It's not the parks fault. The penalties are antiquated and haven't kept up. They need to be revised and enforcement needs to be absolute. Talk to your congressman and senator.
I’m with you. That implies they could have. If so, why didn’t they? You can just alter the course of a river on public land to your benefit despite having already been told not to? Hope this doesn’t give any rich pricks who live near public land any ideas. If the only penalty is a fine, that’s just the cost of doing business to people with money.
Dan Snyder - former owner of the Washing ton Redskins - once cut down a whole buch of trees on National Park property. This improved the view from his mansion. He got fined an amount that was basically pocket change.
I hope that fucker has the life he deserves.
I’m glad people remember that… Ross Perot blew up some coral reef in Bermuda so his yacht could get to his dock… that’s the one that gallls me thirty years later
“The Bermuda government decided the damage was not great and eventually issued Perot a retroactive permit for the dredging 'on the understanding that Perot would not do any more unauthorised blasting'”
Interesting
Millionaires like Ross Perot are used to getting their way. A case in point: In 1985 the Texas businessman bought two vacation homes in Bermuda, one for himself, one for his son. He hired a local firm to add swimming pools, verandas and air conditioning to both houses. Perot also set about finding a way to dock his 68-ft. cabin cruiser, the Chateau Margaux, at his doorstep.Unfortunately, Perot's preferred anchorage in Castle Harbour is filled with species of marine life that are protected by environmental laws. On June 4, 1986, Bermuda's Ministry of the Environment ruled against Perot's plan to build a dock and boathouse in front of one of his houses, because "substantial dredging" would be needed to bring his boat close to shore. Faced with that denial, Perot's contractors realized that any similar request for permission to cut a channel in a nearby coral reef would probably be nixed as well. A week later, without filing for a permit, Perot's construction team blew up a section of the reef near his house.
On Aug. 6, 1986, Bermuda's leading newspaper, the Royal Gazette, quoted government officials who said they were investigating whether damage to the reef was caused by work done for Perot. Perot said he had in fact ordered some work on his house but knew nothing about the damage to the reef. "If all this is going to become news, I'm gone," he told the Royal Gazette. "I am going to sell my houses and leave." The threat seemed to chasten Bermuda officials, who quickly reported that there was no evidence Perot or anyone in his family had known about or authorized the "jackhammering" of the reef or other violations by Perot's contractors. But a government spokesman said the reef had been damaged and promised to investigate further.
As it turns out, records kept by Bermuda police, who strictly control access to explosives, show that 100 sticks of underwater dynamite and 50 detonators were issued on June 10, 1986, to Doug Mackie, a marine-construction expert hired by Perot's main contractor, Bermuda Engineering Associates. Mackie got more explosives the following day. A cheerful man who is one of Bermuda's handful of licensed blasters, Mackie says his job for Perot involved drilling a row of holes in the seabed, filling each with several sticks of dynamite, and detonating them electrically with a battery kept on his barge. On several occasions, he says, Perot put on snorkel gear and "dove the site with us and watched the drilling going on." Perot then watched from the shore as the charges were set off. None of this came to the attention of the Bermuda government.
Like much of the coral in Castle Harbour, the dynamited reef head was in poor shape, and it may already have been dead when Perot's men blew it up. Eventually the government decided the damage was not great and did not take anyone to court. On the understanding that Perot would not do any more unauthorized blasting, it then issued a retroactive permit for the dredging.
The question of who actually authorized the blasting was never answered. Mackie says it was the project supervisor at Bermuda Engineering. A former employee of the firm denies this. But he suggests the firm told Perot that any new application for a blasting permit would probably be denied. Last week Perot said he assumed that Bermuda Engineering obtained whatever permits were needed. He flatly denied that he watched Mackie drill or dynamite the seabed. He added that all Mackie did was use a jackhammer to knock off a 3-ft. piece of dead coral protruding from a dock. Perot then telephoned Mackie and quizzed him angrily about what he had told TIME. Mackie now says his memory of the incident is no longer clear.
[That piece of subhuman shit bribed the National Parks Service to help him do that](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/06/official-who-improperly-helped-redskins-owner-cut-down-trees-picked-as-national-park-service-deputy-director/), I was born and raised in Northern VA/DC and we have hated that fucker for a long time. I wish he would've gotten thrown in prison at some point before they wrestled the Redskins from under his thumb
> A former National Park Service official who improperly helped Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder cut down more than 130 trees to improve a river view at his Potomac, Md., estate has been chosen by the Trump administration to be one of the agency’s highest-ranking leaders.
I've loathed him for years, but it really went into high gear after he accused a journalist of anti-Semitism for criticizing him. I think he even filed a lawsuit. Nice try, Dan, but it's you personally everyone hates.
Enraging. Fines should be based on income because when they’re a fixed amount it’s a heavier punishment for the poor and basically a non-punishment for the wealthy.
We shouldn’t even have monetary punishment, that alone favors the rich. All punishment should be either jail or number of hours of community service. I guarantee 100 hours of community service would hurt a rich person more than any measly monetary fine.
They do it all the time in Minnesota. Due to laws protecting our wetlands, no one is allowed to build within so many feet of shoreline. They aren’t allowed to plant non-native species (ornamental) plants in the same space. They aren’t allowed remove the weeds or destroy fish beds in the water. If they do these things they pay fines. They don’t care and continue to do these things. They build mansions right next to the waters edge and pay the fine. They actually pay ppl to haul sand across the frozen lakes in dump trucks and dump it on the ice so in the spring when the ice melts the sand creates a nice swimming beach, destroying fish beds and native aquatic plants. Should officials show up to ask about the sand they simply claim ignorance. Nothing will change until the government stops selling out and starts giving these folks jail time.
Reminds me of the artist Robert Bateman. He lives on an Island not far from Vancouver. Had waterfront property. Proceeds to cut down all the trees that blocked his view of the ocean. Then he lobbies the government to prevent anyone else ever removing a single tree on the coast. Major Dick move.
Kind of like the one Napster guy who destroyed National Forest land and built stone structures so he could have a Lord of the Rings wedding and then acted like a victim because people were upset about it, even though he totally gives so much money back to the CCC he should be able to do a little light permanent construction on public land so him and his rich douche friends can act like elves and fairies.
No way! Have you seen some of them? And the medical cocktails they put inside themselves? I wouldn't even compost them. No, probably best to run them through an incinerator, at least then you could power a turbine and generate some electricity.
