 |
Pack and Paddle Winter 2000 |
 |
THE SPRING MEET IS SET FOR TYLER BEND
The first Ozark Society spring meeting of the new millennium will be held at Tyler Bend on the Buffalo National River the weekend of April 29-30, hosted by the Buffalo River Chapter.
Chapter co-chair persons, Laura and David Timby of Leslie, are working with Meetings Chairman Joe Meyer of Rogers to present an informative and entertaining pro gram.
Here's what you need to know NOW to make plans for April:
HEADQUARTERS: On Saturday, April 29, our head quarters will be the Tyler Bend Pavilion, with registration ($5 per family) be ginning around 9 a.m.
TENT CAMPING: Site No. 1 of the Group Campground has been reserved for the Ozark Society beginning Friday, April 28. The fee is $2 per person, per night. There is a limit of 25 people in the group campsite.
RVers: Individual RV sites with hook-ups are available at Tyler Bend. Call the Tyler Bend Ranger Station for all camping information and fees. The telephone number is l-870-439-2502.
LODGING: Sleeping under a roof is available at the following nearby locations: Buffalo Bo's, at Silver Hill (Silver Hill is the community on U. S. Hwy. 65 near the access road west to Tyler Bend, just before you reach the Buffalo River Bridge -- (1-870-448-2015).
Buffalo River Outfitters, log cabins, at Silver Hill, (1-870-439-2244.) Anna's House, at Gilbert on the Buffalo River, a bed & breakfast, operated by Ozark Society members Wendel and Liz Norton of Snowball (1-800-448-5725). Restoration Homestead (renovated log cabins) at Snowball, operated by Ozark Society members Richard & Brenda Hempel (1-870-448-5043). Buffalo Camping & Canoeing, Gilbert, operated by Ben and Cynthia Freuhauf (1-870-439-2888).
Motels and restaurants also are available at Marshall on U. S. Hwy 65.
PROGRAM:
As this is written, Laura and David Timby are working with Joe Meyer of Rogers, meetings chairman, on a program that will be a blend of Searcy County's unique history, area conservation issues, and ample outdoor activities.
For example, Eddie Treece, the solid waste environmental coordinator for Northwest Arkansas, will explain how this thorny problem is being handled. There will also be a hotly contested "Dutch Oven" cooking contest, so stash your best recipes in your holsters and prepare for a real showdown at high noon -- or whenever.
The program is shaping up. Whatever form it ultimately assumes -- it will be fun and informative. The Timby's will have all the details ready for the Spring 2000 issue of P&P.
See you at Tyler Bend on the beautiful Buffalo River, America's first NATIONAL RIVER, and a very special place in our universe that the Ozark Society has long pledged to protect from all threats foreign and domestic.
WINTER BOARD MEETING ACTIVITIES
The Ozark Society board of directors held its 1999-2000 winter board meeting at the Shepherd of the Ozarks (SOTO) Mountain Resort Retreat Center 4-miles east of Harriett on beautiful Big Creek, a major tributary of the Buffalo National River. SOTO is an outreach program of Shepherd Ministries, headquartered at Irving, Texas.
SOTO is the type of environmentally compatible private recreation development that Dr. Neil Compton visualized for the area surrounding the narrow boundary of the Buffalo National River, realizing that not all of the Buffalo River watershed could be placed under federal protection. The picturesque log lodges on this bluff-lined 300-acre complex are decorated in a western theme, reflecting that peculiar blend of the South and the Southwest that characterizes the Ozark Region (after all, Texas isn't the only state that has ranchers and cowboys!)
The delegates were so impressed with the facilities, which are oriented to accommodate business gatherings, church groups, and family reunions, that the Society is exploring the possibilities of holding its Fall 2000 annual meeting at SOTO. The outdoor setting is perfect, alternative or overflow lodging is available in the Buffalo Point, Marshall-Yellville area, the potluck is no problem, and there is also room for our small tent-camping contingent near the lodge. Stay tuned.
