E Coli in the Spring River

[taxidermist]

I have to defend the farmers, they bought the land they pay ofr it and the water rights are theirs.

Not practical to fence cattle, horses or any other animal fromt he stream. Farmers dont normally spread cattle poop, it falls where they cow craps and thats the end of what most farmer do with it.

Maybe the better solution is to force nonowners not to use the stream.

Livestock being watered from tanks away from the stream would not work either.

Beason said it best, keep the water out of your mouth, Ecoli is just one problem there are many other types of infections you can catch.

Bone up on your outdoor survival for more tips.

Dilution is the solution is what they use to say.

[jdmidwest]

I have to disagree on that one Taxidermist. As a landowner and a farmer myself and my family too, we are educated enough to water cattle from ponds and not the stream itself. We keep a buffer zone of trees between our fields and the creek that runs through the land we own. We keep the livestock away from the stream banks to prevent bank erosion. We keep the fences away from the streams, floods just wash them out anyway. We don't clearcut our forests, we manage the timber and selective cut to prevent erosion. We fertilize our pasture with manure from the feed lots and barns with manure spreaders. We are living on a century old farm that was homesteaded in the 1800's. My Great Grandparents have started here and through the years we have made several livings off this land. I harvest all types of game and fish from this land. We have gone away from row crops and converted it all to pasture and timber.

The problems lie in the major operations, not the family farms. Large dairy farms, feeder cattle lots, chicken houses, and major hog operations are the culprits here. Commercial operations with concentrated waste, toxic spills and runoff are to blame. Like any other industrial accident, someone should be held accountable for their actions. A local hog operation here lost a waste pond that spilled into a creek that resulted in a fish kill. MDC was on the case and I believe fines were levied per fish killed.

Government grants and programs are in place to prevent such things from happening. Monies for watering wells or ponds, MDC has landowner programs for land management, local extension offices have trained professionals to help. There is no real excuse.

With most of Missouri in private land ownership, landowners should take care of what they have.

[Chief Grey Bear]

I have to defend the farmers, they bought the land they pay ofr it and the water rights are theirs.

Not practical to fence cattle, horses or any other animal fromt he stream. Farmers dont normally spread cattle poop, it falls where they cow craps and thats the end of what most farmer do with it.

Maybe the better solution is to force nonowners not to use the stream.

Livestock being watered from tanks away from the stream would not work either.

Beason said it best, keep the water out of your mouth, Ecoli is just one problem there are many other types of infections you can catch.

Bone up on your outdoor survival for more tips.

Dilution is the solution is what they use to say.

That has got to be some of the stupidest stuff I have ever read in my life!

Do you really believe what you have wrote??

The problems lie in the major operations, not the family farms. Large dairy farms, feeder cattle lots, chicken houses, and major hog operations are the culprits here. Commercial operations with concentrated waste, toxic spills and runoff are to blame. Like any other industrial accident, someone should be held accountable for their actions. A local hog operation here lost a waste pond that spilled into a creek that resulted in a fish kill. MDC was on the case and I believe fines were levied per fish killed.

I agree in princple what you are saying. But we also have to remember that a number of small farms along the same stetch of water can equal one large corprate farm. Therefore we must all practice conservation the best we can. I commend you and your family for doing what they can to keep it clean. I only wish others would do the same. Carry on soldier!!

[DeepDiver75]

It's attitudes like " I own it, I can do what I want with it regardless of effects on the environment" that have created most of our ecological nightmares. I sure hope most people have more sense than to think the way Taxidermist does. He wants to take away our rights to public waters and destroy our environment in the name of commerce. Some folks need to think before they open their mouth or simply have the sense to keep it shut!

[motroutbum]

I have to defend the farmers, they bought the land they pay ofr it and the water rights are theirs.

Not practical to fence cattle, horses or any other animal fromt he stream. Farmers dont normally spread cattle poop, it falls where they cow craps and thats the end of what most farmer do with it.

Maybe the better solution is to force nonowners not to use the stream.

Livestock being watered from tanks away from the stream would not work either.

They may have the water rights, but the DON'T have the right to contribute to the pollution of the water from their cows' Sh*t. It is practical to fence the cattle from the stream. The Conservation Department and the Soil Conservation Service will help with the cost and in some cases pay for solar powered pumps to be installed to pump the water from the stream to a holding tank or wherever to water the cows and not have them crap in the river. Besides that, the PUBLIC has the rights to the water not just the farmer.

I dont have my papers right infront of me, but the Conservation Dept. wants farmers to have a riparian buffer zone on their land, especially if they farm it. Which basically means, dont farm or have your cattle right to the waters edge. Why risk losing a foot or more land a year due to erosion than to give up 15 yards and not lose any land.

Well put JD. I agree totally!

[Terry Beeson]

One question... How many of you guys have ever owned or worked on a cattle operation? Especially one with a stream dissecting the land... not just bordering it... and not just little ol' weekend 10 acre - four cow "ranches" either.

