Sportsman's Group Prioritizes Protection For Conservation Budget

[Gavin]

Here on the ONSR they are closing roads that have been used since before it was designated a recreation area. What I am saying is they will tell you one thing and do another.

I'd agree that the Feds dont take care of what they own. But I disagree with your statement in regard to the ONSR. I've been visiting the Current for over 30+ years, and I've seen many changes. I cant blame folks for wanting to drive down to the river, but I dont think that the folks oppossing the road closures in the ONSR have any idea of how bad the UA access situation has become. Friends of the Riverways had done some reasearch on the problem if you care to look it over. Cheers.

http://www.friendsofozarkriverways.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10&Itemid=13

[awhuber]

Not a stretch at all. We have 100 million more people in the country than we did in 1970. Without strong regulation you would have kissed much of what you hold dear goodbye by now.

And if you're satisfied with your position that the Feds should not buy more land because your wife can't ride an ATV off-trail on it, then you're welcome to it.

You would have landed more light bulbs if you had stuck with the need to reduce the deficit.

Hey thats a good one (light bulbs ) No one has posted any pics yet by the way...

My prob with the feds buying more land is they cant take care of what they have. We as a people were getting more conservation minded by the late 60's so much of what has happened conservation wise might have happened, anyway.

There are many private groups that you can donate to that buy property for conservation. Nature cons, Club Sierra, RMEF, etc.

[awhuber]

I'd agree that the Feds dont take care of what they own. But I disagree with your statement in regard to the ONSR. I've been visiting the Current for over 30+ years, and I've seen many changes. I cant blame folks for wanting to drive down to the river, but I dont think that the folks oppossing the road closures in the ONSR have any idea of how bad the UA access situation has become. Friends of the Riverways had done some reasearch on the problem if you care to look it over. Cheers.

http://www.friendsofozarkriverways.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10&Itemid=13

They are closing roads that were used before the inception of the area. Roads that the locals were assured would be left open. I, too, have beeen going for 30+ years and will agree the new roads should be closed just not the heritage roads.

If it wasnt for the Dent and Shannon co. commissions roads like parker and 357 to walter lipps would be closed.

Hey this has been fun.

Heres a pic a one The wife made me throw back...

[Tim Smith]

Hey thats a good one (light bulbs ) No one has posted any pics yet by the way...

My prob with the feds buying more land is they cant take care of what they have. We as a people were getting more conservation minded by the late 60's so much of what has happened conservation wise might have happened, anyway.

Not a chance.

Without regulation, all those wild-eyed grannies on ATVs tearing up the stream banks could silt up every stream in Missouri. That doesn't even account for the gravel miners, sewage releases, industrial output, livestock effects, logging, agriculture and a thousand other things that happen on private property that affect the public resource.

Pollution has no respect for property boundaries. Until there is a law in place (and because pollution moves across state boundaries it has to be federal law) no amount of conservation sentiment will matter in the end.

There are many private groups that you can donate to that buy property for conservation. Nature cons, Club Sierra, RMEF, etc.

Good luck getting your ATV on Nature Conservancy land. They mostly won't even let you visit on foot...and they're doing less with their land and are even more broke than the feds.

You're really just kind of stirring the pot here aren't you.

[awhuber]

Not a chance.

Without regulation, all those wild-eyed grannies on ATVs tearing up the stream banks could silt up every stream in Missouri. That doesn't even account for the gravel miners, sewage releases, industrial output, livestock effects, logging, agriculture and a thousand other things that happen on private property that affect the public resource.

Pollution has no respect for property boundaries. Until there is a law in place (and because pollution moves across state boundaries it has to be federal law) no amount of conservation sentiment will matter in the end.

Good luck getting your ATV on Nature Conservancy land. They mostly won't even let you visit on foot...and they're doing less with their land and are even more broke than the feds.

You're really just kind of stirring the pot here aren't you.

I am not just stirrin the pot this is good discussion here. We are on the second page and no one has even called anybody a son of a dog breeder, or anything.

I dont have an atv, I prefer a truck, you can haul more mooshine.

I'm headin to the river. I'll check back tommorrow. Play nice...

[ozark trout fisher]

Are you guys still trying to argue with this guy? Awhuber is almost certainly trolling this thread, and doing a good job too. Read his last post "You can haul more moonshine." I don't think that leave a whole lot of doubt. I say this from experience, as someone who often likes to stir the pot a little for fun... To the chagrin of many on a recent Montauk Park thread.

And if he isn't just messing with you, well then I'm not sure I would bother arguing anyway...Sometimes there just ain't no point.