Here's a capsule summary of the meeting:
Crooked Creek/Regulation 15--
The Pollution Control and Ecology Commission has responded to public outrage by agreeing to strengthen Regulation 15 (The Arkansas Open-Cut Mining and Land Reclamation Code) that protects all streams. In a nutshell, The Society and other conservation groups favor a permanent "buffer zone" larger than the old and totally inadequate one of 25-feet (100-feet or more at least!) between a stream and any open cut mining activity.
So far, the Commission has waffled back and forth over whether to initiate a larger buffer zone or stay with the minuscule 25-foot buffer. Incredibly, the PC&E has only "one and-a-half" inspectors to cover the whole state! We don't know whether the "half-inspector" is all head or all legs, but he must be a busy fellow! In reality, most violation
s are reported by citizens; and the fines levied against the big mining companies are so low some landowners refer to them as a "license to steal."
Bear Creek Dam --
The Ozark Society position is to support Searcy County citizens in their quest for a high quality, long-term water supply. We believe this can best be accomplished by the same methods that are being used by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission to serve other Ozark communities. In brief, utilizing the virtually inexhaustible water supplies already available in existing federal reservoirs, such as Beaver, Norfork, Bull Shoals, and Greers Ferry, that have already been built at taxpayer expense. Bear Creek is an "undisturbed resource" and should not be dammed. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service studies conclude that Bear Creek Dam will cause significant damage to the ecosystem and sport fisheries in both Bear Creek and the Buffalo Nation al River. We oppose the issuance of a 404 permit for Bear Creek Dam.
Trans-Ozark Trail--
After considerable discussion, the board endorsed a non-wilderness route for the Trans-Ozark Trail recommended by an exploratory team composed of Duane and Judy Woltjen of Fayetteville, Bill Steward of Sherwood, Kirk Wasson of North Little Rock, Dwight and Virginia Buras of Fayetteville, and Jim Allen of Mountain View.
The approved route starts on Spring Creek Road and involves about 8 miles of trail using road right-of-way hiking, or national forest land, if convenient. The route would eventually end up at the Norfork Lake Trail Head and Dam. The board has not endorsed any trail route between the current terminus point of the Buffalo River Trail at Gilbert and the proposed trail head on Spring Creek Road.
The endorsed section would become part of what is called the "Trans-Ozark Trail." Deb Schnack, planner/trails coordinator for Missouri State Parks, said the Trans-Ozark Trail (or T-O-T) is envisioned as a hiking/backpacking trail that would link Fort Smith, AR with St. Louis, MO. Missouri has so far completed 307 miles of its 500-mile portion, leaving 193 miles to go, she said. Missouri's Ozark Trail is now at the southern boundary of the Willow Springs Ranger District west of West Plains, MO, and is within 15 or 20 miles of the Arkansas border, Schnack said. In Arkansas, the plan is to follow Highway 341 right-of-way north across the White River Bridge and continue on this road to the Norfork Lake Trail Head.
National Forest Issues --
Conservation Chairman Paul Means explained that the National Forest Management Act of 1976 requires the Secretary of Agriculture to develop, maintain and revise land and resource management plans for the National Forest System. This process is under way and the official comment period has been extended to Feb. 3, 2000.
You can learn more about it from the USFS website -- http://www.fs.fed.us/forum/nepa/rule/
We are monitoring this process.
Another issue is that the USFS already has more roads than its budget will support -- 380,000 miles of road, enough roads to circle the globe more than 15 times. But the agency currently has a road reconstruction and maintenance backlog of approximately $8.4 billion. Road building also exacts a great environmental cost through erosion, land slides, and slope failures, all of which has adverse effects on fish and wildlife.
The Ozark Society supports the movement to keep existing roadless areas roadless. These roadless areas offer a form of primitive recreation not found in more crowded portions of our national forests, yet have less restrictions than wilderness. For example, mountain bikes would not be prohibited.
