Msta Bunker Hill Resort

[Mark]

The Missouri School Teachers Bunker Hill Resort is a 2,000 acres facility owned by MSTA for exclusive use by MSTA members that borders the Jack's Fork River. As a MSTA member, I called the resort last summer to check to see if I could access the Jack's Fork from the MSTA property. I was informed that access was limited to MSTA members who rented cabins. Cabins are rented for $80 per night per person or $125 per person for Friday and Saturday nights, including meals and the price is the same whether guests eat the meals or not. Children under 3 yrs old are free, 6-12 yrs. old are half price, and children 12 and over pay full price. So the price for a family of four with two teenagers would be $320 for one night or $500 for a weekend - quite a tab for a family on a teacher's salary. The facility is only open from Mother's day until October.

I recently wrote to the MSTA Board of Directors to express my dismay at the cost of using the facility. I stated my opinion that many teachers could not afford the cost, many teachers would use the facility if camping was allowed on the 2,000 acre property, many of us are outdoorsmen and enjoy the outdoor experience of camping and preparing our own meals, and have access to the Jacks Fork on property that is owned by our organization. I also stated that there are many who enjoy camping in the spring and fall when the resort is closed, and would like to see the resort available for camping use in the offseason.

I was pleased to get a reply from the Board of Directors that informed me that the Bunker Hill Resort operations were recently turned of to a committee called the Friends of Bunker Hill, and my email had been forward to the committee. The Friends of Bunker Hill are considering such options as designating a camping area on the property. As the reply did state, I understand that there are regulations that must be followed in accordance with Ozark National Scenic Riverways and the Forest Service. The Bunker Hill Resort cannot simply open up a camping and picnic area right on the banks of the river or allow vehicles traffic right up to the river bank. But surely a 2,000 acre property has room to set aside a camping area not on the river bank that would allow visitors to go down to the river for day use.

I would encourage other MSTA members to voice their opinions. I have not been able to find a direct email address to the Friends of Bunker Hill but will suggest you write to the MSTA Board of Directors and request your opinion be forwarded to the committee. I have never been to the Bunker Hill Resort and, as the policy now stands, I cannot see myself ever using the facility due to the cost. Seriously, $320 per night for a family of four is out of the price range of most teachers. I would gladly pay a nominal camping fee. The reply I received stated that the organization is considering ways to better utilize the facility.

[Al Agnew]

Mark, I'd agree that the price is pretty ridiculous for the average teacher. When I've floated by the property on summer weekdays, I have yet to see anybody around but what looked like the caretaker, so I'm wondering how much it really is utilized. Although that's usually been very late in the summer when a lot of the teachers would be back at work.

[KCRIVERRAT]

That's a ridiculous price Mark. To be honest, I always thought there wasn't a charge at all for the teachers. I should've known better because, as Al stated, the place has always looked empty when I've floated by it. Here's a dumb question... why doesn't the state give SOMETHING back to the people who educate our kids for the love of doing so despite what the pay is? Hope you get to go down with the family someday. It's a beautiful place with a fantastic bluff on the other side of the river. Great swimming stretch too.

[ColdWaterFshr]

Thats a nice looking property and I've had the same experience floating by -- it always looks pretty empty. I've called the place in the past, asking if we could use the resort as either a take-out or put-in, even with my wife being with me and she is a teacher --- the answer was "no", you have to be staying as an overnight guest. $320 for 4 is ridiculous.

[Mark]

That was my intention all along - I wanted to set up camp one evening and float the next day back to my camp. I would gladly pay $10 per night to camp on the property owned by my labor organization.

I would think that is what the property is for - the rank and file members and not a private resort for the highly paid administrators and union bigwigs. And I have no reason to think this other than a suspicious mind, but I wonder how many union bigwigs or local "good ol' boys" in general hunt on the property on a "wink, wink" arrangement with someone who knows someone from the union. I would think it would be prime deer and turkey hunting, and no one there after the first of October. Who would know, and if anyone asked, then they could just say so and so from the union gave permission? I just find it hard to believe absolutely no one gets on the 2,000 acres from the first of October until mid May. No accusing, just always suspicious about that sort of thing. Very easy for a few "in the loop" people to have their own set of keys to 2,000 acres owned by a entity and not an actual person.

[awhuber]

Wait...huh? I thought there were already too many people down there. You want to make it cheaper and easier for more folks to come down? /s

[Mark]

Definitely not too many teachers using the teacher union's resort. Assuming you are using sarcasm. BTW - A letter to the editor in today's St Louis Post from Sen. Jason Smith advocating leaving the regulations alone on Current and Jacks Fork.

[awhuber]

Definitely not too many teachers using the teacher union's resort. Assuming you are using sarcasm. BTW - A letter to the editor in today's St Louis Post from Sen. Jason Smith advocating leaving the regulations alone on Current and Jacks Fork.

He has also introduced a couple of bils on the issue. One concerning moters on the river and one turning control of the riverways over to the state of Missouri.

http://jasonsmith.house.gov/media-center/press-releases

If he keeps doing things like this he will only get 85% of the vote in Nov.

[Mark]

Oh yeah, he knows how to play to his audience. There are a couple of points he fails to mention though. The 65 miles of horse trails that are being debated to close are unauthorized trails to begin with. The same with closing unauthorized accesses, they shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. As far closing down camping on the gravel bars, again no one is suggesting that floaters will not be able to camp on the river. The intent is to eliminate people who have made unauthorized trails and roads to the river, drive their 4 wheel drive trucks out on the gravel bar, and camp out of their trucks and RVs. As far as Sen. Smith supporting no further regulations on motor boats on the rivers, again he is preaching to the choir, and uses terms like Obama bureaucrats and big city environmentalists to appeal to his predominantly GOP voting base. It isn't a debate of us vs. them, or Democrat vs. Republican, or big government vs. individual/states rights, or local interests vs. outside regulators. The issue is do we take steps to protect our streams and enforce the laws vs. allowing the status quo of ignoring the regulations in place by allowing some to do whatever they want on federal ground because they live in the area and it's always been that way.

The question remains, why don't we enforce the laws that are already in place by eliminating the illegal horse trails, illegal vehicle accesses, and illegal parking on gravel bars. I have no doubt that there are some locals who believe it is their river, they have riding horses wherever they want, making their own accesses, and driving the pick ups on the gravel bars all of their lives and don't want anyone telling them they can't do it anymore.

I don't believe the solution is to remain the status quo and allowing some people to disregard the regulations already in place.