North Fork River Property For Sale

[bknopf]

It's been way too long since I've been on here. So long I had to become a new member again.

I had this river property posted here a few years ago but want to get the word out again in case anyone might be looking.

Located between The Falls and McKee Bridge across and just upstream from ROLF on the East side of the river.

3.58 acres and 173 feet of river frontage in Rainbow Alley.

Great building site set off the flood plain. Several beautiful homes in the area already that were safe from flooding last year.

Listed now by owner at $74,900

Here is a link for more info and photos - www.northforkriverproperty.com

Send me an email for more info or questions or pass it along.

brian.knopf@coxhealth.com

cell 417-268-8374

Thanks, Brian

Property on Right bank. Looking upstream.

Property on Left bank. Looking downstream

Building site at base of hill. Property extends to the top of hill.

The Falls are just a couple hundred yards downstream

[Gavin]

2 posts & both to sell real estate.....and real estate that isnt in the best interest of that river....where is the septic gonna drain?......Through the bluff or to the river?

[bknopf]

I hear your concern and do realize that we can 'love' the river to death.

I know that the North Fork is a very special place and worth protecting.

The drainfield would be a safe distance of about 500-600 feet away from the river and above the flood zone.

[Outside Bend]

Any covenant or other restrictions to protect the riverbank/riparian corridor?

[Justin Spencer]

Guys

If it's the place I'm thinking of it's a nice lot already cleared and located amidst several other "cabins". Pretty nice spot if you want a place on the river, in the area north of the falls it has been sectioned up and what hasn't been developed will be. I really think we have more nutrients (phosphates, etc.) coming out of the springs than are created by the cabins. The old places will cause problems more than these new ones, hard to stop progress on private land, and hard to blame somebody for trying to make a buck, even if it's not in the best interest of the river. Aesthetically I rather see no cabins on the river, but not gonna happen where most is private property.

[Brian Wise]

Guys

If it's the place I'm thinking of it's a nice lot already cleared and located amidst several other "cabins". Pretty nice spot if you want a place on the river, in the area north of the falls it has been sectioned up and what hasn't been developed will be. I really think we have more nutrients (phosphates, etc.) coming out of the springs than are created by the cabins. The old places will cause problems more than these new ones, hard to stop progress on private land, and hard to blame somebody for trying to make a buck, even if it's not in the best interest of the river. Aesthetically I rather see no cabins on the river, but not gonna happen where most is private property.

Exactly..... SO played out. Talk to Mtn Grove if you don't like filamentous algae, which does more good than bad FOR the river by the way. It may be a pain but it supports bug life a lot better than gravel, and helps our fry a TON.

[Outside Bend]

High nutrient concentrations may not be as great for the imperiled native species present in the NFOW (including the hellbender) as they are for non-native sport fishes. It's not just about trout.

And high nutrient loads are only one symptom of development. More nitrogen and phosphorous may be great for algae, inverts and trout fry- but the associated chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, salts, petroleum compounds, pharmaceuticals) aren't. Removing canopy cover warms water temps, interfering with spawning and other life-history characteristics. Cutting riparian zones alters hydrology- wider, shallower streams, more fine sediment, shifting gravel bars, flashier hydrographs. Impervious surfaces and well drilling impact groundwater flow and recharging of the aquifer. Watershed development impacts a whole lot more than the nutrient level of streams, and history has shown we drastically underestimate the impacts of development on our waterways.

I'm not anti- development, I just think it needs to be done thoughtfully. There's no shortage of Ozark streams impaired because folks didn't pause to think about the ramifications of their actions. The NOFW is a phenomenal resource, one of the last best float streams still largely in private hands, but it won't remain such unless folks take an interest in protecting it. We should take the lessons we've learned from the White, the Meramec, the Huzzah, the Gasconade, & others, and apply them to the NFOW as well...that's all I'm saying.

That, and I don't understand why on earth someone, drawn by the scenic beauty of an Ozark stream, would buy a lot, slick it off and build their own Fortress of Solitude. Seems antithetical to me, like showing everyone how much I love my house by making stool in the foyer.

Maybe that's just me, though.

[Chris Gates]

I'm familiar with the lot. Right across from upper ROLF. Has a "Motivated Seller" sign on it now. No worries, give the guy a break, he's not building condos or a golf course. There are approximately 8 cabins within 200 yds of the river from Kelly to Myrans. Selling a lot for a cabin isn't going to hurt. Plus this lot sits way back off the bank compared to others. Plenty of room for a septic and associated drain field. Justin's right about old septics being the issue. Look at the Lake of the Ozarks. All the turds that roll down the hill into the lake come from old systems where older cabins are the norm. Not the new ones in more developed parts. Plus the density is not at the NFOW to cause issues. I love that river as much as anyone and would defend it to the end if I thought this was a threat. It's not.

[gotmuddy]

IMO what separates the NFoW from places like the white(below BS dam anyways) is most of the land is locked up because no one wants to sell it. And building a cabin right next to a river that is known for prolific flooding would be incredibly stupid(even though lots of people do it).

I think this land is a good deal for its location.

[Brian Wise]

High nutrient concentrations may not be as great for the imperiled native species present in the NFOW (including the hellbender) as they are for non-native sport fishes. It's not just about trout.

And high nutrient loads are only one symptom of development. More nitrogen and phosphorous may be great for algae, inverts and trout fry- but the associated chemicals (pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, salts, petroleum compounds, pharmaceuticals) aren't. Removing canopy cover warms water temps, interfering with spawning and other life-history characteristics. Cutting riparian zones alters hydrology- wider, shallower streams, more fine sediment, shifting gravel bars, flashier hydrographs. Impervious surfaces and well drilling impact groundwater flow and recharging of the aquifer. Watershed development impacts a whole lot more than the nutrient level of streams, and history has shown we drastically underestimate the impacts of development on our waterways.

I'm not anti- development, I just think it needs to be done thoughtfully. There's no shortage of Ozark streams impaired because folks didn't pause to think about the ramifications of their actions. The NOFW is a phenomenal resource, one of the last best float streams still largely in private hands, but it won't remain such unless folks take an interest in protecting it. We should take the lessons we've learned from the White, the Meramec, the Huzzah, the Gasconade, & others, and apply them to the NFOW as well...that's all I'm saying.

I can't say anything for the hellbender, this may or may not help or hurt the hellbender. But if developement was going to hurt the North Fork of the White's ability to produce wild rainbow trout.....it would have already reared it's ugly head. We have had some of the best hatches of young of the year rainbows that the river has ever seen in the last 5 years, the University does studies on the Hellbenders in the NFOW (because they can ALWAYS come here and find some), and we are clearly the highest population of wild rainbow trout in the state--if not the mid-west. I am totally guessing here, but I would say our water quality is "ok" at the very least.