First of all, we are still "chasing ghosts" in that there is no "proof" as to the source of the E. Coli levels for this stream. That should be the first step here. THEN we can start pointing fingers. Second, the E. Coli problem is still not the "big picture" in our water quality issues. High levels is a potential problem but there are MUCH "bigger fish to fry."

I agree that land ownership gives no right to pollute especially since "we all live downstream." But, MTM, I'm not so sure how you come up with the practicality of fencing a stream. Riparian buffer zone, yes, I agree one hundred percent. Ponds and tanks, totally. I'll even give in to fencing streams that border farms. But fence off one that runs down the middle? Easier said than done.

I think we need to be concerned with E. Coli levels, yes. But we need to be looking more at PHOSPHATE levels from commercial fertilizer and chicken litter as well as erosion problems from land development and lack of riparian zones. Those are the bigger issues that need our attention far more than family farms.

Land development - housing

Golf courses

Large commercial agri operations

Golf courses are probably the bigget contributors to water problems than anyone even realizes. They are building more and more golf courses and the amount of commercial fertilizer used on them rivals any farming operation 10 times the same size. This fertilizer pours phosphates into the stream at alarming rates.

Missouri has done a pretty good job with housing developments, but still, this just adds more problems to the water especially when the development is next to a larger stream. Look at the fiasco on the Norfork tail waters. And then you have to look at the septic systems for these developments. A couple of dumpings into the White system have already occurred. Arkansas is, MAYbe, finally coming out of a deep sleep into a state of semi-concious slumber.

The answer? I wish it was so simple... it's not... Nobody can "wave a magic wand" and make the problem go away. But the things that need to be put in place in my humble opinion are these:

- Tighter controls on commercial development within a (TBD) range of major streams. Major stream designation by MDC.

- Mandatory riparian zones (15 ft or more) on any stream of certain size or larger.

- Tighter controls on golf course and similar operations on amounts of fertilizer and drainage.

- Storm water controls for "high dollar" land developments and large commercial agri operations.

- More and better enforcement of these and current regulations.

- Funding for R&D on storm water/drainage prevention strategies and practices to improve conditions.

These are just my opinions, for what it's worth, and that ain't much...

[Capt E]

I grew up on a 160 acre farm in Vernon Co. Our farm was split in the middle by Clear Creek. My grandfather always made sure that our cattle never had free access to the creek. Yes, we had to run them through the ford to get to other pastures but it was done as little as possible and as quickly as possible. I spent a lot of summers mending fences up and down that creek. He always taught me that if we didn't take care of the land, it would not be able to take care of us.

Like I said before, the stream teams have done DNA testing and have determined that the high levels of e coli were specific to HUMANS!

[Crippled Caddis]

Terry wrote:

< Mandatory riparian zones (15 ft or more) on any stream of certain size or larger.>

15 feet doesn't even BEGIN to be enough. That would be a mere token to satisfy 'the letter of the law'. It might be sufficient to screen the source of the problem but is far too meager to provide filtration effect to runoff. Nor do the carefully manicured and well-fertilized sloping lawns of residential 'riparian zones' suffice in any manner. A large, thick and highly diverse concentration of vegetation is required to provide a riparian zone that is effective----the bigger the better! A quarter mile of set-back might be enough if it meets the vegetation criteria required for effectiveness.

[Terry Beeson]

Capt, I didn't see that post or maybe it is from another thread? Are you talking specifically about the Spring? If so, then now we can begin to "point fingers" so to speak.

You can attest to the "practicality" of fencing a stream dissecting a farm. The initial construction is one thing, but the upkeep is another for sure. I, too, have spent many hours mending fences torn down by flooding waters, tresspassers, determined cattle, the neighbor's bison, and even a black bear or two.

Our farm was (and is) dissected from the NE corner to the SW corner by a creek that empties into a COE built watershed lake. It was never fenced off, but there is and will always be (as long as my mom, sister, and I own the property) a riparian zone of at least 15 feet. The cattle do not frequent the stream as we have ponds located on the acreage. However, they do have a couple of fords that they cross. The amount of cow manure going directly into the stream is minimal. (The farm is leased out now to another cattle farmer.)

While large ag operations (chicken houses, pork operations, beef feed lots, and large dairy operations) are a problem, it is a little clearer now that the problem on the Spring is more likely from a housing development source.

Again, storm water improvements and stricter enforcement and better land development practices are key. This from a phosphate and bacteria standpoint.

(I wonder how I and other country kids survived swimming in creeks and branches all those years...)

[motroutbum]

i didnt say 15 feet. I said 15 yards. its something close to at least 50 ft. I agree with you terry about the amount of phosphates in the water, having come from the golf courses and from the poultry farms. I failed to mention that because I was just thinking about beef. my bad