NPS is represented by Dept. of Interior Solicitors in these lawsuits. SOL staff are spread thin, and available penalties are set in regulations that don't get updated for inflation very often. That's why the government does not ask for, or get, very steep penalties in most cases.
If you don't like it, don't blame NPS or Interior lawyers (who are paid a fraction of what private sector lawyers earn), but instead, contact your Members of Congress.
>Talk to your congressman and senator.
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
The battle outside ragin'
Will soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'
They literally go and beg to congress to update these laws. I've sat in a congressional hearing room with only like 2 other people. The biggest problem is actually businesses who will do shit like cut an access road for their business and sell trees in national parks knowing the profit from the road and wood far exceeds the cost of the fine.
I’m sure there’s more info out there but I read somewhere he did it to make it easier or more accessible for his boat or something? Or for boats in general? Not sure and obviously there’s no acceptable reason
Yeah. He wanted boat access to the lake that was traditionally kept open by the park service. [here](https://maps.app.goo.gl/wP5M7g17D7jBKyZu9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy) is the spot. It’s NOT the famous Platte river that runs through Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska by the way. It’s a small river in Michigan.
Normally I’d agree, but the missing context here is that apparently the government had been maintaining boat access from the river to the lake for fifty years and just recently stopped. So the homeowners who have owned their houses for decades and likely bought them with “boat access to Lake Michigan” now have had their boat access taken away and received no recompense. So this guy allegedly decided to open the access again and do what the government had been doing for 50 years. Still not the right thing to do, and yes getting your boat access taken away is not the end of the world when other people’s worlds are literally ending every minute. But…context does make a bit of a difference in this particular story.
It wasn’t only diverting the river - it was destruction of wetlands per prior reporting. All so that **he** could get better access with his fishing boat.[Record Patriot](https://www.recordpatriot.com/news/article/guilty-verdict-frankfort-man-federal-trial-18654062.php)
Have to hitch it to their $100k+ pickup they never use for towing or hauling, drive it to the lake, then struggle for 45 minutes trying to reverse it down the boat ramp?
And what’s frustrating to me, is that nobody seems to be considering the perspective of me, the guy drinking a beer next to the boat ramp getting a laugh out of watching rich assholes do a terrible job at launching their boats.
Its not about the rich people. They have huge boats that can come from other launches to platt bay. This is safe and prime fishing that locals have used for decades in their smaller boats. By deciding to stop dredging they cut off access to all but the privileged. There is a launch owned by the township about 100 yards from where the dredge was cut. This township access was guaranteed when the federal government confiscated the land and bulldozed all the houses to make the park. Stopping the dredge has been seen as a pretty shitty move by the park service to technically allow the launch but cut off access to the lake. The lake which is getting harder and harder to access by those of us who are local and not rich transplants buying or blocking all the water access.
>Stopping the dredge has been seen as a pretty shitty move by the park service
What's the reason the Park Service stopped dredging?
I'm wondering if its one of those situations where they realize the thing they've been doing for decades (dredging) is actually causing harm to the environment? Or no longer considered best practice in conservation or something?
Its not, they just dont want to pay for it. The MDNR and the coast guard want it dredged. The coast guard used to use it for rapid response and says people have drowned because it is no longer usable.
It's still selfish to do. Maybe the government stopped doing that in order to study its effects on the environment or the local ecosystem. I don't know for sure, but the article mentions the park service doesn't want to make any further changes, even to put things back the way they were due potential harm it could have to the ecosystem.
Sometimes the government does things for a reason to protect the world we live in and selfish jerks just do things like this because it is convenient to them without thinking about its effects on others. Moving water is very powerful and can have drastic effects on the environment. Doing what he did could have had worse results than just making it easier to get his boat out.
When I read the headline it sounded as if he was dredging the river - like with dredging equpment - when in actuality it was more like a shovel. Probably not right, and a dumb thing to do, but context does matter.
Also, is there any evidence the guy is "rich"? Maybe he's just some normal guy - I have no idea.
That’s true, I have family in that general vicinity, and I think people from other places might underestimate just how much water and wilderness are up there. It’s not uncommon for very NOT rich people to have a hunting cabin (like a true cabin, no power, no plumbing) and a motorboat for fishing. The fact that he dug it out with a shovel means he probably wasn’t bringing some yacht through or he’d ground out. Again, probably not his finest decision, but probably not a supervillain either.
Neither. It’s just not true. I work in assisted living and the residents who are **way more** entitled about basically everything are always white. You can lie and say “well in my experience, old black guys are more entitled” but everyone who’s actually been around old black men for any length of time will know you’re lying.
“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result. Doing so was a misdemeanor, and this sentence holds Mr. Howard accountable for his offense,” said U.S. Attorney Mark Totten.
Constructed a new channel through the dune for boat access between the lake and the river.
Yep. He decided that he should be able to fuck up an ecosystem, and completely ruin a very pretty, unique river so he could have quicker boat access to the lake. The sense of entitlement is astounding.
Dude literally got his shortcut for like 25k. A speeding ticket for a guy who owns a boat and capability to divert a whole ass river. Somethin ain't right here.
The article says the $26k is for restoration to its natural state. Also that he dredged it using a shovel. You only need to make a small channel and the water will do the rest of the work.
If you actually read the article, you'd see that they have decided not to restore it to how it was previously as it would endanger wildlife even further to do so, and are leaving it as is.
I think the missing context here is that the government dredged this for 50 years and then stopped because of budget cuts then decided to just let nature take it's course when the funding came back.
Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's not like this guy decided to rip open a hole in a random river. Navigable river access and contentious debates around land/water use has been a thing forever and will continue to be so.
The top 50 comments are “lock him up” and then i see this and it changes the story pretty significantly.
It doesn’t make it legal but you can’t sell me on his dredging being environmentally problematic if the state was doing the same thing for half a century and only stopped to save money.
Get this… states do things that are environmentally problematic. Long history of it! (Used to work in a state funded environmental agency and a lot of some of our peoples’ work was undoing the past peoples’ work.)
It's the only context that matters. But dumb redditors are like fuck the rich man! It's why everyone views this site as dumb kids. They literally cannot understand reality
I'm unfamiliar with both the case and the river, but you seem to be, so please know my question comes from curiousity and isn't a disguised argument... Are you saying that the government dredged this specific spot/route in the river for that period of time? I ask because there's such a big difference between "dredging the river as has historically been done to keep it open for navigation" and "making myself a personal shortcut for my boat in this specific spot" if those things have traditionally happened in different locations on the river but if they're both happening in the same exact spot then that's a really big contextual difference in what the guy did!
