One of the interesting talking points of opponents of the removal of the Estabrook Dam, Grafton Dam, and Limekiln Dam on the Milwaukee River is that, after dam removal, large mudflats will be left behind. These large unsightly stretches of clay and silt will then become homes for weeds, thus spoiling their scenic view of the river.
This is a true statement, but only in the short run. In order to find out why, let us examine what a mudflat is, and how it is formed.
Rivers are great earthmovers and builders. Over vast amounts of time, they erode outside bends and deposit silt and particulates on inside bends. These initially form flats of sediment or rock. In the Midwest, these inside bends are mostly composed of silt, sand, dissolved clay and tiny wood debris. This inherent character of rivers is why they bend and meander in their channels, always eroding earth and depositing it in new places such as inside bends and estuary regions. One look at a map or trip to a river will prove this to be true. As time passes, these inside bends grow larger and larger, beginning as mud flats and ending up as land that people build homes upon. First grasses and hearty plants (weeds to some) grow upon the flats. Then small shrubs and trees take hold. Finally, the former flat becomes part of the shore structure and may be indistinguishable from the surrounding woods.
All these building, moving, and eroding processes are natural, so why the fuss over a natural riparian structure? Here we find the irony. Because, simply put, it is man’s interference with rivers by slowing the water flow with dams and creating impoundments, and channelizing the river with artificial bank structure that impedes the river from its earth moving, its ability to push the silt downstream, form new channels, and build new river banks. Thus, the actual composition of the bottom of the river changes from gravel, boulders, silt, mud, and sand, to primarily long flat bars of silt. When water levels are lowered, these become mudflats. Anyone who lives in a tidal basin on the ocean knows this process well, albeit in a natural way.
Flow rates and gradient also play a part. Faster flow moves the sediment, while slow deep areas of a river (like an impoundment) allow the sediment to fall to the bottom and collect.
So it is ironic in a sense that the very dams and resulting impoundments that they create are primarily responsible for the formation of these mudflats that seem to be the bane of dam proponents.
There is, obviously, one missing factor here, and that is time. We measure time in days, years, and generations. Nature measures time differently. Given a long enough time, all mudflats become banks and islands. Walking in a river will prove this. Where did that island come from? Was it always there? Chances are it started as a small gravel and silt deposit forming what is known as a ‘braid.’ Over time it continued to build as the river, flowing around it, deposited more and more silt, mud, gravel, and particulate at its downstream end. Then birds nested on it and brought undigested seeds. Nuts and seedpods washed down and took root as well. Then trees began to grow.
We can see, in a shortened time, how mudflats become land. The North Avenue Dam removal created an enormous set of flats on both upstream banks. The river, which was formerly slow, deep and very wide here, shrank to less than half its width. Where did the flats go…?
The answer is that you are walking on them. At present, the land reclaimed from the impoundment all the way up to Hubbard Park in Shorewood is a jumble of brush, shrubs, grasses, and small trees, but in another twenty years, if we don’t mess with it, that area will return to nature completely, and provide an aesthetic view. We can and have aided that process by securing the former flats with bank stabilization, and planting native plants.
So, dam removal opponents, in a nutshell, that is what mudflats are. They are natural, and in time, will morph and grow into something beautiful. They are your mudflats: created in this instance by the dams themselves.
Showing posts with label Estabrook dam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Estabrook dam. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Misinformation continues to flow over the Estabrook Dam
Below is an excerpt from an article by Joe Lanane, Daily Reporter, and following that are some comments I have to get off my chest.
Glen Goebel, director of the Milwaukee River Preservation Association, said the Estabrook Dam was originally built as a flood deterrent. If the dam was permanently removed, he said, flood spillover could go as far as one mile out from the river’s banks — enough to potentially reach Glendale City Hall.
“It would do that worse nowadays than it would back then because it was mostly farmland back then,” Goebel said. “It was a flood-control project that we really still need in place.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It still amazes me that this fundamental falsehood remains as an accepted truth to many of the Milwaukee County Supervisors, as propagandized by Supervisor Lipscomb, who is hardly partial on the issue, and has an inside seat and corresponding voice on the county board, or Mr. Goebel, president of a pro-dam lobby group, who's wild and scientifically baffling claims as to the positive and negative aspects of dams and removal have been a rather sad commentary on the ability of special interest groups to lobby regardless of the truth of the facts they espouse.
