North Fork River Property For Sale

[Justin Spencer]

Exactly.

When I start playing the lottery....and win billions, I gaurantee there will be no development on the NFOW besides my HUGE PAD that overlooks the river.

We could knock off the owners of that new place down by James and you could claim squatters rights. Hope you'd put a hot tub out on that deck for me to use! Technology can help us with wastewater treatment, but only landowners can help the rest of the watershed, probably too many to bother with.

[Brian Wise]

It's getting really old to have every topic turn into an eco crusade. LAME

Word

[bknopf]

Wow. Missed a day on here and things got interesting to say the least!

I didn't mean to get a big firestorm going here but I totally understand the passion in defending the river.

Although my post might suggest otherwise, I truly love the NorthFork and would never do it intentional harm.

I agree that I'd rather float / fish down a wild river without development but also know that some of the private landowners can be some of it's strongest allies.

I also understand that developing the river and wanting to protect it can be contradictory when you get more and more development down there. ie. we can 'love it to death'

As I mentioned initially, I was on the forums in the past as briank but it had been so long that I had to become a member again. Couldn't use the same name for some reason.

I could see that it might seem a little 'rude' to jump on here and start trying to sell property that is very hard to put a pricetag on anyway.

All that property in the McKee section does have restrictions to protect the riparian corridor.

I remember Al's stories about how the Big River south of STL has changed and declined over the years and no one wants to see anything even close to that!

On a side note, looks like one of the current 'neighbors' down there may be buying it soon which would be good.

bk

[Chris Gates]

The nice thing about many of the cabin owners along rivers is that they do care. Most are not the obnoxious drunks, but those like you and me, or some rich dude that won't use it anyway.

Speaking of obnoxious drunks Mueller and I will be down Friday. Mueller has a flask of 90 proof to keep him company when we are pulling streamers and I will have a case of STAG.

[Justin Spencer]

Speaking of obnoxious drunks Mueller and I will be down Friday. Mueller has a flask of 90 proof to keep him company when we are pulling streamers and I will have a case of STAG.

Oh yeah I forgot most of the fly fishermen down here are obnoxious drunks but they stay away in the summertime so the fair weather fishermen don't have to deal with them!

[Outside Bend]

Glad to hear there's some restrictions in place bknopf- and please know I'm not trying to demonize you. I understand the draw of rivers, and if I had the scratch, it'd be tough to say no to a place on the NFOW. In the end, I think everyone involved in these discussions has the best interest of the river at heart.

Justin-

You're right that the Eleven Point has little, if any development on the mainstem. But the Eleven Point has been impacted by municipal sewage discharge, gravel mining, logging, livestock, and other land-use practices, just as the NFOW has. I agree with you that the problems are spread throughout the watershed. But the cabins are part of the watershed. IMO denuded land is denuded land, whether the cause is overgrazing, a clearcut, or construction. Cabins aren't the only issue in the watershed, probably not even the biggest issue- but there's no reason to divorce their impacts from those of other factors in the watershed.

Brian-

I cut my teeth fishing urban streams in St. Louis county- basically glorified storm drains. House after house, deeply incised banks, places the health department doesn't advise whole-body contact. It ain't about the aesthetics for me

I'm not advocating going back to the 1950's- I've went through enough fish kill reports to know that wasn't the boon of Ozark water quality Nor am I saying we need to return the entire watershed to it's native state. Nor am I saying we need to have a moratorium on streamside development. Nor am I saying we need to protect streams to the point they're unusable for recreation. They're red herrings.

Development on the NFOW is going to happen regardless of my opinion. I'm saying that the development should be done with an eye towards protecting the stream that drew people there in the first place. Protecting groundwater, protecting riparian habitat, fencing livestock, managing runoff and waste, instituting responsible logging practices, managing erosion, etc. I'm not sure it requires gov't intervention- as you and Justin say, folks live there because they love the river. They may just not be aware how land practices influence that river, and how some of those influences can be mitigated. I may have mentioned it before, but I think a consortium of interested parties- landowners, anglers, canoe liveries, floaters, guides...who could educate landowners and the public about best land management practices...I think it'd be a great asset for the watershed as a whole.

You're a guide, right Brian? I'm assuming you practice C&R with your clients, at least to some extent. I'm assuming you practice C&R because you recognize a resource can be used without compromising its integrity. That's exactly what I'm advocating, just on a larger scale. We can catch trout without destroying trout populations, just as we can develop a watershed without destroying that watershed's fisheries and ecology.

Bigredbirdfan-

I'm glad you found time for this thread, as your posts are consistently positive, constructive, and informative. I'm glad you took the time to read, understand, and analyze my position. After all, saying "I expect development in the NOFW watershed to continue," is exactly like saying "I want the NOFW to look as it did 200 years ago." Or how "I'd like to see responsible development of the NOFW watershed," really means "I want to see no development in the NOFW watershed." Most of all, I really appreciate you shedding light on how "eco-crusades," like protecting water quality and fish habitat are wreaking havoc on our streams.

