White River A Blue Way. Not What You Think!

[Coldspring]

Read an article a couple of days ago where the local pols, up to US Senator level are having doubts about this Blueway designation. Lots of apprehension concerning federal control.

I don't have the list, but I believe so far over half the quorum courts and county commissons in the Blueway have signed resolutions of oppositioni to the Blueway designation. The property rights groups have basically stormed the county courthouses and filled them with non-truths about the so called federal and UN Agenda 21 land grab, the so called regulations, and the 180 foot riparian buffer that will be required around all surface water right down to small streams, farm ponds, and mudholes. One of the bloggers of a local Tea Party group that broadcasts on the radio admitted in a newspaper editorial letter that he couldn't find the claimed 800 pages of documents they had boldly claimed existed in front of that county commission.

Also, from Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, Rep. Billy Long, Rep. Jason Smith, and Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder have written letters on behalf of the property rights groups to Sec. of Interior Sally Jewll asking her to rescind the order for the Blueway.

[Justin Spencer]

I should be better educated on this topic than I am since it directly effects my property, but from what I have seen it really changes nothing at this point. I don't worry about a land grab, and while a riparian buffer might be a good idea, it would not be good for riverside campgrounds, depending on what restrictions they might impose.

[Quillback]

It's funny to read comments about it in the paper. The "for" folks say why worry, nothing will change, the "agin it" folks say why implement it as nothing will change.

[Al Agnew]

I don't have the list, but I believe so far over half the quorum courts and county commissons in the Blueway have signed resolutions of oppositioni to the Blueway designation. The property rights groups have basically stormed the county courthouses and filled them with non-truths about the so called federal and UN Agenda 21 land grab, the so called regulations, and the 180 foot riparian buffer that will be required around all surface water right down to small streams, farm ponds, and mudholes. One of the bloggers of a local Tea Party group that broadcasts on the radio admitted in a newspaper editorial letter that he couldn't find the claimed 800 pages of documents they had boldly claimed existed in front of that county commission.

Also, from Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt, Rep. Billy Long, Rep. Jason Smith, and Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder have written letters on behalf of the property rights groups to Sec. of Interior Sally Jewll asking her to rescind the order for the Blueway.

I really get sick of those lying a-holes. And I WILL tell them to their face that they are lying. I thoroughly detest these groups that have their own agendas and lie to achieve them. Including the Farm Bureau.

[skeeter]

The Stone County Commission approved a resolution Tuesday to oppose the National Blueways System designation for the White River watershed. Commissioner Dennis Wood says the citizens of Stone County want clean water, but they don’t want the mandates.

MO State Representative Don Phillips perhaps summed it up best and in fairness to both sides ( yeah Al, like YOUR side doesn't have an "Agenda" !? LMAO ! ) in his latest newsletter :

Blueway Designation Innocent or Potentially Problematic?

The White River National Blueway designation seems innocent enough on the surface; however there are numerous causes for concern with the primary “red flag” being a lack of accountability by those that make up the “stakeholder partnership.” (There are 26 sponsors that make up the stakeholder partnership of the National Blueway but most all are state and federal agencies or organizations; none are private citizen groups associated with individual property rights).

In fairness, there’s no language in the Blueway designation about “land grabbing” or “further regulating” or any of that sort. (That would be foolish!) The language focuses on conservation efforts, promoting wildlife, flood control, agriculture, etc. And, I think we’re all onboard with those efforts.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s website states the purpose of the Blueway is to “Boost Tourism, Expand Recreational Opportunities and to Fuel Local Economies.” My fear is that a designation like this starts off with little effect one way or the other on personal property rights but, has the potential to eventually escalate into a serious threat to land owners and farmers along the designated area. What’s to keep that from happening in five to 10 years? Suddenly the Blueway becomes sacred ground. If the National Blueway designation is really as innocent as it’s portrayed then why do we need it?

The supporters say the Blueway designation is basically a badge of honor and they claim we’ll go higher on the federal funding food chain with millions of dollars designated for environmental quality along the 722 mile Blueway. I’m certain there will be plenty of money for the Blueway, but that’s not the issue.