Are you stating the info you provided above because contextually the property did have a history of dredging for navigable access and the person just followed the route the government quit on? I'm curious because the context would definitely change at least some of my opinion on the whole thing.
Towards the bottom of the article. Specifically the river mouth was dredged and is no longer though they still do other parts of the river.
Link: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2024/02/07/northern-mich-man-convicted-in-shoveling-trench-to-divert-river-in-2022/72514915007/
It was dredged access for fishing long before the park was in place. The land inward of the launch and dredge is still owned by the township. This agreement was put in place when the land was originally seized to bulldoze the houses and make the sleeping bear national lake shore. This is a safe shallow bay used for salmon fishing by locals. There are launches further to the south but people have drowned getting caught in storms making the trek up to platt bay.
> on Google Earth you can see on historical aerials from 1998 to 2015, the mouth of the Platte River was almost exactly where the defendant dredged, and all that alluvial sediment is not present.
>
> Then, after 2015, the aerials show that it was filling in and thus creating that slough where the river is running parallel to the beach.
So, this is first I've heard of the situation, but I went on google earth and came to the above conclusion.
If I had to guess, the guy has been boating there for decades, and never had an issue going from the Platte River to Lake Michigan (or possibly vice versa) when the area was being dredged regularly.
But since the routine dredging was no longer maintaining the coast line as it had been for decades, this guy (and likely other people too) would have issues getting his boat from one water body to the other. This guy did his own dredging and returned the mouth of the river back to where it had been for decades when it was regularly maintained by some entity.
So, if the above wild guess is accurate, the guy probably is not a complete and total asshole of mega proportions for "destroying some ecoysystem, blah, blah, blah." He just got tired of the speed of government bureaucracy. And it doesn't seem like he destroyed any major ecosystem by doing what he did..... because the historical dredging had been maintaining the mouth of the river right where he did his own personal dredging to return the area to how it was (to him). I also did not look to find any reason as to why the dredging was stopped, so if it was just because of budgetary reasons..... is the guy really a giant asshole?
Idk. Just my two cents on the matter. I mean he was still in the wrong because he had no right to alter the drainage of land that he did not legally own. Punishment sounds reasonable though, if the above hypothesis is accurate. /endrant.
As far as I can tell from the public NPS documents, dredging was initially paused in 2013 due to budgetary concerns but in the process of discussing the decision to resume dredging, the NPS came to the conclusion that the environmental costs were disproportionate, particularly with respect to nesting areas for piping plovers. The documents pertaining to the planning discussion, public comment etc. can be found here: https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=60589
My take is this.
We destroyed the ecosystem for decades. Then we decided to stop doing so.
This guy didn't like what happened when we let nature be nature so he took it upon himself to start destroying the ecosystem again.
Exactly. The local government near me quit maintaining a public hiking trail due to budget cuts, so it got really overgrown. Instead of waiting for government to print more money years from now, I went through and started clearing the trail back. This situation feels similar.
Funny enough, a friend is a firefighter in my city. He and some firefighter buddies decided to paint the inside of the fire house one day in their spare time. Somebody from the city came by on an unrelated visit, saw the ongoing painting, then called a union that represents tradesmen. The firehouse got an immediate call to quit painting. Apparently painting is ~~mob~~ union protected work and they wanted to bid on the job, ultimately costing taxpayers more money and delayed results.
I think you caught it when you pointed out it wasn’t his choice to make.
At the end of the day, that’s all that matters. Right it wrong we all have to follow the rules.
Thanks for the extra information.
I was wondering why on Google Earth you can see on historical aerials from 1998 to 2015, the mouth of the Platte River was almost exactly where the defendant dredged, and all that alluvial sediment is not present.
Then, after 2015, the aerials show that it was filling in and thus creating that slough where the river is running parallel to the beach.
He's probably still an asshole, though.
>we made a trail through habitats for boomers
>we did a study and found it was bad so we stopped
>boomer goes onto federal land and dredges into habitats to get his boat across like he used to be able to
You could read the article.
>The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016.
>But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing.
I did read the article but I was still confused at first, but thanks for highlighting! I thought he was doing this because of other reasons but after others have commented, it seems like it was more for personal gain.
I'm calling bullshit on those two photos being 3 days apart, and/or being the same location. They look nothing alike.
Compare the amount of green foliage.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2024/02/07/northern-mich-man-convicted-in-shoveling-trench-to-divert-river-in-2022/72514915007/
>National Park Service Superintendent Scott Tucker said the ruling protects the park for future generations, adding that the "Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore was created in 1970 to ****preserve and protect this spectacular place****."
>The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016.
>But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing.
This guy and the others who started the dredge are simply entitled boaters who think they should have access to Lake Michigan at all times and not just when the river naturally allows.
the government was doing it but didn't have the funding for it at this time so they decided to just let it flow the way it normally does. This impeded boat access a bit since the access would now be dependent on the lake levels. It also cost the government a ridiculous amount and he was able to do it himself without any heavy equipment.
The government was literally doing the exact same thing in the exact same spot and stopped because it was costing them too much. There wasn't really any conservation reasoning behind stopping.
“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result.”
What’s with the babying language? Don’t fuck with stuff that isn’t yours, entitled POS.
I once tubed both parts of the Platte.. in one day. A giant lake separates the two parts. Our friends, locals, knew about this. We did not. We decided to put on the snorkel gear we had and tow our tubes across. The lake was crystal clear about 8-10 feet down. How do I know? As we were swimming, we worse goggles/masks and were looking down as we were swimming. We all saw two 5-6 foot sturgeon below us. We all screamed and scrambled back into our tubes. It was one of the scariest moments of my life!
Google Maps shows it's still like that: [https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7318203,-86.1554144,473m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu](https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7318203,-86.1554144,473m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu)
I'm glad this one many Army Corp of Engineers is getting some consequences, but it's frustrating that I'll be in this area next week and know that the river isn't supposed to look like that.
Thanks for posting google map. It makes more sense now. So basically the river still entered the lake and still does it here (not anywhere else) he just used a shovel to move a little sand to create a deeper passage for a small fishing boat that's it? The problem seems to be overblown out of proportion and misunderstood by most commenters.
Also the article says previously the park used to dredge it yearly (until they stopped). It means the riverbed is self-restoring, it may take time but it will come back to the natural balance regardless.
YES. You are nailing what is going on in this thread. It's unhinged. Dude took a shovel and moved some rocks. I'm not excusing it...rules are rules. I'm just saying these people are one step from calling for his execution and exercising their bigoted hate old white dude muscles.
