State Hwy M crosses a small creek nor...

State Hwy M crosses a small creek north of Hwy 160 not far from Fairdealing

Posted in the Doniphan Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Sandy in Texas

Archer City, TX

#1 May 18, 2012
Does anyone know the name of the creek that Hwy M crosses, north of Fairdealing?
Info

United States

#2 May 18, 2012
Bonanza Hollow
Sandy in Texas

Archer City, TX

#3 May 18, 2012
Is it possible that this creek, that Hwy M crosses, could actually be part of the "Little Black River"?
Sandy in Texas

Archer City, TX

#5 May 18, 2012
GUEST wrote:
<quoted text>Little Black is at end of blacktop. From there on is private land owned by Slaytons but nobody is allowed on them
Thanks. I have some cousins named Slayton in Ripley County. I guess I could call them.:)
Hopefools

United States

#7 May 22, 2012
GUEST wrote:
<quoted text>Terry and Tim owns across river. I know Terry
They think they own the creek too. Terry drives across the bridge when there are small childrrn swimming. One of these days someone will pull him out of the car and wear him out for his mouth.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#9 May 23, 2012
The apron of the bridge is perfectly legal to be on, as soon as you step on gravel you are trespassing, and if you are on the actual top of the bridge between the yellow lines, it is no different than putting your crap out in the middle of a county road. The gravel going to the bridge is a county road, the bridge is a public bridge/road right of way, the county doesn't maintain or have anything to do with the gravel on the other side of the bridge. How would you like people to come park in your driveway and go hang out in the middle of the road on your way to work, then leave all their trash when they decide to leave?
Butbutt

Greenbrier, AR

#10 May 23, 2012
Yes they do block the road.. yes they do trash the river .. NO THEY DON'T HAVE ANY RESPECT/. NO just because people have used the area for swimming and recreation for years and years does NOT give you the right to be there.
If people wouldn't block the road and wouldn't trash the place the Slaytons wouldn't mind them using the river.
When my kids were small we would go down to swim.. when we left the area ..we would collect the trash around the bridge and carry it away with us to put in the garbage collection at my home. We would not block the road or bridge with ourselves or our 'stuff'. We carried away everything from beer cans/bottles,empty food packages, to dirty diapers that others had just tossed helter skelter. People would throw dirty diapers into the river.. WTF.. you come to swim then contaminate the water you swim in .?? go figure.. it has always been a problem for the people who live back there on the river.
Butbutt

Greenbrier, AR

#11 May 23, 2012
Sandy in Texas wrote:
Is it possible that this creek, that Hwy M crosses, could actually be part of the "Little Black River"?
Yes it is Little Black River.. the one at the end of the black top..
Technically M hwy does not cross the river.. M hwy ends at the end of the black top. From there it is a private road.
Hopefools

United States

#12 May 23, 2012
GUEST wrote:
<quoted text>Your trespassig because you cross his land to get in the river. The cops will make you leave.
He doesn't own the road or the bridge or the creek. So no one is getting on his property. He likes to make people think he owns all that, but he doesn't. He is the person who calls in on everyone that goes there.
Noooope

Greenbrier, AR

#13 May 23, 2012
If you are on here you can apparently read...there are signs posted about no parking down there and it is actually painted ON THE BRIDGE about people not being allowed to be on there. I have driven over it several times and morons just stand on the bridge with their kids running nuts and all of their crap spread around and luck at me like I am the one doing something wrong for needing to drive across the bridge they are not suppposed to be on to get to property I own out there past the Slaytons. If people would have a little respect for the land owners and for the property they are on, follow the very simple laws posted by the Sherrif's department (not the Slaytons) then there would be a lot less problems. If you don't like it, go swim somewhere else. STAY OFF OF THE BRIDGE BETWEEN THE YELLOW LINES!!!! Not that hard.
Hopefools

Ford City, PA

#14 Jun 15, 2012
Noooope wrote:
If you are on here you can apparently read...there are signs posted about no parking down there and it is actually painted ON THE BRIDGE about people not being allowed to be on there. I have driven over it several times and morons just stand on the bridge with their kids running nuts and all of their crap spread around and luck at me like I am the one doing something wrong for needing to drive across the bridge they are not suppposed to be on to get to property I own out there past the Slaytons. If people would have a little respect for the land owners and for the property they are on, follow the very simple laws posted by the Sherrif's department (not the Slaytons) then there would be a lot less problems. If you don't like it, go swim somewhere else. STAY OFF OF THE BRIDGE BETWEEN THE YELLOW LINES!!!! Not that hard.
Hey Tim, if you drive across the bridge and then turn around and go back across the bridge several times, you wouldn't have to worry about waitng on people to get out of your way. When your taunting people they don't like that, so why get out of your way? You Slaytons neex to get over yourselves and not worry about the people swimming in the creek. There is always going to be someone in that creek or on that bridge, so quit stressing out about it.
wow