CURRENTS
By Stewart Noland,
President Ozark Society
Conservation Chairman Paul Means and I recently had the chance to visit with Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lambert Lincoln and her aide, Cynthia Edwards, concerning issues surrounding the White River, the Buffalo National River, and our national forests.
Our points were well received and it was a good opportunity to establish a dialogue with Arkansas' newest senator.
The New Year promises to hold much for the Ozark Society. Bill Steward will lead another of his well-organized June Buffalo River outings (June 13-17, see article this issue), Bob Ritchie and Catherine Hill have expressed interest in leading another trip to Colorado, and our various chapters have numerous activities planned on an ongoing basis.
The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality is considering changes to gravel mining regulations to better protect water quality, the national forests are seeking input on forest planning processes and possible roadless areas, and the Ozark Society will closely monitor efforts to dam the Strawberry River, Lee Creek, and Bear Creek.
As a consequence of a recent meeting with Buffalo National River personnel, the Ozark Society may have an opportunity to work in partnership with the BNR to establish a Neil Compton Buffalo River Learning Center at an existing facility near Pruitt, on the upper Buffalo. I have asked our education chair, Janet Nye, to lead a committee to evaluate this possibility. Many people have asked me what the Ozark Society can do to recognize Neil's legacy to the Buffalo River, and this may be the perfect opportunity. If you would like to assist this committee, please contact Janet at 501-851-7524. Recent correspondence from Bill Steward indicates that a proposal to extend the Trans-Ozark Trail (TOT) downstream of Buffalo Point toward Norfork Lake may be in the offing. A meeting with BNR and Ozark National Forest personnel to discuss the trail proposal is in the process of being scheduled. Our oral history committee has been busy interviewing additional persons in its ongoing attempt to capture documentary evidence of the Buffalo River story.
The fall meeting at Devil's Den State Park was full of fun, and I hope you will make plans now to attend the Spring Meeting on April 29-30 at Tyler Bend on the middle Buffalo River.
An editorial correction from my column in a pervious issue is warranted. In the Fall l999 edition of Pack & Paddle a photograph credited to me showed Ozark Society member Jim Mitchell with a relatively large German Brown trout caught in Brown's Canyon on the Arkansas River in Colorado during our western outing. The correction is that the trout is not nearly as big as it looks in the photograph!
THE UNEASY CHAIR
By John Heuston
Communications Chair
The Ozark Society, working as a component of the Arkansas Conservation Coalition Wilderness Study Task Force, was a major player in the 10-year battle to pass Senate Bill 2125, "The Arkansas Wilderness Act of 1983," which actually became law on Oct. 19, l984.
OS and AWF member Don Hamilton and Tom McClure of the Sierra Club and others held countless meetings with USFS officials. Ozark Society Outing Chairman Bill Coleman, now an environmental engineer in California, directed eleven "field study" teams that narrowed the list down to 25 choice "RARE II" study areas in the Ozark and Ouachita national forests. However, only eleven of them became wilderness.
Even if ALL the proposed new wilderness areas in the Ozark and Ouachita national forests had been added to the two existing wilderness areas, it would have represented only 6.0% of the total Ozark-Ouachita forest acreage in Arkansas!
However, recent speculation about possibly routing the highly publicized, marked, and developed "Trans-Ozark Trail" from Ft. Smith, AR to St. Louis, MO through either the Lower Buffalo Wilderness and/or Leatherwood Wilderness has rekindled the old debate over whether highly publicized, developed, and regularly maintained hiking trails in our tiny "weekend wonder" wilderness areas lives up to the vision of the Act's proponents' who viewed wilderness as a "... place to enjoy nature on its own terms, far removed from machines and development."
