Ozark National Scenic Riverways Holds Forums
Darren Lingle, US Representative Joann Emerson’s office, Richard Tyler, ONSR’s Rick Drummond, and John Mark Brewer, Voice of the Ozarks discuss the No Action plan proposed by the park service at the Eminence forum.
Approximately 325 people attended the ONSR open forum held at the new Eminence High School Gymnasium on June 23. There were several stations for people to offer comments about alternatives for a proposed management plan for the Ozark National Scenic Riverways.
The no-action plan was by far the busiest station. A majority of people attending favored that plan and want things left the way they are, or take things back to before the national park service took over management of the land.
Some in attendance liked part of the other alternatives, such as closing some roads and making it more of a wilderness, but the majority like the way things are.
More facilities, enforcement of laws and seeing more rangers in boats were mentioned, but most people wanted to see continued access to the river. Most don’t want to see the old roads leading to old family homesteads or cemeteries closed.
The first forum was held Monday night, June 22 in Van Buren with 260 people attending. The third was Wednesday in Salem. Similar meetings were held on Thursday in Columbia and Friday in St. Louis.
Elisa Kunz, public information officer for the Ozark Natural Scenic Riverways, said the next step is to gather all the public comments and put them in a plan based on what people want. Comments will be accepted until July 31.
A draft plan is scheduled to be published in winter 2010 or summer 2011, with that plan revised by fall 2011 or 2012. The final plan is set to be implemented by winter 2012. Citizens are urged to contact legislators and park officials with ideas and comments.
Several in the audience favored going back to the way it used to be, when they say people were allowed to have more fun on the river. According to ONSR history, original attempts were to establish the area as a park or monument. That effort failed. Later it was proposed that not a park, but a scenic riverway be developed with the intent of having as many diverse forms of recreation as safely possible. That rationale, along with commerce and timber management, led to the original legislation establishing it in 1964.
Then in the mid 1970s, the riverways took a different term, some calling it management by neglect. Access points have been neglected and closed, recreational opportunities limited and even eliminated based on their impact on the natural state of the river. This is not in keeping with the intent of the enabling legislation from 1964.
Management zones will be established for all sections of the riverways. Park service officials will then develop strategies, based on public input, to meet these conditions so visitors can enjoy the park and resources available without damaging resources, Kunz said.
Land-based management zones will include developed, resource-based recreation, natural and primitive. River based management zones include non-motorized, mixed use (motorized and non-motorized boats) and seasonal mixed use.
"Any of the proposed zones have the potential for changes," Kunz said. "Change depends on what the public wants. Once public input is given we’ll develop strategies to balance our natural resources with those needs."
"Some of the plans will include more designated trails for horseback riding and less riding in crowded areas for safety reasons," Kunz said. Another important consideration is development of horsepower ratings for motor boating.
The four proposals include:
• the current regulations, 10 HP from the north boundary to Akers, 25 HP from Akers to Round Spring and 40 HP from Round Spring to Big Spring.
• Alternative A, non-motorized from the north boundary to Round Spring, 25 HP from Round Spring to Van Buren.
• Alternative B, non-motorized from north boundary to Akers, 25 HP from Akers to Van Buren.
• Alternative C, 10 HP from north boundary to Akers, 25 HP from Akers to Round Spring and 40 HP from Round Spring to south.
A brief look at each Alternative includes:
• Under Alternative A, the north segment of the Upper Current River would include a natural area designation from Montauk State Park, a primitive area around Devils Well and Pulltite, then revert to natural and primitive to and including Jerktail Landing. There would be a devoted area around Akers and Round Spring.
• Alternative B would include a combination of natural, resource-based recreation at Montauk State Park, Nichols Cabin and Cedar Grove, developed areas at Akers, natural and primitive around Devils Well and Pulltite, more developed areas at Round Spring as well as natural and primitive the rest of the way.
• Alternative C includes developed areas at Welch Landing and Akers, natural areas from Montauk to Devils Well, and then resource-based the rest of the way, with developed areas at Pulltite and Round Spring.
Developed zones would have mostly buildings and visitor facilities (like campgrounds and related services). In alternatives A, B and C, the total number of acres covered by this zone would be small. Alternative C would have the largest amount of this zone because of its focus on enhancing recreation.
Resource-based recreation zones would be managed for a wide range of recreational and educational activities. Natural and cultural resources would remain largely intact. A lot of this zone is used in alternative C because of its focus on enhancing recreation.
A natural zone’s management priority would be to protect the plants and animals and the beauty of the scenery. Visitors could enjoy solitude and natural sights and sounds. Recreational activities would be allowed as long as they don’t cause much damage to the environment. There is a lot of this in Alternative A and B. These alternatives emphasize protecting natural features and provide chances for visitors to enjoy quiet places and learn about the area.
A primitive zone would keep its wild, natural character. Natural resources and processes would be protected. Visitors could find backcountry challenges and solitude. Alternative A has much of this zone.
More information, alternatives and a way to comment can be found online at www.parkplanning.nps.gov/ozar