Warrensburg, MO

#15 Jun 16, 2012
This battle has been going on for decades!
LandOwner

Troy, MO

#16 Jun 19, 2012
In Missouri the landowners own all the streams and so you are not ALLOWED TO SWIM THERE OR ANYWHERE

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#18 Jun 19, 2012
In Missouri you do NOT own navigable waterways, as long you as you stay below the normal high water mark you are legal. Navigable waterway is the key here, if you can't float a boat down it you can't legally be on it. The issue on M highway is simply because people won't stay off the driveway part of the bridge and won't stay parked on the public side of the bridge. If people would have respect for landowners and vehicles passing through there would be no issues there. However, people don't have respect for anyone and they put grills in the middle of the PUBLIC road bridge. Would you put a grill in the middle of the Current River bridge? Would you let your children run in front of vehicles on any other county road? The county maintains that bridge and the gravel going to it. The yellow lines are painted on the bridge to show people where they are NOT allowed to be, anywhere else is fine except on the gravel where all the trees are painted purple and there are no trespassing signs everywhere! If you can get on here you can obviously read even if you don't know what purple paint means!
dumb

United States

#19 Jun 19, 2012
The bridge belongs to the state. Not the land owners. And 60 foot on each side of the river belongs to the state. It is and always will be public property. Just that most locals don't know the law. And the land owners have just enough pull to make it annoying for locals swimming there.
Joe

Doniphan, MO

#20 Jun 19, 2012
dumb wrote:
The bridge belongs to the state. Not the land owners. And 60 foot on each side of the river belongs to the state. It is and always will be public property. Just that most locals don't know the law. And the land owners have just enough pull to make it annoying for locals swimming there.
The bridge is public property put the 60 ft. is bs go ask any lawyer. Better yet go to Judge bloodworth's cabin or anyone else and measure back 60 ft from the river and set up camp.
dumb

United States

#21 Jun 20, 2012
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>The bridge is public property put the 60 ft. is bs go ask any lawyer. Better yet go to Judge bloodworth's cabin or anyone else and measure back 60 ft from the river and set up camp.
I work for the state park service. As a land manager.What would I know anyway...

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#22 Jun 20, 2012
The bridge is considered public property, but the county only paid for half of that bridge to be built. The public property ends at the gravel because the public road dead ends there. The public land in the state of Missouri on all navigable streams stops at the normal high water mark which is below the level of the bridge top. Landowners own up to the high water mark which is why you will find fences that go right down the bank of Current River. Blocking the bridge or the road leading to it is no different than blocking any other county road. Littering laws also don't change because there isn't a dumpster handy.
Noooope

Doniphan, MO

#23 Jun 20, 2012
Hopefools wrote:
<quoted text> Hey Tim, if you drive across the bridge and then turn around and go back across the bridge several times, you wouldn't have to worry about waitng on people to get out of your way. When your taunting people they don't like that, so why get out of your way? You Slaytons neex to get over yourselves and not worry about the people swimming in the creek. There is always going to be someone in that creek or on that bridge, so quit stressing out about it.
Not Tim Slayton, not even close! However, if Tim wants to drive back and forth across the bridge all day every day, it doesn't matter...it is a roadway for vehicles, not for people to be standing on. You should get out of his way because it is a bridge for vehicles, not your front porch! If everyone was in the creek along with all of their crap then there wouldn't be a problem, but people like you can't follow simple laws like no parking and no standing on the bridge between the yellow lines. All those that drive over the bridge wouldn't stress about it if you would actually show some common sense and move when you hear/see a vehicle coming and have your stuff out of the way. Not that hard people.
Noooope

Doniphan, MO

#24 Jun 20, 2012
dumb wrote:
The bridge belongs to the state. Not the land owners. And 60 foot on each side of the river belongs to the state. It is and always will be public property. Just that most locals don't know the law. And the land owners have just enough pull to make it annoying for locals swimming there.
If the property is owned by the state that doesn't make it public property, that means it is state property and they set the laws/regulations for it. The laws for that bridge and area are clearly posted for the public to see, yet they ignore those laws and get mad when others need to actually use that property for its legal and intended use.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Doniphan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
teachers 36 min Geez 13
jody wilson (Sep '13) 7 hr Smh 21
fire (Dec '09) 8 hr coverup 19
doug smith chocking a 15 year old and not going... (Aug '10) 11 hr James 44
Doniphan Cops (Aug '12) 17 hr businessas usual 84
Cops at Patsys (Jan '12) 17 hr enablers 13
abusive cops (Sep '09) 17 hr enablers 14

Doniphan Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Doniphan Mortgages