The Estabrook Dam was the final piece in a flood control project. It, by itself, offers little or no flood control at all, especially to the area of Glendale noted by Mr. Goebels, which is UPSTREAM from the dam. The flood control project consisted of driving a straight channel through a series of S-curves in Lincoln park in order to speed the river, and lessen ice buildup on the outside bends in the river, which in spring thaw, created ice-jams and caused localized flooding. The dam was designed as a water-height regulator to control the flow and height of the river upstream. How a dam is supposed to prevent flooding upstream of its location just baffles me. By slowing the water flow and backing up the river in a flood, the dam could conceivably aid in flood prevention downstream, however, that entire area is already a flood plain, and homes and businesses are built high on the river banks. In addition, the design of the Estabrook Dam negates even that possible flood control, as in a heavy rain event the entire dam is submerged, and the river runs over and around it.
What the dam, very ironically does, is increase the flooding potential in a sudden rain event in the impoundment area bordered by the dam itself and roughly Bender Rd. By backing up the river, the dam decreases the flow rate and throughput ability of the river in cubic feet per second, to evacuate the channel and move downstream. So it is sad that this falsehood, maintained by the Milwaukee River Preservation Association (read 'Dam preservation'), and Mr. Lipscomb, actually negatively affects the very home-owners that are being represented as advocating for dam preservation in part due to concerns about flooding.
And yet the Milwaukee County Board, which is literally approaching a financial meltdown, and losing the respect of county taxpayers, is on the brink of recommending and funding the repair of the Estabrook dam based in part, on false and unscientific information which has been publicly refuted by both engineers from The Wisconsin DNR, the Milwaukee Riverkeeper, the River Alliance, and other organizations and bodies that actually have some experience with rivers and dams.
Your tax dollars down the drain, fellow citizens.
At least the county board should consider and debate this important infrastructure issue with all of the FACTS before them, and not popularly accepted myths. Kudos to Supervisor Broderick, who, seemingly a lone voice of reason, has tried to steer the board's decision towards a more open public forum. Funny, but I seem to remember many letters written, facts laid out, and testimony given last year, which somehow got lost or misplaced in the minds of the County Supervisors or masked over by the endless fog of miss-information.
Claiming that the Estabrook Dam prevents flooding in Glendale is like a scene out of 'The Music Man.' It would be funny if it was not our own county board that was buying it, and all of us poor schlubs that will be paying for the decision with tax dollars and bonds that we can ill-afford.
At absolute least, please be honest about why the dam is to be saved. To keep the still-water impoundment upstream of the dam intact so that power-boating can occur and docks can be maintained. All at the expense of the river, water quality, fish, wildlife, and yes... your wallet.
The march of folly continues on...
Glen Goebel, director of the Milwaukee River Preservation Association, said the Estabrook Dam was originally built as a flood deterrent. If the dam was permanently removed, he said, flood spillover could go as far as one mile out from the river’s banks — enough to potentially reach Glendale City Hall.
“It would do that worse nowadays than it would back then because it was mostly farmland back then,” Goebel said. “It was a flood-control project that we really still need in place.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It still amazes me that this fundamental falsehood remains as an accepted truth to many of the Milwaukee County Supervisors, as propagandized by Supervisor Lipscomb, who is hardly partial on the issue, and has an inside seat and corresponding voice on the county board, or Mr. Goebel, president of a pro-dam lobby group, who's wild and scientifically baffling claims as to the positive and negative aspects of dams and removal have been a rather sad commentary on the ability of special interest groups to lobby regardless of the truth of the facts they espouse.
The Estabrook Dam was the final piece in a flood control project. It, by itself, offers little or no flood control at all, especially to the area of Glendale noted by Mr. Goebels, which is UPSTREAM from the dam. The flood control project consisted of driving a straight channel through a series of S-curves in Lincoln park in order to speed the river, and lessen ice buildup on the outside bends in the river, which in spring thaw, created ice-jams and caused localized flooding. The dam was designed as a water-height regulator to control the flow and height of the river upstream. How a dam is supposed to prevent flooding upstream of its location just baffles me. By slowing the water flow and backing up the river in a flood, the dam could conceivably aid in flood prevention downstream, however, that entire area is already a flood plain, and homes and businesses are built high on the river banks. In addition, the design of the Estabrook Dam negates even that possible flood control, as in a heavy rain event the entire dam is submerged, and the river runs over and around it.