So last month, by request, we aired the viewpoint of the Society's "No Developed Trails" advocates in the "Uneasy Chair," a position which heretofore had not received much publicity. We also solicited "opposing view points" and anticipated other comments. We received a few responses to our "editorial," both pro and con. They will follow: But first, some basic journalistic ground rules that I thought every body understood, but apparently some don't.
The "Uneasy Chair" originated years ago as an opinion column by the editor (well, honestly, it was a device to fill space when member news contributions were scarcer than diamonds at the Crater). The editor is solely responsible for its content. It usually explores various conservation issues that concern our membership.
We don't have "editorials" although maybe we should. The regular bylined columns and submitted articles that appear in Pack & Paddle, (or any other publication) signify that the opinions expressed are those of the authors (that's what bylines are for). The closest thing we have to an "editorial" is President Stewart Noland's column, "Currents," which often explains the nuances of Ozark Society policies, current issues, and ongoing programs. Official policy positions are established by the Ozark Society Board of Directors.
However, the flood of letters (all three of them) have been so interesting and provocative that your editor plans to initiate a "Letters to the Editor" column. This way, members can vent on whatever issue bugs them. So, got something on your chest? Then sharpen your PC and get after it! However, from now on, let's keep the letters reasonably brief. Letters to the Democrat-Gazette are limited to 250 words, but we could probably allow about 300-350. Write tight.
Naturally, we will edit out any libelous our slanderous name-calling or obscene language -- especially if it's directed at the editor -- who is a very sensitive fellow. So, WE'VE GOT MAIL!
DUANE WOLTJEN, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
At the Sept. 1999 Board Meeting at Devil's Den, a motion was made to have the Ozark Society officially oppose the Trans-Ozark Trail (the Ozark Highland Trail in Arkansas) continuing through the Lower Buffalo Wilderness and the Leatherwood Wilderness. I seconded the motion on condition that it be tabled to avoid a precipitous and potentially uninformed vote.
A lot of progress has been made and information exchanged all around since that dark day. I hope you won't, but perhaps soon you will ultimately vote through your Board representation to oppose this trail in wilderness. The result would be the Trans-Ozark Trail from Ft. Smith to St. Louis would fall far short of what it should be. It could simply end this vision of the Arkansas and Missouri public land managers, trail users, wilderness advocates and private landowners who envisioned this trail way back in l977. To me a vote against this trail in wilderness is as a vote against our youth, a vote against a great recreation/education asset.
The simple facts are these: The Leatherwood Wilderness can be bypassed. Realistically, the Lower Buffalo Wilderness cannot be by passed. Ozark National Forest Super visor Charles Richmond announced "we want to build this trail" at a meeting Oct. 22, l999, in Russellville. Kirk Wasson, Bill Steward, Jim Allen, Tim Ernst and ONF staff Dick Bowie and Gary Knudsen attended. To start the long process, Supv. Richmond has assigned Ranger Gary Knudsen to proceed with developing an Opportunity Analysis. simply an examination of possibilities.
We then reviewed three documents:
FOREST SERVICE WILDERNESS POLICIES FOR TRAIL DEVELOPMENT (IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WILDERNESS ACT OF 1964). (1) Trails are an acceptable improvement. Construct and maintain trails to standards described in FSH 2309.18, Trails Management Handbook. National Recreation Trails are generally not designated within wilderness (FSM 2350).
Historic essays and articles by the advocates of the Wilderness Act are published in "Voices for the Wilderness" edited by William Schwartz, Ballantine Books, 1969. I re-read my 30-year-old copy recently.
Advocates did not speak in opposition to trails or people in wilderness areas. They clearly thought wilderness areas were for people to see, enjoy, and visit for recreation, nature study and communing with nature. They led large group outings to foster a constituency for wilderness preservation. They wanted, as we want today, to keep the best of things wild forever wild. Since l964 new trails have been made in many wilderness areas including Bell Mountain and Devil's Backbone in Missouri, on the Ozark Trail (Missouri) portion of the Trans-Ozark Trail.
