15yrs. During the years any time that you go to any docks around the lake, you will see a lot of out of
state vehicles, which means that a lot out of state boaters are using and enjoying the lake,without paying anything to boat in this lake. I have
nothing against these people and I hope that they continue to come and enjoy the lake as I. But as of now unless you buy a Kentucky boating, hunting,
or fishing license you are not paying anything thats goes directly to this lake.
Bluebird -
2-1-2010 at 01:09 PM
This thread shows huge interest in the preservation of Lake Cumberland pristine waters & shorelines.
The State of Kentucky has a unique manmade waterway treasure that at times seems to be taken for granted.
When the dam rehabilitation is completed & economic conditions improve a COUNTLESS MULTITUDE of grandparents & parents will lead the next generation
of kids to Lake Cumberland to enjoy the existing deep, wide, clear, pristine waters & thousands of miles of undeveloped shoreline.
(These people live within 300 miles & I promise you the magic memory of the lake will draw them back !!!!
)
Now is the time to create a LC Preservation Group (LCPG) to maintain, improve, protect our 60 year old waterway/shoreline
treasure for future generations!!!!!!!!!
mcraftman -
2-1-2010 at 01:21 PM
| Quote: |
Originally posted by chipmunk
During the years any time that you go to any docks around the lake, you will see a lot of out of state vehicles, which means that a lot out of state
boaters are using and enjoying the lake,without paying anything to boat in this lake. I have nothing against these people and I hope that they
continue to come and enjoy the lake as I. But as of now unless you buy a Kentucky boating, hunting, or fishing license you are not paying anything
thats goes directly to this lake. |
First, the fallacy that out of state boaters are using the lake "without paying anything to boat in this lake" is just plain absurd. However, just a
little education, it's called reciprocity, and it's goes both ways. That is, you can go up to Ohio and boat in lake erie if you'd like, or down to
Tennessee, and boat in Dale Hollow, Center Hill, Percy Priest or any # of other lake/rivers. And you can do all that without "paying anything thats
goes directly to this lake", as you put it.
Pourme - 2-1-2010 at 02:13 PM
| Quote: |
Originally posted by chipmunk
I have nothing against what the committe would like to see happen, but it seems to me that all of the money taken in by taxes, fees ect. would go to
areas surrounding the lake not to the lake. I would like to see a yearly boating tag be sold with all money going to help pay for clean-up,
maintenance of public ramps and docks and most all Water Patrol. I have had the pleasure of using this lake for more than 25yrs. And owning a
camp/resinence near the lake for the past 15yrs. During the years any time that you go to any docks around the lake, you will see a lot of out of
state vehicles, which means that a lot out of state boaters are using and enjoying the lake,without paying anything to boat in this lake. I have
nothing against these people and I hope that they continue to come and enjoy the lake as I. But as of now unless you buy a Kentucky boating, hunting,
or fishing license you are not paying anything thats goes directly to this lake. |
Wow....Wrong.
Lock5 - 2-1-2010 at 03:15 PM
Bluebird, I like the picture. The problem is it doesn't show any of the beads, cameras or sunglasses or other touristy things that are laying on the
bottom of our pristine lake. Also there is no toilet paper from dumping houseboats or roting old boats on the banks, and I didn't see not one
aluminum can or bottle. So I'll just go on record to say that it must be a misrepresented photo. I have been coming to LC since the late 80's we
don't have the same lake today that I had back then, It seems that there are varying ways to enjoy our lake, and not all of us agree on what that may
be.
E_HILLMAN - 2-1-2010 at 03:42 PM
I think that pic is Cave Run... lol
Raymond - 2-1-2010 at 04:17 PM
Where is the OHIO NAVY that you people complained about a few seasons ago??
Bluebird - 2-1-2010 at 04:23 PM
The old-timers, this generation & future generations will never see Lake Cumberland return to the good old days without stronger focus by ALL
citizens to maintain, protect, & improve Lake Cumberland water/shoreline/animal life.