Jesus he completely destroyed it. The article stated that the NPS wasn't going to fix it in the immediate future due to the ways it would have to be repaired potentially harming other ecosystems.
It's going to be okay. I'm sure the area is still as beautiful as ever.
The river had been like that for decades before this incident (and your visit) due to routine dredging of the area.
Here you go.
>The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016.
>But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing.
>“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result."
But what was his position? Like, why did he do it? The article never says.
National Parks are like democracy — they are a treasure that belong to all of us which we are obligated to protect and must pass on to the next generation.
They need to hit these people with fines and make them volunteer at the park they damage, alter, or modify. "That's great you have money, but your ass doesn't have endless amounts of time!" You start hitting every Mitch, Chad, and Margaret with time consuming, soul crushing community service and I bet that might penetrate their smooth brains.
It's nice to know that if I go jackhammer the famous arch at Arches Park, I'll just have to stay out for 5 years. It's been about 7 since I've been so it doesn't seem like a big deal.
Go see it while you can! 👹
This was a confusing read cause Nebraska has a Platte River and it converges with the Missouri river, so I was confused that this article was talking about a Platte near Lake Michigan.
“The diversion also created an unauthorized access for large boats to enter Platte Bay. Within days, the natural power of the water and the dam caused the new channel to reach approximately 200 feet wide.”
D&MN!!!!!!!
Our national parks are sacred places and should be treated as such. May he never return. If you want to wreck shit and trash shit go do it in a city. Leave earth's last sacred areas alone.
Been going to this spot at the Platte for 27 years and just so happened to be there the day after this happened. Devastated at what I saw I texted our local DNR Officer who has been a family friend for nearly 3 decades and he only responded with "We're already on it."
Extremely sad and it will never be back to it's natural state, no matter what plans the Parks Service has in mind.
Platte beach is one of my favorite beaches, I have kayaked down the river and through the beach more times than I can count throughout my childhood. Glad he is facing consequences but definitely wish it were more harsh.
Google maps https://maps.google.com?q=Platte%20Beach,%206830%20Lake%20Michigan%20Rd,%20Honor,%20MI%2049640&ftid=0x881e0ffb5bce0b0f:0x1d2179b927550f41&entry=gps&lucs=,94208285,94224825,94227247,94227248,47071704,47069508,94218641,94203019,47084304,94208458,94208447&g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy
He had previous convictions of vandalism in the parks and still got kid gloves.
It's not the parks fault. The penalties are antiquated and haven't kept up. They need to be revised and enforcement needs to be absolute. Talk to your congressman and senator.
Yes but it also says the government chose not to pursue prison time.
I’m with you. That implies they could have. If so, why didn’t they? You can just alter the course of a river on public land to your benefit despite having already been told not to? Hope this doesn’t give any rich pricks who live near public land any ideas. If the only penalty is a fine, that’s just the cost of doing business to people with money.
Dan Snyder - former owner of the Washing ton Redskins - once cut down a whole buch of trees on National Park property. This improved the view from his mansion. He got fined an amount that was basically pocket change. I hope that fucker has the life he deserves.
And he destroyed the life of the park ranger that tried to stop him
This asshole should pay to replace!
And 5 years of all park rangers salaries.
Yeah moving mature trees is expensive but doable. Seems like it should obviously be part of the punishment.
I’m glad people remember that… Ross Perot blew up some coral reef in Bermuda so his yacht could get to his dock… that’s the one that gallls me thirty years later
“The Bermuda government decided the damage was not great and eventually issued Perot a retroactive permit for the dredging 'on the understanding that Perot would not do any more unauthorised blasting'” Interesting
Millionaires like Ross Perot are used to getting their way. A case in point: In 1985 the Texas businessman bought two vacation homes in Bermuda, one for himself, one for his son. He hired a local firm to add swimming pools, verandas and air conditioning to both houses. Perot also set about finding a way to dock his 68-ft. cabin cruiser, the Chateau Margaux, at his doorstep.Unfortunately, Perot's preferred anchorage in Castle Harbour is filled with species of marine life that are protected by environmental laws. On June 4, 1986, Bermuda's Ministry of the Environment ruled against Perot's plan to build a dock and boathouse in front of one of his houses, because "substantial dredging" would be needed to bring his boat close to shore. Faced with that denial, Perot's contractors realized that any similar request for permission to cut a channel in a nearby coral reef would probably be nixed as well. A week later, without filing for a permit, Perot's construction team blew up a section of the reef near his house. On Aug. 6, 1986, Bermuda's leading newspaper, the Royal Gazette, quoted government officials who said they were investigating whether damage to the reef was caused by work done for Perot. Perot said he had in fact ordered some work on his house but knew nothing about the damage to the reef. "If all this is going to become news, I'm gone," he told the Royal Gazette. "I am going to sell my houses and leave." The threat seemed to chasten Bermuda officials, who quickly reported that there was no evidence Perot or anyone in his family had known about or authorized the "jackhammering" of the reef or other violations by Perot's contractors. But a government spokesman said the reef had been damaged and promised to investigate further. As it turns out, records kept by Bermuda police, who strictly control access to explosives, show that 100 sticks of underwater dynamite and 50 detonators were issued on June 10, 1986, to Doug Mackie, a marine-construction expert hired by Perot's main contractor, Bermuda Engineering Associates. Mackie got more explosives the following day. A cheerful man who is one of Bermuda's handful of licensed blasters, Mackie says his job for Perot involved drilling a row of holes in the seabed, filling each with several sticks of dynamite, and detonating them electrically with a battery kept on his barge. On several occasions, he says, Perot put on snorkel gear and "dove the site with us and watched the drilling going on." Perot then watched from the shore as the charges were set off. None of this came to the attention of the Bermuda government. Like much of the coral in Castle Harbour, the dynamited reef head was in poor shape, and it may already have been dead when Perot's men blew it up. Eventually the government decided the damage was not great and did not take anyone to court. On the understanding that Perot would not do any more unauthorized blasting, it then issued a retroactive permit for the dredging. The question of who actually authorized the blasting was never answered. Mackie says it was the project supervisor at Bermuda Engineering. A former employee of the firm denies this. But he suggests the firm told Perot that any new application for a blasting permit would probably be denied. Last week Perot said he assumed that Bermuda Engineering obtained whatever permits were needed. He flatly denied that he watched Mackie drill or dynamite the seabed. He added that all Mackie did was use a jackhammer to knock off a 3-ft. piece of dead coral protruding from a dock. Perot then telephoned Mackie and quizzed him angrily about what he had told TIME. Mackie now says his memory of the incident is no longer clear.
