In the past three weeks, two people have commented to me on Traveler’s story reporting the Missouri Conservation Commission’s endorsement of the “No Action” option in regards to the Ozark National Scenic Riverways new General Management Plan. Both persons who commented seemed to think this was the most enlightened thing the MDC has done in years.
I’m not aware that any other media reported this story except Traveler, so in case you missed it, below is the article we ran in our October issue.
We’re interested in hearing from more people on this subject. Do you agree with those who said the MDC made the right call?
The Missouri Conservation Commission on Sept. 18 approved a letter endorsing the No Action preliminary alternative in the new General Management Plan to the Ozark National Scenic Riverways.
In the letter, the Commission recommended that hunting, fishing and trapping continue to be allowed throughout the ONSR “except in highly developed areas where a reasonable safety zone for public protection may be required.”
It noted that gigging and trout fishing are popular activities on the Riverways and recommended that language from the 1985 GMP be carried over into the new document. The 1985 GMP states “The program proposes to continue present fisheries activities, including the cooperative trout management program with the state, on the upper reaches of the Current River.”
The Commission’s letter says that changes in horsepower limits would impact angler access, harvest pressure and fish communities along with MDC’s ability to complete fish management activities and enforce the Wildlife Code within the ONSR.
To address the need to control unauthorized access points and undesignated public use areas, the MDC recommends the OSNR:
•Develop a system of streamside trails to accomodate fishing access and other uses;
•Upgrade existing camping and day-use facilities to attract families and children;
•Construct a visitor’s center for interpretation of natural, cultural and recreational features;
•Improve access at Waymeyer to decrease user conlict by providing a way for boaters to access the river and travel upstream;
•Consider using Welch Spring, in place of Akers, as a boundary for horsepower limits.
The Commission states “The Department is not in favor of a ‘Wilderness’ designation for the Big Spring area. Instead, we propose a ‘Primitive’ designation with certain enhancements found within a ‘Wilderness’ protection…Given the impacts of necessary fire protection, drought and insect damage, climate change and invasice species, a ‘Wilderness’ designation would limit access and eliminate many of the management tools needed to address these and future concerns.”
The letter notes the that enabling legislation creating the ONSR created two “gaps” within the park where activities are not regulated. Changes in the GMP have the potential to impact neighboring properties and activities within the gaps by displacing previously allowed activities, it said.
The letter describes Alternatives A, B and C as “either too restrictive or permissive for practical management considerations” and recommends the No Action alternative as the “best opportunity to balance competing uses and resources protection with the necessary flexibility to meet current and future needs.”