> Thank you for your responses to my request for suggestions about possible
> sites for this event;

> my initial thoughts are to locate the site if
> possible, within a days driving distance (approximately 500 miles) of a
> popular seakayaking hub (Puget Sound and So. Cal. are two such hubs).

> Unfortunately, these two hubs are quite a distance apart and trying to
> accommodate attendees from these two ends of the Pacific coast may be a
> little tricky. . .
> . . . In this case Northern
> California would be the logical compromise. This option would require a
> long days drive from either hub.

> Another option, as mentioned in a previous post would be to split the
> event into two localities -- more conveniently serving each of the hubs.
> I would like some more input, if the interest is out there, about these two
> options.

Joe, the obvious compromise here sounds to me like it will just make everyone equally unhappy. Why not go for 2 rendezvous? Do one south in the early part of the summer and one north in the later part of the summer. The southern one will be very convenient for those in that area, and any who wish to travel from the north will be inconvenienced, but not much more than going to some compromise spot. The northerners will then get to see not only the boats, but also the locales in which they are comonly used. A few months later the opposite will be true. those from the south who want to make a pilgimage can see the excitement of the northern waters. With two dates people would have an oportunity to visit either or even both, and attendance at either of the local occasions should be better than at any compromise site. It is just more convenient. Those of us who are not near the left coast would have two choices, and two opportunities to schedule vacation time.

For interest, you might see if anyone wants to paddle the coast between the two sites, making the event a true rendezvous for the travellers. If not the first year, then maybe in the future.

Paul Jacobson