Greasy B Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 Let’s hope some good comes from this designation. I say any effort to preserve what’s left of the biological communities in the basin are worthwhile. Yes we are fortunate to have many miles of intact rivers for our pleasure and use but it’s also very frightening to think about how close we came to loosing much more. His father touches the Claw in spite of Kevin's warnings and breaks two legs just as a thunderstorm tears the house apart. Kevin runs away with the Claw. He becomes captain of the Greasy Bastard, a small ship carrying rubber goods between England and Burma. Michael Palin, Terry Jones, 1974
Wayne SW/MO Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 I'm still trying to figure out what it means. The goal of the system if to advance a watershed-wide approach to conservation, outdoor recreation, and other economic opportunities that rivers provide. It sounds more like $ than conservation. Hydroelectric dams are pretty much done as a future source of renewable energy and the drought is only going to enforce that. As far as conservation goes, what can they add that isn't already being done? Outdoor recreation opportunities already exist to the point that it's hard to imagine what could be added without further negative impact. Economic opportunities sound negative to me. Are they going to impact the river in way that preserves or changes the river? Today's release is tomorrows gift to another fisherman.
Outside Bend Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 I think the goal is to combine the efforts of federal agencies like the Fish and Wildlife Service, NRCS, and Corps of Engineers with state conservation and ag agencies, as well was non-government groups like TU, Sierra Club, Audubon, etc. That's what I got from the press release, anyway. As far as conservation measures, I would imagine they'll be looking mostly at landscape use- nutrient management of cattle pasture and CAFOs, reducing erosion, best-management logging practices, streambank stabilization, retaining riparian forests to reduce erosion and stream temperature, cleaning up dumps in karst-prone areas, keeping cattle out of streams, stuff like that. I don't see too much doom & gloom/ government tin-hat conspiracy in the whole thing, and I really hope it's effective. <{{{><
Blazerman Posted January 14, 2013 Author Posted January 14, 2013 I think the goal is to combine the efforts of federal agencies like the Fish and Wildlife Service, NRCS, and Corps of Engineers with state conservation and ag agencies, as well was non-government groups like TU, Sierra Club, Audubon, etc. That's what I got from the press release, anyway. As far as conservation measures, I would imagine they'll be looking mostly at landscape use- nutrient management of cattle pasture and CAFOs, reducing erosion, best-management logging practices, streambank stabilization, retaining riparian forests to reduce erosion and stream temperature, cleaning up dumps in karst-prone areas, keeping cattle out of streams, stuff like that. I don't see too much doom & gloom/ government tin-hat conspiracy in the whole thing, and I really hope it's effective. Ob, hope your analysis is right on. Also, would be great to see this kind of effort spread to many more Ozark rivers.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now