While National Park Service personnel are trying to craft a long-term management plan for Ozark National Scenic Riverways, Missouri's lieutenant government is making a pitch for the state to "reclaim this resource."
The planning efforts have unleashed a battle in Missouri, where some believe the Park Service's draft preferred alternative would greatly restrict access to the Jack Fork and Current rivers that are at the heart of the riverways.
As the Traveler reported last month, a freshman congressman from Missouri's 8th District maintains that the park's approach would convert "the vast majority of the park to a natural area where evidence of human use is minimal." From his perspective, U.S. Rep. Jason Smith maintains the preferred alternative would be devastating to area economies and continue what he sees as efforts by the Park Service to limit access to the forests and rivers within the National Riverways.
Now Missouri's lieutenant governor, Peter Kinder, has penned an op-ed calling for the Show-Me State to show it can better take care of the riverways than the federal government.
"Under the supposed benevolent care of the federal government, Ozark National Riverways is threatened. The solution should not be to give that same federal government more authority and power over the area’s management," he wrote. "Doing so not only will restrict Missourians and visitors from enjoying time on the Jacks Fork and Current, but will hurt many small businesses in southern Missouri that depend on tourism and recreation dollars. The last thing this region needs is more overbearing management by bureaucrats in Washington.
"The creation and management of parks is clearly a responsibility that Missouri handles well. There is no reason to believe it would be any different with a state-managed Ozark Scenic Riverways. It’s time for Missouri to begin efforts to reclaim this resource from the federal government."
Supporters of the park's planning efforts say the structure of the preferred alternative in the draft General Management Plan is long overdue and necessary to prevent further degradation of the 134 miles of the Jacks Fork and Current rivers that course through the rumpled, cave-studded, spring-gushing countryside of southern Missouri's Ozark Mountains.
Over the years park officials have grappled with their mandate to preserve and protect the rivers. Rowdy boaters, drunken behavior, camping illegally on gravel bars, and the preponderance of unauthorized trails woven into the parkscape -- 65 miles of unauthorized horse trails, for example -- have challenged the staff. Indeed, a root of the uproar over the draft management plan that is now open for public comment can be traced to how the Park Service has managed, or in some views mismanaged, the National Riverways that was authorized in 1964 and officially dedicated in 1972.
"Frankly, enforcement has been the biggest problem over the past 30 years," said Lynn McClure, who as director of the National Parks Conservation Association's Midwest Office is studying the draft GMP and preparing comments on it. “It’s not an easy park to patrol. No. 1, it’s got a lot of linear miles to it on two sides of a river. You multiply that park boundary one way by two. It’s not easy to patrol.
"What’s happened I think over the last 30 years, the norm has become something that really wasn’t allowed at the park, in terms of what size of a boat you’re supposed to run on the river, in terms of pulling vehicles, cars, trucks, whatever into the middle of the river, onto the gravel bars and just parking," Ms. McClure said last week while discussing the draft document. "There are gravel bars where vehicle use or truck use is allowed, but it’s just become more common to just pull the truck out into the river."
From his office, Lt. Gov. Kinder has acknowledged that "rowdy behavior along the rivers, illegal camping and unauthorized trails have threatened the pristine area." At the same time, he doesn't believe the Park Service has the proper solution to controlling that behavior.
"The federal government's solution, at the urging of environmentalists, is to restrict access to the water and the abutting lands," he maintained.
Details of the draft management plan can be found on this page. Comments are being taken through February 7, and you can leave them on that page, too.
Comments
I agree, justinh.
ec: your comment that Kirk "hints" that the state would run Ozark Riveways with similar solutions to those used in their state parks was a key part of my point. If you look at those "solutions" applied to current state areas, (no dogs off leash, strict limits on alcohol, camping only in authorized areas, regulations on ATV use, etc.) it's hard to see how those would be less onerous to the locals than the NPS plan.
However, if you're a state official who has to run for reelection, it's a good strategy to just complain about the NPS approach and avoid getting into details about your own solutions :-)
Didn't search all those items but for alcholol, all I could find in those regs was:
"Use of or being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while operating an ATV or motorcycle is prohibited"
Is that "strict limits"?
Missouri must be doing something right with their parks as they don't seem to be experiencing the destruction being seen in Ozark Riverways and I don't see a clamoring amoung Missourians to turn their parks over to the Feds.
Jim, in my own view the issue is much larger, National Parks are just that, they belong to all citizens. I do understand that some locals may be concerned about further restraints on the area uses permitted, however, as the visitation (and population increases), the parks have little choice. These areas have an equal or greater purpose than just visitor enjoyment, by law, they are required to manage the place in such a way that much of it (or better yet, all of it) will remain unimpaired for future generations. The pressure on our prime natural, cultural and historic resources areas is well documented, I am in 100% support of the planners and managers at Ozark Scenic River Way. It is time for us to get serious about environmental issues in our Nations parks and public lands and, with good will toward the locals, they need to buy into this as well. I am sure many have.
rmackie
Interesting, as much of this National Park "that belongs to all citizens" was mostly acquired through forced sale against the wishes of many of the original land owners.
. . . . was mostly acquired through forced sale against the wishes of many of the original land owners."
Documentation please?
"But except for the three state parks, which were transferred to NPS in 1970, most of the
land within the authorized boundaries of the narrow riverine park was private, and would
have to be acquired in fee simple or protected from development and timber-cutting by sce-
nic easement. Because NPS insisted on the right of public access 300 feet back from the river
on scenic easements, many fiercely independent Ozark farmers, who disliked any kind of
government control, felt forced to sell. But Congress authorized only $7 million in the 1964
act to acquire up to 65,000 acres of private land, leading NPS officials to set upper limits on
appraisals, which meant that more than 200 cases ended up in court. Although the courts
tended to set considerably higher values than initially offered by NPS, the forced sales and
contentious proceedings led to a heritage of ill will toward NPS by many in the region (Sarvis 2000)."
http://www.georgewright.org/282flader.pdf
And this guy is on your side.
Thanks, ec. You actually came through this time.
I'll be doing some homework tomorrow. Just a quick scan of this indicates there is plenty of fodder for discussion on both sides of the issue. Gonna have to read it through carefully.
Re ecbuck: "Didn't search all those items but for alcholol, all I could find in those regs was: "Use of or being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while operating an ATV or motorcycle is prohibited"
Need to look a little harder, ec. Here are some other examples from the cited sources: "Alcoholic beverages are prohibited on beaches, parking areas and off-road-vehicle areas in all state parks and historic sites... Open or closed containers of intoxicating liquor and/or non-intoxicating beer are prohibited in ORV areas, staging areas, entrance roads, and other areas designated for ORV operation," ...and so on.
Another issue that has really riled up the locals is the idea of any restrictions on their use of horses at Ozark Riverways. Here are excerpts from regulations on horses on state-managed lands:
"Horses, donkeys and mules shall not be ridden on foot trails, through streams, off designated trails, or tied to trees without the permission of the facility manager..."
"Equestrian owners or riders must show proof of current negative Coggins test (equine infectious anemia) upon request by appropriate park personnel and can be denied access to the facilities if such proof cannot be provided ..."
"Horses, donkeys and mules are permitted only in designated areas within state parks and historic sites and are not permitted in camping areas, picnic areas, or other public use areas ..."
I don't disagree with any of the above. My point is I strongly suspect this is not quite what the locals who are complaining about the NPS guidelines have in mind when they yearn for what they presume would be less restrictive management by the state.