What the dam, very ironically does, is increase the flooding potential in a sudden rain event in the impoundment area bordered by the dam itself and roughly Bender Rd. By backing up the river, the dam decreases the flow rate and throughput ability of the river in cubic feet per second, to evacuate the channel and move downstream. So it is sad that this falsehood, maintained by the Milwaukee River Preservation Association (read 'Dam preservation'), and Mr. Lipscomb, actually negatively affects the very home-owners that are being represented as advocating for dam preservation in part due to concerns about flooding.
And yet the Milwaukee County Board, which is literally approaching a financial meltdown, and losing the respect of county taxpayers, is on the brink of recommending and funding the repair of the Estabrook dam based in part, on false and unscientific information which has been publicly refuted by both engineers from The Wisconsin DNR, the Milwaukee Riverkeeper, the River Alliance, and other organizations and bodies that actually have some experience with rivers and dams.
Your tax dollars down the drain, fellow citizens.
At least the county board should consider and debate this important infrastructure issue with all of the FACTS before them, and not popularly accepted myths. Kudos to Supervisor Broderick, who, seemingly a lone voice of reason, has tried to steer the board's decision towards a more open public forum. Funny, but I seem to remember many letters written, facts laid out, and testimony given last year, which somehow got lost or misplaced in the minds of the County Supervisors or masked over by the endless fog of miss-information.
Claiming that the Estabrook Dam prevents flooding in Glendale is like a scene out of 'The Music Man.' It would be funny if it was not our own county board that was buying it, and all of us poor schlubs that will be paying for the decision with tax dollars and bonds that we can ill-afford.
At absolute least, please be honest about why the dam is to be saved. To keep the still-water impoundment upstream of the dam intact so that power-boating can occur and docks can be maintained. All at the expense of the river, water quality, fish, wildlife, and yes... your wallet.
The march of folly continues on...
Monday, November 30, 2009
More Estabrook Dam Nonsense
More Estabrook Dam Nonsense
We just are not that bright. Here in Milwaukee County our board of supervisors passed a budget for 2010 including a bonded allocation for 2.1 million dollars to repair the Estabrook Dam on the Milwaukee River. Bonded so that our children can pay for our stupidity.
They did not debate the issue, nor did they fully weigh the county’s own workgroup report. They just included it in a budget. Sneaky!
County Executive Walker vetoed the amendment, but was over-ridden. He wrote “The future of the Estabrook dam is a difficult policy decision that the County Board will have to address. This is a decision that should be made through an appropriate process of public hearings and committee discussion and not through an amendment adopted at a late-night budget meeting”
Good for him.
Of course, the county’s own workgroup estimated repairs as costing between 7.7 and 12 million. What the 2 million is being allocated for is a mystery. Band-aids? Discount Dam Repair Inc.?
It seems as though the County Board is either unwilling to actually weigh the issues and make an informed decision, or is running from the issue.
Hydroelectric study, $5000.00 to repair a stoplog structure, and now an allocation of money that is badly needed elsewhere in the county to address needed infrastructure maintenance. Workers are losing their jobs. Positions are being cut. Our parks are falling apart. We are constantly being told, “There is no money.”
Yet the County Board can waste badly needed dollars on only partial solutions. Dollars that if actually used, may be wasted if insufficient to address the DNR orders for repair and upgrade.
All so that we can keep our historic recreational dam, and the silty impoundment it creates.
We are just not that bright…
We just are not that bright. Here in Milwaukee County our board of supervisors passed a budget for 2010 including a bonded allocation for 2.1 million dollars to repair the Estabrook Dam on the Milwaukee River. Bonded so that our children can pay for our stupidity.
They did not debate the issue, nor did they fully weigh the county’s own workgroup report. They just included it in a budget. Sneaky!
County Executive Walker vetoed the amendment, but was over-ridden. He wrote “The future of the Estabrook dam is a difficult policy decision that the County Board will have to address. This is a decision that should be made through an appropriate process of public hearings and committee discussion and not through an amendment adopted at a late-night budget meeting”
Good for him.