THE LEATHERWOOD WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT PLAN, 1990
There are no prohibitions concerning trails in the plan. It states there are several old roads usable as trails. Several of these presently have medium horse traffic, and some still see vehicular traffic due to private in-holdings.
Indeed, one route I and associates have explored and presented to the OZNF includes some of those roads and just 1/4 mile of construction up a hillside to connect Middle Creek bottom road to the west end of Watts Ridge Road. Check USGS Big Flat Topo. It would take only 1/4 mile of 24-inch path for the entire passage through the Leatherwood Wilderness. Bypassing Leatherwood would take at least 10 miles of construction.
THE BUFFALO RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN, 1985
This plan was first developed in the early 1980's. It shows a proposed route for the Ozark Highland Trail Extension going down river from Highway 14 on the south side of the river, generally near the boundary, and connecting to the Ozark Nation al Forest at Big Creek, near the south west corner of the Leatherwood Wilderness.
I and associates have explored this route and it is entirely feasible. The 1994 BNR Plan still has the trail as a management goal, still unfulfilled after nearly 20 years.
You may recall about six years ago (BNR) Supt. (Jack) Linahan publicly and quite seriously advised the Ozark Society to "Jump in a canoe at Tyler Bend and paddle on down the Buffalo and White River." (This is a HIKING trail?)
Others advise hiking through the Lower Buffalo on the north side of the Buffalo to the mouth, but still in the Lower Buffalo Wilderness, and hailing a water taxi to Buffalo City! That's good until the taxi drive gets sued over a deadly winter capsizing, or the taxi just doesn't arrive some bitter day in January.
Still others advise just wading across the Buffalo near the mouth. I have offered to meet such folks there in January, to see how that works out. No takers so far, maybe because they gotta cross before I start across. Finally, some propose going east from Highway 14, through a unit of Loafers Glory Wildlife Management Area, ACROSS PRIVATE LAND (with an owner granted easement) INTO COZAHOME AND EAST WARD TO BIG CREEK, THEN SOUTH EAST UP SPRING CREEK.
Well, the folks in Cozahome sure laid out the welcome mat for the Buffalo National River way back then, and it is just a sure bet they will do the same for the T-O-T. I think our mothers must have given us some good advice about this sort of thing. The NPS doesn't need the trouble we would create just by opening a discussion around Cozahome.
The BNR Plan of l985 had it right, and exploration on the ground proved it to me. The trail can virtually follow the BNR south boundary from Hwy. 14 east and have no significant impact on the Lower Buffalo Wilderness, just as the ‘85 Plan specifies. No need to take your life in your hands crossing or paddling rivers with a backpack, or passing through really hostile territory. Some are worried that we may sacrifice our wilderness, while Missouri may never get their end done. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources reports 307 miles are completed including sections on private land (by willing grantor easements).
I attended the Ozark Trail Council Meeting in Missouri on Oct. 29, l999. The high point of the meeting was the distribution of the Meramec Regional Recreation Association's approved plan for the final 53 miles of the Ozark Trail into the city of St. Louis. (The MRRA is an organization of county, city, and state governments for the recreation planning in the lower Meramec on into the Mississippi at St. Louis.)
If you need to worry about something, worry about how we are going to keep our youth on the straight and narrow. Worry about how we are going (to) grow them to be environmentally conscious adults. Worry about whether we will have done all we could. Worry about whether the National Park Service will ever get going on their section of the T-O-T.
Yes, we may have to "sacrifice" a 24-inch wide track through the wilderness to have the Trans-Ozark Trail become a reality in Arkansas, but isn't that a worthy cause and a small sacrifice for the Ozark Society? I urge the Ozark Society to once again think big by supporting the completion of the Trans-Ozark Trail, even if we have to share some wilderness. Conservation, Education and Recreation all come together on the Trans-Ozark Trail.
