Jeeps in a creek - Pay to play off road park

[cnr]

The stream fisherman in me cringes when I see this. Looking at the map this creek feeds Indian Creek off of the Meramec in the St Clair area.

Moonlight Racing Park:

https://www.facebook.com/moonlightracing1

Location:

21225 State Hwy A

Sullivan, Missouri

[Greasy B]

I recall when this was the scene on M Fork and W F Black. I thought those days were over.

[cnr]

That's what I thought too. I am not surprised it would happen on a small scale but this is a large scale abuse of the environment.

[jdmidwest]

I think the rule is, if you own all of a small stream environment, you can do what you want.

Better them mucking up a small branch somewhere than tearing up and down a more significant riverbed. That would scare the crap even more out of the cattle.

[Chief Grey Bear]

http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/30400000131.html

You can in fact. To hell with the environment! Let's play!

[SpoonDog]

Think of a river network like a tree- everything is connected, and its overall health is going to be compromised if you keep whacking away at every branch. It all runs downstream, and the consequences are the same whether it's a tributary or mainstem river. Erosion is still erosion, tearing up the riparian corridor still releases fine sediment and gravel, it still removes trees and vegetation which protect banks and moderate water temperatures- and many tributary streams are important nursery areas for juvenile sportfish. Part of the reason we see habitat issues (like increased gravel loads) in Ozark streams is because small tributary streams haven't received much attention from landowners, sportsmen, and regulatory agencies.

I only skimmed over the legislation and maybe I missed it, but it seems like the landowner is allowed to operate vehicles in streams on the property he owns- if he's charging other people for access, folks who bring their own machines to tear up the stream- wouldn't that be illegal?

[cnr]

That's the way I read the legislation too.

"2. No person shall operate an off-road vehicle within any stream or river in this state, except that off-road vehicles may be operated within waterways which flow within the boundaries of land which an off-road vehicle operator owns, or for agricultural purposes within the boundaries of land which an off-road vehicle operator owns or has permission to be upon, or for the purpose of fording such stream or river of this state at such road crossings as are customary or part of the highway system. All law enforcement officials or peace officers of this state and its political subdivisions or department of conservation agents or department of natural resources park rangers shall enforce the provisions of this subsection within the geographic area of their jurisdiction."

I agree with SpoonDog, it all goes down stream and will have a negative impact.

[jdmidwest]

I don't disagree that it all runs downstream.

But I remember a time when it happened in many major streams. I would rather see it where it is and know it will stay there then try to stir something up and find out they have a majority vote somewhere and get it back in other streams.

No matter what we do, we can't protect all of the environment all of the time. I have resolved to the fact we are in the next big extinction, number 6, so it really does not matter.

[Al Agnew]

The wording of the law leaves a lot to be desired, which is something that always ticks me off. Geez, you'd think a whole legislature could make sure it's clear. The way I read it, the OWNER himself has the right to ride his ATV on land he owns. I would assume that would include his family and employees. It doesn't clearly say that anybody willing to pay him can also ride.

This is one perfect example of why there is still gravel coming into the larger streams, as we've discussed in the thread on the streams getting shallower. Riding ATVs on gravel bars and stream bottoms keeps the gravel loose and disturbed, and wipes out any vegetation covering the gravel and the banks. And then that gravel moves so much more easily with the next high water. That was one of the things the law was supposed to address, one of the reasons for the law. While this guy may or may not be following the letter of the law, thanks to that stupid wording, he is absolutely not following the spirit of the law.