New Report On Reservoir Locations

[Danoinark]

http://www.senate.mo.gov/llookup/Leg_Resul...0&Zip4=8279

I did a look up for the elected officials for this area's ( the Shoal Creek location ) state Representatives and U.S. Senators . You can e-mail one or all of them with your concerns about the proposed reservoir locations. There is also a look up by zip code so you can find your area specific elected officials ( Missouri ), even if they are not from the proposed locations, and e-mail them so they know what is going on.

I intend to e-mail each of them. If and when I get a response I will let you all know what it is.

I did not have the 9 digit zip code for the Crane area, so I wasn't able to find the elected officials for that area. Someone who has that could put it up and we could get in touch with those individuals also.

I think everyone, even those out-of-stater's, should chime in on this if you feel strongly about this subject.

Save any e-mails you may receive. If needed these responses could be taken to the media, so we can let the public know that there are people out there who really care about the environment and the unique fisheries that are in jeopardy.

Buzz

Good idea Buzz. As for me I fish more in Mo than Ark. I spend money for fuel, food, licenses, etc, so those out of state are just as important weighing in on this issue.

Anybody know if there are environmental impact reports being prepared? I do know Phil is waiting on an answer from someone who should be in the know.

Michael any thoughts on how the FFF can get involved?

Dano

[CBNMO]

First, I don't think Dutch is a troll, just pointing out a view shared by many others. Face it, there is not a large number of folks fishing Crane Creek and spending a ton of money in town everyday. At least not that's seen. What I do see is several boats going to or from Table Rock stopping and getting gas and such. That is seen as an asset to the ecomony. Maybe a bass boat dragging behind a pickup is just much more noticable than a fly pole tucked in the car?

I live a few miles from Crane, am not a Trout fisher and didn't have any idea the importance of this creek until I started visiting this site. I expect others in the area are as unimformed as I was? I expect if you reley on the locals, they may see the posibility of a reservoir as a possible boost to the economy? As mentioned above, as a water source for Springfield it would surely have similar restrictions as Springfield Lake has.

Under the endangered/threatened portion of the report, I think there is 2 species of bats and the Ozark Cave Fish mentioned. They do not list the McCloud Trout Are they threatened or engangered? Should they be on this report too? Perhaps if they are listed then fishing for them would be stopped too? I don't know, just asking.

By the map in the report, it looks like the lake would come up to within maybe 2 or 3 stream miles (downstream) of Crane? Just a guess. The limit on the size of the lake is the town of Hurley. Guess they don't want to buy out most of the town so the lake looks like it would come to about a mile downstream of Hurley.

The next alternative to damming Crane Creek, is damming James River. Given a choice between the 2, I bet you will find a lot more folks voting to dam Crane Creek, as there are more users on the James?

And there's a bunch of folks in Springfield that really don't care about Crane Creek, James River, McCloud trout or bats or cave fish. They will only read what's put in th paper saying they need more water and these are the 2 cheapest choices. Guess how they will vote?

[CBNMO]

This is not about damming all of Crane Creek.

If you look at the map of Crane Creek on this site, under the Crane Creek forum, in the bottom right is where Quail Spur Road crosses the creek. To the west, the next road makes a 90 degree turn to the south. The lake would only come to about half way between these two roads.

It looks like the lake would only come up to the lower edge of the Blue Ribbon Section of Crane Creek.

I don't know, so can someone share with us the importance of the stream, from here down to the James ?

[ozark trout fisher]

This is not about damming all of Crane Creek.

If you look at the map of Crane Creek on this site, under the Crane Creek forum, in the bottom right is where Quail Spur Road crosses the creek. To the west, the next road makes a 90 degree turn to the south. The lake would only come to about half way between these two roads.

It looks like the lake would only come up to the lower edge of the Blue Ribbon Section of Crane Creek.

I don't know, so can someone share with us the importance of the stream, from here down to the James ?

I can. It is a free-flowing Ozark stream, and we already have too few of those. I'm not losing another without a fight, even if its not in the prime trout fishing section. Also, unless I'm mistaken, the lower end of the Blue Ribbon trout area is one of the best areas to tangle with one of those McCloud Rainbows. Below the Blue Ribbon trout area, (in the stream section that will most certainly be impounded) there is a population of smallmouth bass, along with other species native to ozark coolwater streams (goggle-eye, longear sunfish, pickeral). If we dam it, these will be replaced by the typical lowland species, (largemouth bass, catfish, bluegill), instead of the species she holds right now. It just seems wrong to me, to take one more stream like that.

[zsmith62]

I will say this again- I do not think that a resevoir on crane would produce a lake big enough to really produce much commerce. We already have enough lakes just like the one being proposed here. Unfortunately, I doubt the McClouds could be protected, since the really aren't native. Probably should be, seeing how they are so rare, but they aren't. I do not know where CBNMO was going with this, but this lake would be a lot like Springfield lake. I live close to Springfield lake, and other than maybe the gas station selling a carton of worms every now and then, I don't think Springfield lake really brings in any extra money to the area.