Of course, the county’s own workgroup estimated repairs as costing between 7.7 and 12 million. What the 2 million is being allocated for is a mystery. Band-aids? Discount Dam Repair Inc.?
It seems as though the County Board is either unwilling to actually weigh the issues and make an informed decision, or is running from the issue.
Hydroelectric study, $5000.00 to repair a stoplog structure, and now an allocation of money that is badly needed elsewhere in the county to address needed infrastructure maintenance. Workers are losing their jobs. Positions are being cut. Our parks are falling apart. We are constantly being told, “There is no money.”
Yet the County Board can waste badly needed dollars on only partial solutions. Dollars that if actually used, may be wasted if insufficient to address the DNR orders for repair and upgrade.
All so that we can keep our historic recreational dam, and the silty impoundment it creates.
We are just not that bright…
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Estabrook Dam Repair or Abandon Order issued
One small step for man, one significant leap forward in the fight for clean waters and fish. To newer readers, I and others have been personally involved in pushing for dam removal.
Estabrook Dam deadline set
State orders Milwaukee County to fix or abandon structure
After years of neglected maintenance, state officials have ordered Milwaukee County to repair or abandon the ailing Estabrook Dam.
The Department of Natural Resources ordered the county on Tuesday to fix or tear down the aging structure on the Milwaukee River.
The DNR gave the county a deadline of Oct. 1, 2010, to hire an engineering consultant to provide information about whether the dam can be fixed or rebuilt.
The DNR also told the financially troubled county it has until Jan. 28, 2011, to make a final decision.
The DNR found numerous deficiencies during inspections in 1994 and 2004, and over time, an ever-growing pile of debris and garbage has pressed against the structure and threatened its integrity.
Some work and repairs have been made over the years. This summer, wooden timbers on one area of the structure were replaced with the help of an anonymous donation.
But dam safety experts at the DNR have concluded that the work to date has been inadequate.
Repairs could cost as much as $12 million, according to an estimate by a working group of county officials. The group estimated the cost of tearing down the structure at about $2 million.
County Supervisor Theo Lipscomb, whose district includes the river upstream of the dam, wants to see the dam repaired.
He said the cost of repairs could be far cheaper - about $2.4 million. One reason for the cheaper option: Repairs would be made so that water levels in the reservoir behind the dam would be dropped in the winter so ice doesn't press against the structure.
But DNR officials said all dams that need to be repaired in Wisconsin are required to meet standards to withstand the weight of ice.
Still, Lipscomb said that he is troubled by the years of county neglect, which could mean the loss of the 100-acre impoundment that's been a feature of the river for more than 70 years.
"I think it's irresponsible," Lipscomb said.
County Parks Director Sue Black did not return phone calls on Wednesday asking for comment.
The dam lies on the northern end of Estabrook Park and was built in the 1930s. A complicating factor is that river sediments above the dam are contaminated with industrial pollutants known as polychlorinated biphenyls.
Environmentalists and conservationists have pushed for removal, saying it would add another free-running stretch to the river. They point to the North Avenue Dam, which was removed in 1997. Water quality and habitat have greatly improved since then.
But residents above the dam want to see it remain intact, arguing the loss of boating and the lake-like character of the river would reduce property values.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
A picture is worth a thousand words
A picture is worth a thousand words, and certainly more than a few foul ones...
During the public debate over the Estabrook Dam, one pro-dam supporter got in the face of a friend of mine, and repeatedly screamed "You can't float a boat in that part of the river! (downstream from the Estabrook Dam)" while turning red in the face. He also stated this 'fact' at the March public meeting, and if I am not mistaken, was the one person who had to cautioned when I got up to speak.
Well... here is a toast to that water that nobody can canoe or kayak in. Picture taken in Early June 2009, downstream from Capitol Drive in the Milwaukee River. Flow rates about typical, @ 300-400 cfs.