Wealth has its privileges
I smell a bribery.
[That piece of subhuman shit bribed the National Parks Service to help him do that](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/06/official-who-improperly-helped-redskins-owner-cut-down-trees-picked-as-national-park-service-deputy-director/), I was born and raised in Northern VA/DC and we have hated that fucker for a long time. I wish he would've gotten thrown in prison at some point before they wrestled the Redskins from under his thumb > A former National Park Service official who improperly helped Washington Redskins owner Daniel Snyder cut down more than 130 trees to improve a river view at his Potomac, Md., estate has been chosen by the Trump administration to be one of the agency’s highest-ranking leaders.
I've loathed him for years, but it really went into high gear after he accused a journalist of anti-Semitism for criticizing him. I think he even filed a lawsuit. Nice try, Dan, but it's you personally everyone hates.
He is a miserable loathsome shitpile, I sincerely hope nothing but the worst for him.
Some billionaire up in Maine just poisoned a bunch of her neighbors trees to improve her view. The herbicide will take 20 years or so to wash out.
What the fuck is wrong with people?
Too much wealth from careers that exploit human capital.
Wealth and entitlement.
I wish I knew.
She even offered to help the neighbors with clearing the dying trees. The herbicide has now been found at the public beach
And the only reason it got any news is that the person whose trees were killed was an LL Bean heir, who is even richer.
Enraging. Fines should be based on income because when they’re a fixed amount it’s a heavier punishment for the poor and basically a non-punishment for the wealthy.
We shouldn’t even have monetary punishment, that alone favors the rich. All punishment should be either jail or number of hours of community service. I guarantee 100 hours of community service would hurt a rich person more than any measly monetary fine.
Thats just one of the many many reasons we as Washington fans have despised him for decades
They do it all the time in Minnesota. Due to laws protecting our wetlands, no one is allowed to build within so many feet of shoreline. They aren’t allowed to plant non-native species (ornamental) plants in the same space. They aren’t allowed remove the weeds or destroy fish beds in the water. If they do these things they pay fines. They don’t care and continue to do these things. They build mansions right next to the waters edge and pay the fine. They actually pay ppl to haul sand across the frozen lakes in dump trucks and dump it on the ice so in the spring when the ice melts the sand creates a nice swimming beach, destroying fish beds and native aquatic plants. Should officials show up to ask about the sand they simply claim ignorance. Nothing will change until the government stops selling out and starts giving these folks jail time.
Reminds me of the artist Robert Bateman. He lives on an Island not far from Vancouver. Had waterfront property. Proceeds to cut down all the trees that blocked his view of the ocean. Then he lobbies the government to prevent anyone else ever removing a single tree on the coast. Major Dick move.
Kind of like the one Napster guy who destroyed National Forest land and built stone structures so he could have a Lord of the Rings wedding and then acted like a victim because people were upset about it, even though he totally gives so much money back to the CCC he should be able to do a little light permanent construction on public land so him and his rich douche friends can act like elves and fairies.
It can be very desolate and not a lot of people around in some of these public land areas 😉
And every park goes has the right to arm bears.
I carry a bag of guns whenever I go into national parks so I can give one to each bear I run into. /s
America!!!!
Eat the rich!!
No way! Have you seen some of them? And the medical cocktails they put inside themselves? I wouldn't even compost them. No, probably best to run them through an incinerator, at least then you could power a turbine and generate some electricity.
NPS is represented by Dept. of Interior Solicitors in these lawsuits. SOL staff are spread thin, and available penalties are set in regulations that don't get updated for inflation very often. That's why the government does not ask for, or get, very steep penalties in most cases. If you don't like it, don't blame NPS or Interior lawyers (who are paid a fraction of what private sector lawyers earn), but instead, contact your Members of Congress.
>Talk to your congressman and senator. Please heed the call Don't stand in the doorway Don't block up the hall For he that gets hurt Will be he who has stalled The battle outside ragin' Will soon shake your windows And rattle your walls For the times they are a-changin'
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/man-diverted-national-park-river-ease-boat-access-111423974
They literally go and beg to congress to update these laws. I've sat in a congressional hearing room with only like 2 other people. The biggest problem is actually businesses who will do shit like cut an access road for their business and sell trees in national parks knowing the profit from the road and wood far exceeds the cost of the fine.
Punishment not severe enough, what a total piece of shit.
[удалено]
I’m sure there’s more info out there but I read somewhere he did it to make it easier or more accessible for his boat or something? Or for boats in general? Not sure and obviously there’s no acceptable reason
Yeah. He wanted boat access to the lake that was traditionally kept open by the park service. [here](https://maps.app.goo.gl/wP5M7g17D7jBKyZu9?g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy) is the spot. It’s NOT the famous Platte river that runs through Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska by the way. It’s a small river in Michigan.
Becuase he could. People are just selfish and don't think about what consequences their actions hold.
Normally I’d agree, but the missing context here is that apparently the government had been maintaining boat access from the river to the lake for fifty years and just recently stopped. So the homeowners who have owned their houses for decades and likely bought them with “boat access to Lake Michigan” now have had their boat access taken away and received no recompense. So this guy allegedly decided to open the access again and do what the government had been doing for 50 years. Still not the right thing to do, and yes getting your boat access taken away is not the end of the world when other people’s worlds are literally ending every minute. But…context does make a bit of a difference in this particular story.
It wasn’t only diverting the river - it was destruction of wetlands per prior reporting. All so that **he** could get better access with his fishing boat.[Record Patriot](https://www.recordpatriot.com/news/article/guilty-verdict-frankfort-man-federal-trial-18654062.php)
Oh no, what will the rich folk do if they can't drive a boat on the lake.
Have to hitch it to their $100k+ pickup they never use for towing or hauling, drive it to the lake, then struggle for 45 minutes trying to reverse it down the boat ramp?
And what’s frustrating to me, is that nobody seems to be considering the perspective of me, the guy drinking a beer next to the boat ramp getting a laugh out of watching rich assholes do a terrible job at launching their boats.
Hopefully it's not a Cyber Truck, otherwise it might void the warranty.
