51����

People who do take to its water are met with advisories not to eat the fish. And long gone are the days when its freshwater mussels were collected and made into buttons, with populations of those and other bottom-dwelling species, such as crayfish, dwindling over the years.

That’s because the Big River cuts through the heart of Missouri’s Lead Belt, which once supported the globe’s most prolific concentration of lead mines — an industry that experts say has left parts of the region contaminated with heavy metals.

“This area provided a good chunk of the world’s lead production for many, many years, and we are still dealing with effects from that legacy,” said Eric Gramlich, a Missouri Department of Natural Resources official who helps manage restoration efforts in the area.

During an informational meeting Tuesday at Mineral Area College in Park Hills, Gramlich and other officials from the DNR, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and additional agencies gathered to talk with area residents about restoration goals for the waterway.

The DNR and USFWS are trying to determine how best to spend a pot of at least $24 million stemming from an environmental damage with the American Smelting and Refining Co., or Asarco.

Lead accumulated in sediments within and along 90 miles of the Big River has become a growing concern as floods have struck the area in recent years, remobilizing the contaminants as they’re swept up and redeposited — even threatening the Meramec River, where the Big River empties.

“It’s slowly moving downstream,” Gramlich said.

He used a picture of one of the area’s severely eroded riverbanks to vividly illustrate the issue.

“That thing is releasing tons of lead-contaminated material in the river each year,” Gramlich said.

Combating erosion to stop the downstream progression of contaminated sediments is a primary goal of the restoration projects discussed Tuesday.

While lead dominates the watershed’s pollution concerns, cadmium and zinc are other metals present in the river system. Past work has been done to cover large piles of mine tailings in the area that were key sources of the contaminants.

Officials believe that once the watershed’s rogue contaminants are immobilized, they may later be more fully remediated.

But to first reach that point, officials are looking at projects that would add trees and other vegetation to the river floodplain in an effort to anchor the soil. Alternative projects being evaluated would install logs or other material to stabilize the riverbanks and double as fish habitat during high river stages.

In some other areas, erosion is fueled by boreholes — small openings cut down into old mines. With those mines now defunct, some boreholes have been reclaimed by groundwater and now gush water. About 3,000 area boreholes have been filled in recent years, but many more remain scattered through the area.

Agency representatives are looking to partner with private landowners along the Big River to implement targeted projects — many of whom were in attendance Tuesday. Other collaborative efforts would focus on instituting practices on livestock pastures and other agricultural land in the area that cut down on erosion around riparian areas and tributaries.

“Land management causes erosion. Flooding is going to occur,” said Chris Kennedy, a Cape Girardeau-based fisheries regional supervisor for the Missouri Department of Conservation who attended the meeting. “We really need to start looking at our streams more in a community fashion.”

There is no sunset date for the agencies to spend the Asarco money, but Gramlich said he hoped to have some more formal restoration project proposals assembled within the next six months. Tuesday’s meeting was simply billed as the first of several to outline plans and possibilities.

“We want to get with the communities and find out what projects are out there and what ones fit,” Gramlich said.

In total, the restoration projects being considered will take some time to be completed.

“Some of these processes are going to take four, five, 10 years,” said Dave Mosby, an environmental contaminants specialist with USFWS, based in Columbia. “We probably won’t have that money spent for another 10, 15 years.”

Some area residents hope it’s worth the wait — expressing a desire for the Big River to, at last, become more of a recreational or even economic centerpiece for the area.

“We got nothing in this county,” said Joe Barton, a resident of the Frankclay area in western St. Francois County, and one of several camo-clad outdoor enthusiasts in attendance. “We need something in the center of this state that will help the local people out.”