They sure look like boats to me. Recreational kayaks to be specific.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
The Lipscomb memorial hydroelectric boondoggle dam
The hydo-power pink elephant
The latest on the Estabrook dam issue. Milwaukee County Supervisor Lipscomb introduced a proposal to repair the stoplog structure on the spillway section of the dam, which was passed unanimously by the PEE committee and now moves on to the entire county board. The aim is that the stoplog repair will allow the filling of the impoundment behind the dam thus providing the desired water level for boating. The WDNR has stated that the dam needs much more attention and repair than simply replacing the missing stoplog structures. They will likely issue an order to prevent filling of the impoundment unless all ordered repairs are completed.
The supervisors will also vote on whether to put out an RFP for debris removal.
The other amendment attached to the $5,000.00 stoplog repair calls for a study of the potential of the dam being modified or replaced to generate hydroelectric power.
Who can spot the pink elephant?
The Milwaukee River is a spate river defined by a spring flow at its headwaters, and a huge watershed that drains 882 square miles in 6 counties. It is dominated by rainfall and snowmelt runoff. It fluctuates wildly between 100 cfs (cubic feet per second) in low summer flows, to over 9,000 cfs in flood events. Its flow often increases by ten to twenty times after a significant rainfall.
Rivers of this character are poor candidates for hydroelectric generation. The wildly fluctuating flows would leave the generator dry at low flow, and overwhelm it after rainfall. The way man has historically tried to tame rivers of this sort is to build an impoundment behind the dam to build up the supply of water so that more constant flow can be maintained. The impoundments are not small such as the 100 acre Estabrook impoundment, but must be larger and deeper in order to be cost effective. The impoundment would most likely have to be increased in size, possibly necessitating the relocation of those very residents calling for the dam’s preservation.
In addition, a larger deeper impoundment is going backwards in environmental terms. Any hydroelectric generation would have to pass strict federal standards, and undergo environmental impact studies, which it never would.
I think a study is actually a good idea if conducted properly. It would lay to rest any debate concerning feasibility of hydroelectric generation for good.
Mr. Lipscomb is grasping at any straw he can to get his way in this very personal fight for him. His Maternal grandfather operated the dam for a period.
What’s next… painting the dam green in order to pass it off as a boon to the environment?
A fresh coat of paint and a sign stating "Estabrook Eco-dam" should solve all the issues...
The latest on the Estabrook dam issue. Milwaukee County Supervisor Lipscomb introduced a proposal to repair the stoplog structure on the spillway section of the dam, which was passed unanimously by the PEE committee and now moves on to the entire county board. The aim is that the stoplog repair will allow the filling of the impoundment behind the dam thus providing the desired water level for boating. The WDNR has stated that the dam needs much more attention and repair than simply replacing the missing stoplog structures. They will likely issue an order to prevent filling of the impoundment unless all ordered repairs are completed.
The supervisors will also vote on whether to put out an RFP for debris removal.
The other amendment attached to the $5,000.00 stoplog repair calls for a study of the potential of the dam being modified or replaced to generate hydroelectric power.
Who can spot the pink elephant?
The Milwaukee River is a spate river defined by a spring flow at its headwaters, and a huge watershed that drains 882 square miles in 6 counties. It is dominated by rainfall and snowmelt runoff. It fluctuates wildly between 100 cfs (cubic feet per second) in low summer flows, to over 9,000 cfs in flood events. Its flow often increases by ten to twenty times after a significant rainfall.
Rivers of this character are poor candidates for hydroelectric generation. The wildly fluctuating flows would leave the generator dry at low flow, and overwhelm it after rainfall. The way man has historically tried to tame rivers of this sort is to build an impoundment behind the dam to build up the supply of water so that more constant flow can be maintained. The impoundments are not small such as the 100 acre Estabrook impoundment, but must be larger and deeper in order to be cost effective. The impoundment would most likely have to be increased in size, possibly necessitating the relocation of those very residents calling for the dam’s preservation.
In addition, a larger deeper impoundment is going backwards in environmental terms. Any hydroelectric generation would have to pass strict federal standards, and undergo environmental impact studies, which it never would.
I think a study is actually a good idea if conducted properly. It would lay to rest any debate concerning feasibility of hydroelectric generation for good.
Mr. Lipscomb is grasping at any straw he can to get his way in this very personal fight for him. His Maternal grandfather operated the dam for a period.
What’s next… painting the dam green in order to pass it off as a boon to the environment?
A fresh coat of paint and a sign stating "Estabrook Eco-dam" should solve all the issues...