[Dutch]

I'm really surprised. I figured all of you guys would jump on me like stink on crap when I put in an opposing view. I'm glad you jumpers only profess to be "conservationists" not open minded people.

Dutch, I have a serious question. If you do not care about preserving our outdoor heritage, why do you frequent a site that houses many hundreds of conservationists and conservation minded sportsmen?

I think I am a little conservation minded myself. I have fenced off 5 areas for wildlife and don't allow any domestic animals in there ever. I also have it posted to keep most of the trespass hunters out and I don't hunt it.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Now trust me when I say I don't want Crane Creek changed in any respect. I also want it left just as it is at this moment.

But I want to express a couple of points.

First, I really doubt that anything will happen to Crane Creek. It looks to me that there are more viable and financially doable options. Not to mention the local lakes very close to Springfield, you also have Stockton Lake. Since pipelines will have to be layed, why go to the cost of building a reservoir and laying pipe? But even at that, I do think it is something we do need to keep our eyes and ears wide open for any new developments.

Also I am not sure how "pure' those McClouds are in Crane. I have read a lot the writings of Spencer Turner. He is now retired from the MDC and is in my opinion one of the leading if not the leading authority on trout in Missouri. It seems that the MDC stocked Crane periodically throughout the years up into the 1960's. One place where I may differ with him, is how or when Crane was first stocked. History as written says that it was stocked in the 1880's from railcars that dumped them out of barrels from bridges. Only problem is the railroad through Crane was not built until 1905. But that doesn't mean they weren't stocked in the 1880's. It just means it wasn't by train.

Somewhere on here I post a great article by him that I think he wrote for his local newspaper. If anyone is interested, I will try to find it and repost it.

One final note. Other streams were targeted as possibilities of being dammed for reservoirs for water. I also understand that there is concern for these to streams to backed up for miles, destroying the fishing. Did you know that Shoal Creek has two "dams" making reservoirs for municipal water? Yeah, Joplin has one that is owned my Missouri American Water. And the other is just north of Neosho and is owned by the city of Neosho.

Now when I first saw this posted I was just as alarmed as all of you. But the more I thought about it the more I don't think we are looking at the possibility of huge lake just for water usage. I may be wrong, but I hope not.

Remember, I have the same level of concern as you guy's, I just may be looking at it a little differently. I am more than happy to disscuss this with you but, lets not turn it into a TR forum type urinating match.

[zsmith62]

Great points all around Chief, now that you say some of that, it does make a lot of sense.

[ozark trout fisher]

Now trust me when I say I don't want Crane Creek changed in any respect. I also want it left just as it is at this moment.

But I want to express a couple of points.

First, I really doubt that anything will happen to Crane Creek. It looks to me that there are more viable and financially doable options. Not to mention the local lakes very close to Springfield, you also have Stockton Lake. Since pipelines will have to be layed, why go to the cost of building a reservoir and laying pipe? But even at that, I do think it is something we do need to keep our eyes and ears wide open for any new developments.

Also I am not sure how "pure' those McClouds are in Crane. I have read a lot the writings of Spencer Turner. He is now retired from the MDC and is in my opinion one of the leading if not the leading authority on trout in Missouri. It seems that the MDC stocked Crane periodically throughout the years up into the 1960's. One place where I may differ with him, is how or when Crane was first stocked. History as written says that it was stocked in the 1880's from railcars that dumped them out of barrels from bridges. Only problem is the railroad through Crane was not built until 1905. But that doesn't mean they weren't stocked in the 1880's. It just means it wasn't by train.

Somewhere on here I post a great article by him that I think he wrote for his local newspaper. If anyone is interested, I will try to find it and repost it.

One final note. Other streams were targeted as possibilities of being dammed for reservoirs for water. I also understand that there is concern for these to streams to backed up for miles, destroying the fishing. Did you that Shoal Creek has two "dams" making reservoirs for municipal water? Yeah, Joplin has one that is owned my Missouri American Water. And the other is just north of Neosho and is owned by the city of Neosho.

Now when I first saw this posted I was just as alarmed as all of you. But the more I thought about it the more I don't think we are looking at the possibility of huge lake just for water usage. I may be wrong, but I hope not.

Remember, I have the same level of concern as you guy's, I just may be looking at it a little differently. I am more than happy to disscuss this with you but, lets not turn it into a TR forum type urinating match.

Interesting. This still concerns me a lot, but it does put it in perspective a bit.

[drew03cmc]

I'm really surprised. I figured all of you guys would jump on me like stink on crap when I put in an opposing view. I'm glad you jumpers only profess to be "conservationists" not open minded people.

What the hell does being open-minded have to do with ruining a natural free-flowing Ozarks spring creek? This issue is pretty cut and dried. Do we want to lose Crane Creek for an unnecessary impoundment?