TERRY FREDERICK OF FAYETTEVILLE
Your article implies the Ozark Society position opposes trails in wilderness areas. It seem ironic the Ozark Society hikes on trails and canoes and rafts in wilderness areas.
The information on the Missouri leg of the Trans-Ozark trail referred in your article is very erroneous. Missourians formed a coalition of conservation-minded people and organizations, including the Sierra Club, to build their portion of the trail (through) private and public lands while Arkansans set with hands in their pockets.
As for the cost of trail maintenance and construction, volunteers from Arkansas, Missouri, and surrounding states have constructed and maintained trails without cost.
This is truly an issue among Ozark Society members important enough to create a rift among members and have a negative impact on membership. Being an avid hiker of wilderness areas I cannot and will not support the individuals or organizations who maintain the no-trail wilderness position.
CHARLIE TRANSUE OF TULSA, OK
I do not believe in recreation as the highest use in wilderness areas. I deeply believe that the highest use of wilderness areas should, by their very name, be the preservation of the wild character of the land. Please promote preservation of the wild character of Leatherwood Wilderness Area and the Lower Buffalo Wilderness Area by not allowing the extension of the Ozark Highlands Trail through these wilderness areas
Transue also passed along a letter he wrote to Tim Ernst of the Ozark Highlands Trail Association in 1996, congratulating Ernst on his "Wilderness Reflections" exhibit at Oklahoma City, and adding these comments on Arkansas wilderness and its inherent value:
But one part of your discussion concerning future plans for the OHT I take exception to. You argue for routing the trail through Leatherwood Wilderness Area. You support your argument by saying that the OHT already goes through a number of wilderness areas, for instance, Hurricane Creek Wilderness Area. But the reason the trail goes through Hurricane Creek is that the trail already existed at the time of wilderness designation. The OHT does not go through but around Richland Creek Wilderness Area because the trail was extended after wilderness designation.
I have hiked in the South San Juan Wilderness Area of southwestern Colorado amidst sheep and cows, which reduce mountain meadows to mere pastures. A trail is a man-made alteration to the land, and to make exceptions to the Wilderness Act in the name of trails leaves the recreation community open to charges of self-serving hypocrisy and gives fodder to the opponents of wilderness.
From my experience of hiking in Leatherwood and other trail-less wilderness areas, part of the special character of those hikes has come from the lack of rigid order that a trail imprints on the land, in the same way that a road does. Walking, sometimes alone, in a trail-less wilderness in the deep quiet of winter is one of the freest experiences I've known. The OHT has afforded friends and myself many, many dear memories, and the opportunity to hike the trail I am always thankful for. But in a continental United States with so very few places left without vestiges of human presence, let's let remaining wild land remain wild, which meaning precludes new trails. Editor's Note: The Ozark Society Board has approved a route for the T-O-T on non-wilderness lands that should resolve this issue. See board meeting article.
THE OZARK SOCIETY AND SCRWD'S WATER SUPPLY PLANS
(On January 11, 2000, Ozark Society Conservation Chair Paul Means mailed copies of the following letter to Col. Thomas A. Holden, district engineer, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Little Rock, and J. Randy Young, executive director, Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission, Little Rock, explaining the Ozark Society's position on plans proposed by the Searcy County Regional Water District (SCRWD) for a water supply. Copies also were sent to our U. S. Senators, representatives, Gov. Huckabee, SCRWD, appropriate state and federal agencies., and others.)
The Ozark Society (OS) has reviewed information concerning the above referenced project. The OS supports the fundamental premise that the SCRWD needs to develop a reliable, long term water supply. The selected water supply alternative should be feasible from an environmental, technical, and political perspective. The OS also suggests preference should be given to any alternative that utilizes existing developed resources as opposed to utilizing undeveloped resources.
The SCRWD has proposed a dam on Bear Creek as its preferred water supply alternative, and it has applied for needed permits from both of your agencies for the Bear Creek Dam.
