White River Before The Dams

[tjulianc]

Watching that video is painful. The video, and some of the comments here reminded me of one of my favorite quotes, by one of my favorite authors.

“In recent decades it has become customary – and right, I guess, and easy enough with hindsight – to darn the ancestral frame of mind that ravaged the world so fully and so soon. What I myself seem to darn mainly, though, is just not having seen it. Without any virtuous hindsight, I would likely have helped in the ravaging as did even most of those who loved it best. But God, to have viewed it entire, the soul and guts of what we had and gone forever now, except in books and such poignant remnants as small swift birds that journey to and from the distant Argentine and call at night in the sky.”

-John Graves, Self-Portrait with Birds

[Bill B.]

I feel that way about some of the places that I DID get to see and fish. The riffles on the Osage near the Boy Scout camp, for example. The dam at Osceola. The stretch of the Sac that Stockton drowned. Taneycomo as it was in the 1960s. Truman Lake the first few years after it filled. We'll never see the likes of any of those again. Not in what's left of my lifetime, anyway.

[creekin bassnerd]

I'm with all that feel robbed by the damning of the White river. It saddens me to think of what once was; a seamless network of free flowing rivers/streams

with the great White river being the backbone of these beautiful Ozark streams. And the smallmouth bass, ruler of it all.

These reservoirs and trout fishing tailwaters really annoy me. They were created by money hungry developers looking to build golf courses and attract tourism. There was no regard for the hill people of the Ozarks, for the future inhabitants who have a right to experience an untouched Ozark river system as my grandpa once did, and a blatant disrespect of the land.

Humans are are the number 1 invasive species of Ozark rivers, trout is second but you can't really blame trout for being born in a hatchery and dumped into a river. No wander they are so darn easy to catch, just ring a bell and they think its feeding time back at the ole concrete homestead.

So invasive humans dam up the White so people with jetskis and speedboats can flock to these reservoirs and piss off anyone who is out there trying to fish. These reservoirs were built under the title "flood control" but I believe it was the work of money hungry developers, who should actually be called by there real titles, destroyers. They destroyed the rivers that attracted my ancestors to these mountains, to drown valleys so idiots who like to "go to the lake" can drive their motorboats around in circles all day.

When you dammed the White, you darn us all.

[Guest]

deleted

[Justin Spencer]

These reservoirs were built under the title "flood control" but I believe it was the work of money hungry developers, who should actually be called by there real titles, destroyers.

Playing devil's advocate here these reserviors have given this area clean power without the use of fossil fuels. It's hard to decide what is worse on the environment, the dams are just a different kind of damage. Bull Shoals and Norfork I don't think were built for developers and still have very little development (other than marinas) on their shorelines thanks to the corps. Unfortunately to feed our "overpopulation" we will continue to need sources of power, and that comes with a cost. Arguments are made against every type of power from windmills being too ugly to solar being inefficient because sometimes it's cloudy outside. While I would love to see the White flow freely again, I think this may be one case where more good comes from the lakes being created for both recreation and the economy, and while the ecological changes may have been a high price to pay, I do feel good knowing my power doesn't come from a coal burning plant.

[Gavin]

To see the Ozarks as Schoolcraft did...It must have really been something before it was clear cut, and the rivers dammed, but it was also a very forbidding place. Not sure if many of us would like it the way we do now.

[gotmuddy]

Playing devil's advocate here these reserviors have given this area clean power without the use of fossil fuels. It's hard to decide what is worse on the environment, the dams are just a different kind of damage. Bull Shoals and Norfork I don't think were built for developers and still have very little development (other than marinas) on their shorelines thanks to the corps. Unfortunately to feed our "overpopulation" we will continue to need sources of power, and that comes with a cost. Arguments are made against every type of power from windmills being too ugly to solar being inefficient because sometimes it's cloudy outside. While I would love to see the White flow freely again, I think this may be one case where more good comes from the lakes being created for both recreation and the economy, and while the ecological changes may have been a high price to pay, I do feel good knowing my power doesn't come from a coal burning plant.

great post Justin. That is how I feel. As much I would love to be able to float the entire white river with no dams in the way, I believe I would rather have a virtually limitless supply of clean energy.

[tjulianc]

great post Justin. That is how I feel. As much I would love to be able to float the entire white river with no dams in the way, I believe I would rather have a virtually limitless supply of clean energy.

I have an issue with it being "limitless". During times of drought, which we haven't seen in a few years, but they will happen, where does your energy come from? Our electricity will be shut down before we allow our drinking water to be drained away. What percentage of our electricity comes from hydroelectric power throughout the region? We have three coal plants in Arkansas, with two of them within the Ozark's region (one in Siloam Springs and one south east of Batesville just off the White River). Where I live here in Fayetteville I only get 3.7% of my power from Hydroelectric, where as the national average is 6.7. So I loose a great natural fishery, and I'm still getting most of my power from coal at 55.7%

For those living in Mt Home, most of your power comes from Gas, Nuclear, Coal. Hydo comes in dead last at 1.3%.

You can see your own regions power source here: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/how-clean.html

Some view it as a necessary evil, while I just view it as evil. So its either conditionally evil, or just plain evil, either way its still what it is.

[Wayne SW/MO]

I feel that way about some of the places that I DID get to see and fish. The riffles on the Osage near the Boy Scout camp, for example. The dam at Osceola. The stretch of the Sac that Stockton drowned. Taneycomo as it was in the 1960s. Truman Lake the first few years after it filled. We'll never see the likes of any of those again. Not in what's left of my lifetime, anyway.

I hear you. I even miss the swinging bridges. Don't forget the lower Pomme De Terre that's under Truman. Fred's Fishing Camp at Fairfield. It seems to me that as many people recreated on the Osage, Grand and Pomme as do Truman now. I know that's likely not true, but they were busy areas on weekends.

[Justin Spencer]

For those living in Mt Home, most of your power comes from Gas, Nuclear, Coal. Hydo comes in dead last at 1.3%.

Interesting information, I always just assumed that we used the power that was produced closest to us. Kind of pisses me off that is doesn't work that way, but regardless of where we get our power, if the hydoroelectric plant wasn't there a replacement power plant (probably coal) would be somewhere offsetting this power. I'm sure what Gavin said is true that the White was a "very forbidding place". I'm sure it gets more use now than it ever would have had the river been left to its own devices.

I would guess economics plays a role in why we send this "clean" energy elsewhere probably to areas that need it and pay a higher price, while we pay a cheaper price for our "dirty" power. I always thought we should get a super cheap rate on this "cheap" energy since it was our landscape affected by the damming. I hope that this energy gets taxed with the money coming back to the local economy where it was produced, but somehow I doubt it.

If anyone knows how this power grid thing really works I would love to find out.