We already have enough oversight, regulations and restrictions on landowners concerning the environment and clean water. Most citizens realize the importance of protecting our environment and the need to be good stewards of our natural resources. We also need to be able to continue exercising our freedoms without further intrusion or even the potential for additional regulations.

Here’s what Jo-Ellen Darcy, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, had to say about the designation, “In keeping with President Obama’s commitment to the “America’s Great Outdoors Initiative” the Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) is proud to be a part of the National Blueways initiative which recognizes and supports stakeholder partnerships.”

People don’t trust our government and for good reason. And, we especially don’t trust groups that come quietly through the back door with government’s stamp of approval and with no accountability.

Partnerships are fine but partnerships without accountability can become a powerful team that’s simply covering each other’s backs with a wolf-pack mentality. One set of partnership groups can come to the aid of other partnerships that have the same cause thereby creating a powerful ability to unite for the good of those in the “stakeholder partnership.” It will be interesting to see how this all plays out!

[bfishn]

The "potential for additional regulations" has always existed and will continue to exist with or without the designation. Where was all the fear and paranoia the last 50 years?

More after work.

[Ham]

I think it is fair to say the current administration has created this atomesphere by forcing things on the people it serves that they actively did not want. Certainly, there was potential for good in the Blueway designation and certainly there was potential for bad. Folks aren't trusting Team Obama a whole bunch and I can't say I blame them.

[Brian Wise]

I think it is fair to say the current administration has created this atomesphere by forcing things on the people it serves that they actively did not want. Certainly, there was potential for good in the Blueway designation and certainly there was potential for bad. Folks aren't trusting Team Obama a whole bunch and I can't say I blame them.

Although I agree with most of this.....the people that are shouting "land grab" don't trust anyone. Everything becomes a conspiracy.

I am not 100% sure where I stand on the issue. The Connecticut River was the first to gain this designation and I have done a LOAD of looking and I am yet to find where people have been forced to do certain things to their land or lose their land totally in that region. I know it is still early in the whole spectrum (being just over a year ago) but I can't even find where there was online opposition to the Connecticut River getting the designation. I just have to wonder why the good people of the Connecticut River Watershed and the bloggers/writers/forum members in that area wouldn't be up in arms about it when the good people of the White River Watershed and the bloggers/writers/forum members are. A quick google search of "Opposition to Connecticut River Blueway" and basically you find reports from Missouri and Arkansas including from my county (Ozark).

Now, I know I have left the door wide open for "Well, it is only a year in, they can take my land anytime they want to" and to the extreme conspiracy theorist "The Government has had those sites taken down"

[Gavin]

http://www.interior.gov/americasgreatoutdoors/whatwedo/rivers/national-blueways-system.cfm

From what I've read on the Department of the Interior's site...Blueway designation doesn't do much of anything.

[Justin Spencer]

Although I agree with most of this.....the people that are shouting "land grab" don't trust anyone. Everything becomes a conspiracy.

I am not 100% sure where I stand on the issue. The Connecticut River was the first to gain this designation and I have done a LOAD of looking and I am yet to find where people have been forced to do certain things to their land or lose their land totally in that region. I know it is still early in the whole spectrum (being just over a year ago) but I can't even find where there was online opposition to the Connecticut River getting the designation. I just have to wonder why the good people of the Connecticut River Watershed and the bloggers/writers/forum members in that area wouldn't be up in arms about it when the good people of the White River Watershed and the bloggers/writers/forum members are. A quick google search of "Opposition to Connecticut River Blueway" and basically you find reports from Missouri and Arkansas including from my county (Ozark).

Now, I know I have left the door wide open for "Well, it is only a year in, they can take my land anytime they want to" and to the extreme conspiracy theorist "The Government has had those sites taken down"

We are a skeptical people here in the Ozarks, once again I believe it leads to politics. I would guess the majority of people in the Conn. River watershed are east coast liberals, whereas I can only think of 6 liberals in the White River watershed.

I'm with you Wise, not really sure about where I stand, I don't feel threatened by it and really doubt we ever see anything change because of it.