This is what a whitewater park would look like if voters passed a bond measure that would improve the Colorado Dam Spillway as it passes under the Colorado bridge.
Seems like a good idea. Why just yesterday the authorities plucked another floater from the river as he clung to a beam, inches away from being pushed into the nastiness that is the current spillway. Sure there is an abundance of signage warning floaters of the disaster below the Colorado Bridge, but every damn summer someone, or several someones, make this mistake.
A number of other notable outdoors oriented cities like Denver have benefited economically from these “park and play” whitewater zones. The whitewater park in Golden, Colorado reportedly brings in an estimated $1.4 million per year. Not bad for a park that cost $165,000 to create.
The Bend whitewater park will be attached to the Parks Dist. bond measure on ballots this November. Say yes to more awesomeness in Bend.
This article appears in Aug 16-22, 2012.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
I would love to see this, BUT….the chances of it being completed for $165k are zero (that amount is absurdly low, but could probably be raised privately…). Also, it is a little misleading to say $165k, when the total bond being floated is, what, $2.1 MILLION or something?
– Voting No.
Whether 165k or 2.1 million really doesn’t matter when it comes to improving our community and saving the lives of those in it. Don’t let ignorance blind you from the greater benefit this park would bring. Are you saying that peoples lives could be worth the 165k but never 2.1 mil? Voting Yes and you should too.
1) Do your research. The whitewater park will not be funded through the bond.
2) The whitewater park will not save lives. Removing the dam & spillway will save lives, so playing up an artificial wave as a lifesaver is misleading spin.
Seems like 100 years of experience with ‘improving’ nature to suit one’s notion of awesomeness would make Bendites think that (while kayaking is cool) dumping 1000’s of yards of concrete into our river miiiight not work out so great in the long run. This is an historic opportunity to do something truly awesome (and lasting). There’s plenty of real whitewater all around us. Vote no to dumping concrete in the Deschutes River.
Even though the bond will not pay for it, does a ‘yes’ vote constitute tacit approval of the whitewater park? I’m very supportive of everything else in the plan, but putting all that concrete into the river is just silly when there are so many whitewater opportunities in our backyard. I think this is a calculated move to remove barriers to the whitewater component, while maintaining the ability to say that it’s not included in the bond. Once the bond passes and the dam removal process is underway, the whitewater component will be inevitable, even if the community would prefer to move towards more natural and unobtrusive goals. Does this idea have the support of local environmental groups and agencies like American Rivers, Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife etc? I doubt it.
1) No one said the whitewater park here would cost 165K. The article said the park in Golden, CO was built for that amount.
2) Many, if not most, whitewater parks are built in a very natural way, using rock, rather than concrete. Kelly’s whitewater park, in cascade ID, is a perfect example.
http://www.kellyswhitewaterpark.com/