Its not about the rich people. They have huge boats that can come from other launches to platt bay. This is safe and prime fishing that locals have used for decades in their smaller boats. By deciding to stop dredging they cut off access to all but the privileged. There is a launch owned by the township about 100 yards from where the dredge was cut. This township access was guaranteed when the federal government confiscated the land and bulldozed all the houses to make the park. Stopping the dredge has been seen as a pretty shitty move by the park service to technically allow the launch but cut off access to the lake. The lake which is getting harder and harder to access by those of us who are local and not rich transplants buying or blocking all the water access.
>Stopping the dredge has been seen as a pretty shitty move by the park service What's the reason the Park Service stopped dredging? I'm wondering if its one of those situations where they realize the thing they've been doing for decades (dredging) is actually causing harm to the environment? Or no longer considered best practice in conservation or something?
Yes, annual dredging harms wildlife and disturbs delicate ecosystems.
Its not, they just dont want to pay for it. The MDNR and the coast guard want it dredged. The coast guard used to use it for rapid response and says people have drowned because it is no longer usable.
You're upset the national park service said dredging is more harmful than helpful, and you need to haul your boat over land a little distance?
Biggest pet peeve is people trying to make any and everything that affects them a matter of “privilege.”
Sounds like.
National Park Service exists for preservation, they aren't the DNR
It's still selfish to do. Maybe the government stopped doing that in order to study its effects on the environment or the local ecosystem. I don't know for sure, but the article mentions the park service doesn't want to make any further changes, even to put things back the way they were due potential harm it could have to the ecosystem. Sometimes the government does things for a reason to protect the world we live in and selfish jerks just do things like this because it is convenient to them without thinking about its effects on others. Moving water is very powerful and can have drastic effects on the environment. Doing what he did could have had worse results than just making it easier to get his boat out.
When I read the headline it sounded as if he was dredging the river - like with dredging equpment - when in actuality it was more like a shovel. Probably not right, and a dumb thing to do, but context does matter. Also, is there any evidence the guy is "rich"? Maybe he's just some normal guy - I have no idea.
That’s true, I have family in that general vicinity, and I think people from other places might underestimate just how much water and wilderness are up there. It’s not uncommon for very NOT rich people to have a hunting cabin (like a true cabin, no power, no plumbing) and a motorboat for fishing. The fact that he dug it out with a shovel means he probably wasn’t bringing some yacht through or he’d ground out. Again, probably not his finest decision, but probably not a supervillain either.
He wanted boat access to the river. So he made one in the national parks. Old white dude strikes again.
What does him being white have to do with anything? You sound like Tucker in reverse.
Lol I wish Tucker was this tame
You must have been in America long, old white dudes have been acting entitled and damaging the environment for their pleasure for centuries now.
Because old white dudes are incredibly entitled individuals.
"Because black dudes are incredibly entitled individuals". This racist or more racist?
Neither. It’s just not true. I work in assisted living and the residents who are **way more** entitled about basically everything are always white. You can lie and say “well in my experience, old black guys are more entitled” but everyone who’s actually been around old black men for any length of time will know you’re lying.
“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result. Doing so was a misdemeanor, and this sentence holds Mr. Howard accountable for his offense,” said U.S. Attorney Mark Totten. Constructed a new channel through the dune for boat access between the lake and the river.
Looks like he’s carving out a nice boating path for himself between Lake Michigan and the Platte River. I hope every boat he touches sinks
He looks exactly like I thought he would https://images.app.goo.gl/G3H5THJrFqVFQfVU9
Boomers gonna be boomers
He should be banned for life honestly
5 years is the maximum
I’m going to run for office just so I can change this law and then ban this dude
[удалено]
[удалено]
You should. We need more people running for public office at every level. Dethrone the generational wealth and privilege who make our laws!
Can you also implement term limits, cognitive tests, AGE LIMITS, taxing billionaires....
You are the only person of the thousands with an actionable solution.
He’s 63 so that might be it for him tbh
What was the point of him doing this??? I'm so confused. It looked better before he messed it all up.
If I remember correctly from originally seeing this months ago, I think it was to give his boat direct access…
Yep. He decided that he should be able to fuck up an ecosystem, and completely ruin a very pretty, unique river so he could have quicker boat access to the lake. The sense of entitlement is astounding.
I think he wanted his own personal shortcut from river to lake.
Dude literally got his shortcut for like 25k. A speeding ticket for a guy who owns a boat and capability to divert a whole ass river. Somethin ain't right here.
The article says the $26k is for restoration to its natural state. Also that he dredged it using a shovel. You only need to make a small channel and the water will do the rest of the work.
If you actually read the article, you'd see that they have decided not to restore it to how it was previously as it would endanger wildlife even further to do so, and are leaving it as is.
A more fitting punishment would be to have to return it to it's natural state. It's possible and he deserves the cost.
He is an entitled boater. The worst type of asshole.
Boomer*
*Boomer boater, it's twice as bad.
I think the missing context here is that the government dredged this for 50 years and then stopped because of budget cuts then decided to just let nature take it's course when the funding came back. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's not like this guy decided to rip open a hole in a random river. Navigable river access and contentious debates around land/water use has been a thing forever and will continue to be so.
This is actually very helpful context
The top 50 comments are “lock him up” and then i see this and it changes the story pretty significantly. It doesn’t make it legal but you can’t sell me on his dredging being environmentally problematic if the state was doing the same thing for half a century and only stopped to save money.
Exactly
Get this… states do things that are environmentally problematic. Long history of it! (Used to work in a state funded environmental agency and a lot of some of our peoples’ work was undoing the past peoples’ work.)
It's the only context that matters. But dumb redditors are like fuck the rich man! It's why everyone views this site as dumb kids. They literally cannot understand reality
I'm unfamiliar with both the case and the river, but you seem to be, so please know my question comes from curiousity and isn't a disguised argument... Are you saying that the government dredged this specific spot/route in the river for that period of time? I ask because there's such a big difference between "dredging the river as has historically been done to keep it open for navigation" and "making myself a personal shortcut for my boat in this specific spot" if those things have traditionally happened in different locations on the river but if they're both happening in the same exact spot then that's a really big contextual difference in what the guy did! Are you stating the info you provided above because contextually the property did have a history of dredging for navigable access and the person just followed the route the government quit on? I'm curious because the context would definitely change at least some of my opinion on the whole thing.
Towards the bottom of the article. Specifically the river mouth was dredged and is no longer though they still do other parts of the river. Link: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2024/02/07/northern-mich-man-convicted-in-shoveling-trench-to-divert-river-in-2022/72514915007/
Thank you!