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Estbrook Dam Hearing
Last evening myself and around a hundred other citizens attended the informational public hearing on the issue of repair or removal of the Estabrook Dam held by the Milwaukee County Supervisors board on Parks, Energy, and the Environment.
It is always good to attend these hearings, whether one is interested in obtaining more information, or just to make one's voice heard.
The county board certainly received many impassioned opinions from both sides of the issue. Many citizens exercised their right to speak during the public comment section of the meeting. Comments were limited to two minutes each.
South East Wisconsin Trout Unlimited, the Milwaukee Riverkeeper, the River Alliance, and yours truly were among those advocating for dam removal.
The meeting did get a bit tense, and as I got up to speak, someone had to be cautioned by deputies, but all in all, it was a peaceful and very informative meeting.
Here is the short speech I presented to the County Supervisors:
I came here tonight as an avid supporter for removal of the Estabrook dam.
I spend countless hours every year on this river fishing, boating, hiking, photographing, exploring, and writing about this wonderful resource. From its trout stream headwaters, all the way to its estuary, very few people know this river as intimately as I do.
Thus, I came with the purpose of presenting the ecological and environmental reasons why we would all benefit from the dam’s removal, much as we previously benefited from the removal of the North Avenue dam when we saw several miles of river emerge from suffocation, and spring back to life.
But… Then, the other day, I went and sat by this dam for an hour, reread your work-group report and all the historical documents, and realized the larger issue before us.
This dam is a boondoggle, pure and simple.
It does nothing to prevent flooding, instead it actually increases flooding potential for those living upriver.
It degrades water quality, prevents fish migration, and poses hazards to those living and recreating downstream. Its sole purpose is to create an impoundment upstream so that a very vocal few can continue to recreate in an historic still-water environment.
Meanwhile the dam is falling apart, and we are now faced with the choice of spending millions of dollars for repairs and ongoing maintenance costs, or to simply remove the dam.
Let’s do the right thing for the 950,000 taxpayers and voters of Milwaukee County that are slowly becoming aware of this issue. This is our chance to remove the dam, and get out from under the perpetual financial and physical liability it places on us, and as an added benefit, help restore our river to something we and future generations can be truly proud of. Thank you.
Erik Helm, Shorewood, WI
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
The river will find a way...
A quote sent to me by a friend of our rivers...
"Men may dam it and say that they have made a lake, but it will still be a river. It will keep its nature and bide its time, like a caged animal alert for the slightest opening. In Time, it will have its way; the dam, like the ancient cliffs, will be carried away piecemeal in the currents."
- Wendell Berry
The photo is of the dam on the Milwaukee River at Estabrook park. The debris buildup and ice jam can be seen beyond the concrete dragon's teeth.
An addition:
With the Woolen Mills dam removal in West Bend on the Milwaukee River a similar impoundment was removed and the river came back to life. Read a testament here http://www.wsn.org/shorelands/Milriver.html
This is what could await us in the stretch from Estabrook to Kletzch Park.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
What am I missing here?
I am confused...
The homeowners along the stretch of river upstream of the dam at Estabrook park on the Milwaukee river have consistently made the argument that the removal of the dam at North Avenue ruined the river, and that the resulting muddy and shallow creek destroyed recreation and ability to paddle.
Here is an excerpt from a letter placed on the Riverotter blog found here. (A good blog with a civil discussion)
From a concerned citizen;
"...Prior to moving here, I lived on/near the Milwaukee River north of the North Avenue Dam.
There, too, as I was working on my property, I would hear the crew boats coming down the river. Shorewood had built a boat house for them and they practiced every Saturday. Then one day the river was gone. The dam had been removed (it seemed overnight and with no notice) and the mighty river and the community it supported became a muddy ugly stream. To this day it is still a diminished river, unapproachable, and abandoned..."
I must be missing something here...
Photos by Erik Helm of the section of river above the North Avenue dam after its removal.
And finally, of a free flowing river in Idaho, fresh from the Rocky Mountains... or is it the Milwaukee?
Notice the similar structures of the water flow and the clarity of the water itself? The fall picture was taken in a low water flow period. Looks like fun boating water to me. Riffles and pools, boulders and spits...all on the Milwaukee River.