The proposed Bear Creek dam represents the utilization of an undeveloped resource. In addition, numerous resource agencies have raised serious questions concerning the Bear Creek dam's environmental, technical, and economical feasibility when compared to other available alternatives. A review of long term, reliable drinking water supply development in northwest and north central Arkansas clearly indicates that the preferred long term water supply alternative is existing federal reservoirs. Although the following list does not include all of the examples, it nevertheless provides a clear indication of preferred long term water supply sources. * Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville and others are served from Beaver Lake through the Beaver Water District.
* Gentry, Decatur, Gravette, and others are served from Beaver Lake through the Two Ton Water District.
* Eureka Springs, Green Forest, Berryville, Harrison, and others are served from Beaver Lake through the Carroll Boone Water District. * Portions of Marion County are served from Bull Shoals Lake through the Marion County Regional Water District.
* Mountain Home and others are served from Norfork Lake.
* Clinton and its consecutive systems and Heber Springs and its consecutive systems are served from Greers Ferry Lake.
* The Community Water System serves numerous entities from Greers Ferry Lake, including communities as far away as Mayflower in Faulkner County. Since the construction of the large federal reservoirs in North Arkansas, there has been a consistent development of long term, reliable, regional, high quality water systems. These systems include water treatment facilities located in close proximity to the lake, accompanied by long water transmission lines that lead to local water distribution systems.
These systems have served their users well from environmental, technical, economical, and political perspectives.
Federal reservoirs in North Arkansas have time and again been chosen to be the most feasible long term water supply alternative. The OS applauds these water supply developments because, in addition to the previous factors, they represent the utilization of existing developed resources as opposed to utilizing undeveloped resources.
The OS also recognizes that both the Corps and the ASWCC have been instrumental in the development of the federal reservoirs as public water supplies, and the OS applauds that effort.
Further, the OS maintains that utilizing the federal reservoirs for public water supply is their highest and best use.
These qualities have been acknowledged time and time again by numerous state and federal resource, regulatory, and funding agencies in the development of the aforementioned projects.
The proposal to dam Bear Creek for water supply purposes is clearly a questionable anomaly in the midst of these previously cited water supply projects. The OS joins numerous agencies in strongly opposing a dam on Bear Creek as the preferred water supply alternative for the following reason. Utilizing an existing federal reservoir (Greers Ferry, Bull Shoals, Beaver) is clearly a superior long term regional water supply alternative for the SCRWD, as it has been for thousands of other citizens of North Arkansas. The OS is confident that all of the agencies that are opposed to the Bear Creek dam alternative will support a federal reservoir alternative. The OS encourages the ASWCC, as the lead state water resource development agency in Arkansas, to work with the SCRWD to develop a regional water supply source that includes the use of a federal reservoir. The OS encourages the Corps and the ASWCC, in the interest of the greatest beneficial use of Arkansas' water resources, to deny the permits for the proposed Bear Creek dam project.
At the same time, the OS encourages the Corps and the ASWCC, and Arkansas' Congressional delegation to work with the SCRWD to secure its needed long term water supply from an existing federal reservoir. Among other possible alternatives, the recent offer from the City of Clinton could be developed into a regional water supply solution at the encouragement of the ASWCC. The ASWCC has been instrumental in other similar efforts.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me.
CONSERVATION OBSERVATIONS
By Paul Means, Conservation Chair
The 20th Century ended with a flurry of environmental activity. For several years Congress had forbidden the U. S. Forest Service to spend any funds on updating national forest plans. Members of Congress with close ties to the timber and mining industries feared new plans would prevent these industries from profiting at the expense of the environment and taxpayers. In l999 the strangle hold was finally broken and the U. S. Forest Service has begun a new planning cycle.
The process began on Oct. 5, l999 when the Forest Service released a proposed set of rules regarding "National Forest System Land and Resource Management Planning." The existing rules describe in great detail how to write a forest plan. The proposed new rule describes how to do forest planning. It represents a major change from a system that emphasized counting production from national forests to a system that focuses on sustaining the ecosystems of national forests.