I sure hope you continue to provide these invaluable insights.

[redbird]

Brian, people are going to start thinking of you as the Yvonne Chouinard of the Ozarks.

"Conservacion Ozarkia"

[Justin Spencer]

. I may have mentioned it before, but I think a consortium of interested parties- landowners, anglers, canoe liveries, floaters, guides...who could educate landowners and the public about best land management practices...I think it'd be a great asset for the watershed as a whole.

I was on the board for the Bryant Creek Watershed project that did some good things through education of school children, but to get the general public interested in something that takes some work on thier part is a tough battle that only Al Gore had the time or money to wage. Lack of funding and interest led to the death of the Bryant Creek Watershed project, and while the ideas sound great these projects take a lot of time and effort and are met as if you are the goverment wanting to put regulations on land use practices. Wish people cared, but for the most part they really don't.

[Brian Wise]

Brian-

I cut my teeth fishing urban streams in St. Louis county- basically glorified storm drains. House after house, deeply incised banks, places the health department doesn't advise whole-body contact. It ain't about the aesthetics for me

I'm not advocating going back to the 1950's- I've went through enough fish kill reports to know that wasn't the boon of Ozark water quality Nor am I saying we need to return the entire watershed to it's native state. Nor am I saying we need to have a moratorium on streamside development. Nor am I saying we need to protect streams to the point they're unusable for recreation. They're red herrings.

Development on the NFOW is going to happen regardless of my opinion. I'm saying that the development should be done with an eye towards protecting the stream that drew people there in the first place. Protecting groundwater, protecting riparian habitat, fencing livestock, managing runoff and waste, instituting responsible logging practices, managing erosion, etc. I'm not sure it requires gov't intervention- as you and Justin say, folks live there because they love the river. They may just not be aware how land practices influence that river, and how some of those influences can be mitigated. I may have mentioned it before, but I think a consortium of interested parties- landowners, anglers, canoe liveries, floaters, guides...who could educate landowners and the public about best land management practices...I think it'd be a great asset for the watershed as a whole.

You're a guide, right Brian? I'm assuming you practice C&R with your clients, at least to some extent. I'm assuming you practice C&R because you recognize a resource can be used without compromising its integrity. That's exactly what I'm advocating, just on a larger scale. We can catch trout without destroying trout populations, just as we can develop a watershed without destroying that watershed's fisheries and ecology.

The seriously funny thing about this areas is the old, old, OLD landowners (cattle farmers the VAST majority) and the new retirees think the exact same way. The farmers won't have anyone tell them what they can and can't do with their land (and we are VERY lucky that we don't have cattle just walking around in the stream) "By Gawd I will dew whut I wawnt to with this here land" (my shot at typing the sound of a hilbilly ) and the new retirees do the exact same thing. You figure since the only reason they move here is because of the resources and that they would do everything they can to take care of them.....instead they start what is called the "Ozark County Property Rights Congress" and will only back something if THEY benefit from it... "I will do whaat I waant with my laand eh" (my shot at typing a Chicago accent) Land use will never change and it is the main problem with our rivers. I am NOT against farmers by any means at all but they are one of the biggest groups that are self-centered and wanting to know what YOU or the government can do for THEM as opposed to what they can possibly to do help anyone else out. Whereas in this area our cattle farmers buy and sell cattle between each other which does nothing for anyone until they ultimately sell off to another state that butchers....they are glorified used car dealers.

I don't think the government should mandate everything about how people use their land but if someone is being careless I think they should be able to step in.

wow, rant over

[Justin Spencer]

The seriously funny thing about this areas is the old, old, OLD landowners (cattle farmers the VAST majority) and the new retirees think the exact same way. The farmers won't have anyone tell them what they can and can't do with their land (and we are VERY lucky that we don't have cattle just walking around in the stream) "By Gawd I will dew whut I wawnt to with this here land" (my shot at typing the sound of a hilbilly ) and the new retirees do the exact same thing. You figure since the only reason they move here is because of the resources and that they would do everything they can to take care of them.....instead they start what is called the "Ozark County Property Rights Congress" and will only back something if THEY benefit from it... "I will do whaat I waant with my laand eh" (my shot at typing a Chicago accent) Land use will never change and it is the main problem with our rivers. I am NOT against farmers by any means at all but they are one of the biggest groups that are self-centered and wanting to know what YOU or the government can do for THEM as opposed to what they can possibly to do help anyone else out. Whereas in this area our cattle farmers buy and sell cattle between each other which does nothing for anyone until they ultimately sell off to another state that butchers....they are glorified used car dealers.

I don't think the government should mandate everything about how people use their land but if someone is being careless I think they should be able to step in.

wow, rant over

WORD