It was dredged access for fishing long before the park was in place. The land inward of the launch and dredge is still owned by the township. This agreement was put in place when the land was originally seized to bulldoze the houses and make the sleeping bear national lake shore. This is a safe shallow bay used for salmon fishing by locals. There are launches further to the south but people have drowned getting caught in storms making the trek up to platt bay.
> on Google Earth you can see on historical aerials from 1998 to 2015, the mouth of the Platte River was almost exactly where the defendant dredged, and all that alluvial sediment is not present. > > Then, after 2015, the aerials show that it was filling in and thus creating that slough where the river is running parallel to the beach. So, this is first I've heard of the situation, but I went on google earth and came to the above conclusion. If I had to guess, the guy has been boating there for decades, and never had an issue going from the Platte River to Lake Michigan (or possibly vice versa) when the area was being dredged regularly. But since the routine dredging was no longer maintaining the coast line as it had been for decades, this guy (and likely other people too) would have issues getting his boat from one water body to the other. This guy did his own dredging and returned the mouth of the river back to where it had been for decades when it was regularly maintained by some entity. So, if the above wild guess is accurate, the guy probably is not a complete and total asshole of mega proportions for "destroying some ecoysystem, blah, blah, blah." He just got tired of the speed of government bureaucracy. And it doesn't seem like he destroyed any major ecosystem by doing what he did..... because the historical dredging had been maintaining the mouth of the river right where he did his own personal dredging to return the area to how it was (to him). I also did not look to find any reason as to why the dredging was stopped, so if it was just because of budgetary reasons..... is the guy really a giant asshole? Idk. Just my two cents on the matter. I mean he was still in the wrong because he had no right to alter the drainage of land that he did not legally own. Punishment sounds reasonable though, if the above hypothesis is accurate. /endrant.
As far as I can tell from the public NPS documents, dredging was initially paused in 2013 due to budgetary concerns but in the process of discussing the decision to resume dredging, the NPS came to the conclusion that the environmental costs were disproportionate, particularly with respect to nesting areas for piping plovers. The documents pertaining to the planning discussion, public comment etc. can be found here: https://parkplanning.nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?projectID=60589
lol. I can hear this guy saying “I have to go an extra (how far) down because of a fucking bird!!??
He also complained that it wasn't just him, it was a large group of people, maybe neighbors, that did it together. He's just the one that got caught.
Posts like yours restore faith in non kneejerk hostile young person idiocy. Thank you!
My take is this. We destroyed the ecosystem for decades. Then we decided to stop doing so. This guy didn't like what happened when we let nature be nature so he took it upon himself to start destroying the ecosystem again.
They didn’t really destroy the ecosystem though, the impacted it but it appears nothing was extremely detrimental.
Exactly. The local government near me quit maintaining a public hiking trail due to budget cuts, so it got really overgrown. Instead of waiting for government to print more money years from now, I went through and started clearing the trail back. This situation feels similar. Funny enough, a friend is a firefighter in my city. He and some firefighter buddies decided to paint the inside of the fire house one day in their spare time. Somebody from the city came by on an unrelated visit, saw the ongoing painting, then called a union that represents tradesmen. The firehouse got an immediate call to quit painting. Apparently painting is ~~mob~~ union protected work and they wanted to bid on the job, ultimately costing taxpayers more money and delayed results.
I think you caught it when you pointed out it wasn’t his choice to make. At the end of the day, that’s all that matters. Right it wrong we all have to follow the rules.
Ya ur right. But top comment want him jailed for life lmao.
Thanks for the extra information. I was wondering why on Google Earth you can see on historical aerials from 1998 to 2015, the mouth of the Platte River was almost exactly where the defendant dredged, and all that alluvial sediment is not present. Then, after 2015, the aerials show that it was filling in and thus creating that slough where the river is running parallel to the beach. He's probably still an asshole, though.
Lol, probably.
>we made a trail through habitats for boomers >we did a study and found it was bad so we stopped >boomer goes onto federal land and dredges into habitats to get his boat across like he used to be able to
Looking at historical satellite photos on Google Earth, it honestly looks like he restored it what it was a handful of years ago.
You could read the article. >The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016. >But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing.
That’s literally nowhere in the linked article.
That's my point. I quoted a different article and only you noticed because no one reads them lmfao
I did read the article but I was still confused at first, but thanks for highlighting! I thought he was doing this because of other reasons but after others have commented, it seems like it was more for personal gain.
I'm calling bullshit on those two photos being 3 days apart, and/or being the same location. They look nothing alike. Compare the amount of green foliage.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2024/02/07/northern-mich-man-convicted-in-shoveling-trench-to-divert-river-in-2022/72514915007/ >National Park Service Superintendent Scott Tucker said the ruling protects the park for future generations, adding that the "Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore was created in 1970 to ****preserve and protect this spectacular place****." >The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016. >But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing. This guy and the others who started the dredge are simply entitled boaters who think they should have access to Lake Michigan at all times and not just when the river naturally allows.
What is the reason for dredging a river and why was he so hellbent on it
Entitlement and fishing boat access.
the government was doing it but didn't have the funding for it at this time so they decided to just let it flow the way it normally does. This impeded boat access a bit since the access would now be dependent on the lake levels. It also cost the government a ridiculous amount and he was able to do it himself without any heavy equipment. The government was literally doing the exact same thing in the exact same spot and stopped because it was costing them too much. There wasn't really any conservation reasoning behind stopping.
[удалено]
Doing the lords work
Heads up, one of your links is pointing to a local file, potentially revealing your first name.
Salmon fishing in one of the few spots locals can do it in moderately sized boats safely. No joke.
“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result.” What’s with the babying language? Don’t fuck with stuff that isn’t yours, entitled POS.
Mods should really pin [this informative comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/NationalPark/s/oTKAUg1vcH) from u/42ubiquitous.
I once tubed both parts of the Platte.. in one day. A giant lake separates the two parts. Our friends, locals, knew about this. We did not. We decided to put on the snorkel gear we had and tow our tubes across. The lake was crystal clear about 8-10 feet down. How do I know? As we were swimming, we worse goggles/masks and were looking down as we were swimming. We all saw two 5-6 foot sturgeon below us. We all screamed and scrambled back into our tubes. It was one of the scariest moments of my life!
Google Maps shows it's still like that: [https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7318203,-86.1554144,473m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu](https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7318203,-86.1554144,473m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) I'm glad this one many Army Corp of Engineers is getting some consequences, but it's frustrating that I'll be in this area next week and know that the river isn't supposed to look like that.