Roadtrip - 2-1-2010 at 05:51 PM
| Quote: |
Originally posted by chipmunk
I have nothing against what the committe would like to see happen, but it seems to me that all of the money taken in by taxes, fees ect. would go to
areas surrounding the lake not to the lake. I would like to see a yearly boating tag be sold with all money going to help pay for clean-up,
maintenance of public ramps and docks and most all Water Patrol. I have had the pleasure of using this lake for more than 25yrs. And owning a
camp/resinence near the lake for the past 15yrs. During the years any time that you go to any docks around the lake, you will see a lot of out of
state vehicles, which means that a lot out of state boaters are using and enjoying the lake,without paying anything to boat in this lake. I have
nothing against these people and I hope that they continue to come and enjoy the lake as I. But as of now unless you buy a Kentucky boating, hunting,
or fishing license you are not paying anything thats goes directly to this lake. |
Who funds the COE? The federal government. As I sit here looking at my W2's in preparation for tax season, I think I paid a significant amount of
federal taxes in 2009. So whether my license tag says Kentucky or Ohio, I pay to use the lake. A "permit" is just another word for "tax" and I
already pay plenty as it is!
This federal stewardship hopefully will keep folks from finding a way to put out floating shanty towns and plowing under blue heron rookeries in the
process. I am not typically a greenie in any form or fashion, but this stuff is absurd, and all in the interest of "promoting the lake area".
Sure it is.
Nautiques R Us - 2-1-2010 at 06:01 PM
Sqakmeister,
I am with you! And, when I suggested licensing, I meant for everyone in all states not just Ky! I also agree there should be an on water test of
skills just like for a car. At least then people who buy boats would have some kind of training. I think alot of people just don't even think about
the fact that there are some "rules of the road" they just see all this water and, of course there are no "lines in the road, no stop lights so
why can't everyone just drive anywhere they want. It is not until something terrible happens that they find out otherwise. Also, in my previous
post I was not picking on the fast boats inparticular at all. What I was saying is that without licensing or some kind of boat owner requirement, a
person who has the money can buy a boat...any size of boat..dump it in the lake and take off. When you combine, inexperience with drinking and speed
you have a tragedy in the making. It doesn't even take all three..it could just be inexperience or speed or drinking or all three.
As far as those of us living out of state not paying our way...that is just ridiculous. If it weren't for all of us coming in from out of state,
there would be no tourist attraction and alot of the jobs in the area wouldn't exist. We pay property tax for our home in Nancy, when we had a
houseboat...we paid tax for it to sit in the water. We pay for both of our boats we have now to have slips..we pay for fuel and groceries every time
we come down. We have many friends down there and hope to retire there someday. Just because we don't live there now doesn't mean we don't
fiancially support the area in and around the lake.
If the lake becomes too commercial, it will lose the appeal it has had to so many people and there families for so many years. People will move on
and look for another place to go where they can spend safe, peaceful time with their families. I wish for, but know, it will never go back to the way
it was in the 70's and 80's but I just hate to see the direction it seems to be moving in sometimes. It seems we can never appreciate something for
the way it is...that we always want to change it and that change is usually driven by the almighty buck...that kind of change will destroy the lake we
all say we love. And what will happen then? We will all move on, leave the lake in despair and find somewhere else that hasn't been destroyed yet
to CHANGE!
Lock5 - 2-1-2010 at 07:36 PM
| Quote: |
Originally posted by Nautiques R Us
If the lake becomes too commercial, it will lose the appeal it has had to so many people and there families for so many years. People will move on
and look for another place to go where they can spend safe, peaceful time with their families.
|
If it didn't become as commercial as it is now, people would leave, there is a fine line to maintaining tranquility and providing an interesting
destination. If they want more people, then they will have to allow more commercialization.
It seems as though alot of us liked it alot better back in the day, when an 17' trihull was big enough to run on the main lake on a Saturday in
July.
Having said that, I agree with all you had to say Nautiques R Us.
Subscribe in a reader