One of a series of town hall meetings on the new rules was held in Little Rock on Nov. 16th. While a few representatives of environmental groups were present, the vast majority of the crowd represented the timber industry and land owners adjacent to the national forests. Needless to say, the crowd was very skeptical of the proposal.
The basis for the rule is the compromising the needs of the future. The forests should be managed to maintain the composition, structure, and process of ecosystems. The management plan should promote a wide variety of uses, values, products, and services from the forests. The regulations Require that there be a scientific basis to support the management plan, which will be amended as scientific knowledge grows.
The rule also provides for the for the Forest Service to use a collaborative process to resolve issues and make decisions. Although it may be a bad analogy, a collaborative process is somewhat similar to peace negotiations. The Forest Service would convene a group of interested parties who would meet and work together to find a solution. It has had its ups and downs, but this type of process has worked to bring peace in Northern Ireland. And example of how it might be applied to a national forest is designation of areas open to off-road vehicle use. Such as process would require the active participation of Ozark Society members to protect our common interests. Do not underestimate the significant commitment of time involved in a collaborative process!
The rule making will continue to be considered in 2000. On a faster track is an executive order by President Bill Clinton requiring the Forest Service to develop a program for the long-term protection of roadless areas in the national forests. Work has already begun on the Environmental Impact Statements required for his program, which should be finalized during 2000. This will affect many of the areas in the Mark Twain, Ozark and Ouachita forests that have not yet been designated as wilderness, but which are candidates for wilderness protection.
Finally, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is still working on in-stream gravel mining regulations. As a result of public comments in August, some minor revisions have been made to the proposed new regulations. Depending on your point of view, they are either delaying, or crossing every "T" in anticipation of lawsuits. Moving to rein in the outlaw gravel miners on Crooked Creek, and elsewhere, will not be pleasant. It is time to just bite the bullet and get on with it.
SHORT STROKES
BIG DAM/DITCH FOOLISHNESS
"Big Dam Foolishness," was a term, and a book title, coined by an early soil conservationist who preferred to "stop the rain drop where it falls" instead of building what Neil Compton referred to as "high dams." The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers was not swayed. It currently has these controversial and potentially environmentally damaging projects on its plate: a citizen boosters group proposal to revive the long-dead Bell Foley Dam on the Strawberry River; a 404 permit sought by the Searcy County Regional Water District (SCRWD) for the clearly illegal and unnecessary Bear Creek Dam, a major tributary of the Buffalo National River; Pine Mountain Dam to create a water supply reservoir on upper Lee Creek near Uniontown; the White River Navigation Project to channelize the lower White River and squeeze out a few more days of barge traffic annually, at an enormous ecological, social, and economic cost; and the Grand Prairie Irrigation Project, which is hotly opposed by a group of Grand Prairie farmers. One farm leader has demonstrated how its members can solve their own water irrigation problems by trapping rain water in deep ponds during the off season and using it to irrigate crops (imagine that, local farmers solving a regional water problem without soaking taxpayers, how un-American!)
THE OKLAHOMA OUTLOOK
Phil Lorenz of Bartlesville, OK, our man on the prairies, informs us that a connecting trail has been constructed between the short (one-half mile trail) and the long (2-mile trail) on the Tallgrass Prairie so that visitors can now hike both of them as a unit.
The Spring Creek Coalition is fighting a proposed landfill adjacent to Clear Creek, a tributary of Spring Creek. Spring Creek is the most pristine Ozark stream left in Oklahoma, originating in Delaware County and flowing for 34 miles into Ft. Gipson Reservoir. The focus of concern is the unique "Karst" topography that is also the bane of landfills in Arkansas and Missouri.
The Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation is sponsoring a "Blue Thumb" program of stream monitoring, modeled after the successful "Stream Team" programs now doing such good work in Missouri and Arkansas.