I remember the Milwaukee River before the dam removal, and this is a hundred percent improvement. The only activity that is curtailed in this section of the river is the consistent ability to paddle a canoe or a kayak UPSTREAM. Paddling downstream is not a problem as long as flows are above 175 cubic feet per second, which they are in all but low late summer flows. Even then, one can steer their canoe or boat as I do to avoid the shallow riffles, like I would do in any free-flowing river. River level fluctuation is a normal condition. The silty and slow flowing water I remember before the dam was removed is not.
Yes, the river as the citizen remembers it has changed... but for the better.
It is neither "Unapproachable", nor "Abandoned" and in this writers opinion, not a "Muddy ugly stream." I should know, I have fished, hiked, and boated wild rivers in Wisconsin, Michigan, Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. When I come home from my adventures, the Milwaukee River is awaiting me, and this beautiful stretch beckons with its abundant and restored beauty. You can find me there in summer evenings. Come say "Hi."
And more...
This from a concerned homeowner quoted in the March 10 article by Lee Bergquist in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel...
"If the dam is torn down, "we won't have a Milwaukee River," said Bob Orvis of Glendale, "we will have a Milwaukee stream."
But, the area in question above the dam is not a river now. Instead, it is an impoundment. Does no one get this? Rivers flow. This is what defines them. Rivers speak. The moving water trickles, murmurs, and roars. Impoundments are silent.
I like a good debate, and respect other opinions. But I sure wish those opinions would occasionally be based on facts, not myopic vision. Go see the whole river. From its headwaters as trout streams, to the estuary.
The homeowners along the stretch of river upstream of the dam at Estabrook park on the Milwaukee river have consistently made the argument that the removal of the dam at North Avenue ruined the river, and that the resulting muddy and shallow creek destroyed recreation and ability to paddle.
Here is an excerpt from a letter placed on the Riverotter blog found here. (A good blog with a civil discussion)
From a concerned citizen;
"...Prior to moving here, I lived on/near the Milwaukee River north of the North Avenue Dam.
There, too, as I was working on my property, I would hear the crew boats coming down the river. Shorewood had built a boat house for them and they practiced every Saturday. Then one day the river was gone. The dam had been removed (it seemed overnight and with no notice) and the mighty river and the community it supported became a muddy ugly stream. To this day it is still a diminished river, unapproachable, and abandoned..."
I must be missing something here...
Photos by Erik Helm of the section of river above the North Avenue dam after its removal.
And finally, of a free flowing river in Idaho, fresh from the Rocky Mountains... or is it the Milwaukee?
Notice the similar structures of the water flow and the clarity of the water itself? The fall picture was taken in a low water flow period. Looks like fun boating water to me. Riffles and pools, boulders and spits...all on the Milwaukee River.
I remember the Milwaukee River before the dam removal, and this is a hundred percent improvement. The only activity that is curtailed in this section of the river is the consistent ability to paddle a canoe or a kayak UPSTREAM. Paddling downstream is not a problem as long as flows are above 175 cubic feet per second, which they are in all but low late summer flows. Even then, one can steer their canoe or boat as I do to avoid the shallow riffles, like I would do in any free-flowing river. River level fluctuation is a normal condition. The silty and slow flowing water I remember before the dam was removed is not.
Yes, the river as the citizen remembers it has changed... but for the better.
It is neither "Unapproachable", nor "Abandoned" and in this writers opinion, not a "Muddy ugly stream." I should know, I have fished, hiked, and boated wild rivers in Wisconsin, Michigan, Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. When I come home from my adventures, the Milwaukee River is awaiting me, and this beautiful stretch beckons with its abundant and restored beauty. You can find me there in summer evenings. Come say "Hi."
And more...
This from a concerned homeowner quoted in the March 10 article by Lee Bergquist in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel...
"If the dam is torn down, "we won't have a Milwaukee River," said Bob Orvis of Glendale, "we will have a Milwaukee stream."
But, the area in question above the dam is not a river now. Instead, it is an impoundment. Does no one get this? Rivers flow. This is what defines them. Rivers speak. The moving water trickles, murmurs, and roars. Impoundments are silent.
I like a good debate, and respect other opinions. But I sure wish those opinions would occasionally be based on facts, not myopic vision. Go see the whole river. From its headwaters as trout streams, to the estuary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