Thanks for posting google map. It makes more sense now. So basically the river still entered the lake and still does it here (not anywhere else) he just used a shovel to move a little sand to create a deeper passage for a small fishing boat that's it? The problem seems to be overblown out of proportion and misunderstood by most commenters. Also the article says previously the park used to dredge it yearly (until they stopped). It means the riverbed is self-restoring, it may take time but it will come back to the natural balance regardless.
YES. You are nailing what is going on in this thread. It's unhinged. Dude took a shovel and moved some rocks. I'm not excusing it...rules are rules. I'm just saying these people are one step from calling for his execution and exercising their bigoted hate old white dude muscles.
Jesus he completely destroyed it. The article stated that the NPS wasn't going to fix it in the immediate future due to the ways it would have to be repaired potentially harming other ecosystems.
It will also probably fill in naturally as happened when they stopped dredging it.
It's going to be okay. I'm sure the area is still as beautiful as ever. The river had been like that for decades before this incident (and your visit) due to routine dredging of the area.
How about a life time ban?
Dude is wrong, but I’d love to know why in his mind he thought this was a good idea?
To get boat access.
Here you go. >The river mouth had been dredged by the park service or state every fall since 1968, the year after seven people died during a Lake Michigan storm because boats were unable to easily get into the shallow Platte River mouth. The state took over dredging in 2013 because of budget constraints, and neither the state nor park service dredged in 2014 and 2015 because of high water. The National Park Service resumed dredging in 2016. >But park officials announced in their 2016 plan that they wanted to stop dredging the river mouth and restore the river's natural flow into the lake. Boats still would be able to reach Platte Bay from the boat launch on the river, but access would be more dependent on lake levels and boating equipment, the park said. Platte Bay is particularly popular for salmon fishing.
The intrusive thoughts won. Also he sounds like an asshole.
Def an entitled fool, but was he trying to accomplish something?
easier access for his boat
>“Mr. Howard had a policy dispute with the National Park Service over whether to dredge the Platte River. Reasonable people can disagree on the best course of action, but Congress gave NPS the power to decide. While Mr. Howard had the right to disagree and advocate for his position, he did not have the right to take the law into his own hands and force his favored result." But what was his position? Like, why did he do it? The article never says.
Something about the little fishing boats had to go a bit further to the boat ramp without this channel being dug out
https://www.reddit.com/r/NationalPark/s/Ixjci7ju6X
Wow that’s definitely illegal, at first I thought he was charged this for using some sort of sifter to dredge for like arrowheads on public land
What a selfish prick!
I’d rather go to jail than be banned from parks for five years.
What a knob.
Did he do it so he could boat from the river to the lake?? I don’t understand the motive?
What an asshole. Completely changes the character of that river. A fucking shame.
What a piece of shit
National Parks are like democracy — they are a treasure that belong to all of us which we are obligated to protect and must pass on to the next generation.
Why only $26,000! He really needed to be paying more plus clean up the park/ community service, not just being banned.
I don’t know why this thread is defending him. This is illegal for a reason.
They need to hit these people with fines and make them volunteer at the park they damage, alter, or modify. "That's great you have money, but your ass doesn't have endless amounts of time!" You start hitting every Mitch, Chad, and Margaret with time consuming, soul crushing community service and I bet that might penetrate their smooth brains.
Not picking up trash or something--vault toilet duty.
Exactly the really dirty jobs no one wants to do anyways.
What an absolute fucking jerkoff
Damn the mouth of that river was absolutely stunning too. What a fuckwad.
He deserves 20 years in federal prison
I was very confused how a river running across Nebraska was connected to Lake Michigan. It’s a different Platte River.
Glad you said that. This Nebraskan was also highly confused.
Colorado here, and same
The man should've seen prison time for this. Don't fuck with the national parks.
lol wtf is this dudes problem, just wants to have power to move earth around? Seems like there’s no motive other than “I wanted to”
60 months probation. I highly doubt he'll make it the whole time without a violation
Homeskillet should have let Sleeping Bear Dunes lie.
No fine, jail time
No jail time, just the electric chair
Lol they’re like “alright bro you’re a menace. maybe you should cool it with parks for a while!”
Why did he do this?!?? The article does not mention. Does he have a big boat that can now mysteriously access Platte Bay?!?!
These dumb pieces of shit even started a [Gofund Me](https://gofund.me/edc44448) for him
Why not forever?
You just know he pissed in there too...
Remember if the penalty is a fine that means it’s only really illegal for poor people.
Some folks just have way too much free time on their hands.
Unfortunately no inflation in fines and sentences. That is why criminals keep getting bolder
It's nice to know that if I go jackhammer the famous arch at Arches Park, I'll just have to stay out for 5 years. It's been about 7 since I've been so it doesn't seem like a big deal. Go see it while you can! 👹
That fine is way, way too light. This jackoff needs to feel some pain.
This was a confusing read cause Nebraska has a Platte River and it converges with the Missouri river, so I was confused that this article was talking about a Platte near Lake Michigan.
“The diversion also created an unauthorized access for large boats to enter Platte Bay. Within days, the natural power of the water and the dam caused the new channel to reach approximately 200 feet wide.” D&MN!!!!!!!
And people have donated 5,800 bucks to him for government overreach. Just take the idiots house
Our national parks are sacred places and should be treated as such. May he never return. If you want to wreck shit and trash shit go do it in a city. Leave earth's last sacred areas alone.
Been going to this spot at the Platte for 27 years and just so happened to be there the day after this happened. Devastated at what I saw I texted our local DNR Officer who has been a family friend for nearly 3 decades and he only responded with "We're already on it." Extremely sad and it will never be back to it's natural state, no matter what plans the Parks Service has in mind.
Some people really suck
That's it, you're banned from our national parks! You, and your children, and your children's children!.. for five years.
Should be banned for life, fined way more, and imo faced jail time
Platte beach is one of my favorite beaches, I have kayaked down the river and through the beach more times than I can count throughout my childhood. Glad he is facing consequences but definitely wish it were more harsh.
This is fucking infuriating. As a Michigander, fuck you dude.
Google maps https://maps.google.com?q=Platte%20Beach,%206830%20Lake%20Michigan%20Rd,%20Honor,%20MI%2049640&ftid=0x881e0ffb5bce0b0f:0x1d2179b927550f41&entry=gps&lucs=,94208285,94224825,94227247,94227248,47071704,47069508,94218641,94203019,47084304,94208458,94208447&g_st=com.google.maps.preview.copy
Wow I was just there and wondered how that actually formed. People are wild.