QC times on the possible flood

[Wags]

http://qctimes.com/news/opinio....html

[martinbs]

Just my opinion, but I believe that the Corp Of Engineers could do a much better job to prevent major flooding. No reason they could not have all the gates free flowing and dropped the river down to say 8' instead of the 12'-13' they have been keeping it at in our pool.

A 12' rise from snow up North would bring the river to 20' instead of 24' - 25'. Just plain stupid if you ask me. Huge difference between 20' and 25'. Every year it floods, they easily drop the pool a foot a day after crest with no problem. No reason they cannot have pool 19 at 8' right now.

River to be about 11' the next day or two and then back to 13' three days later. Someone has to explain to me where that water is coming from?

I think what we have here is just bad management of river level?

[xranger77]

Yeah, seems like 19 will be at or above flood stage, while the pool above and below will be at normal stage. What is the deal with that? It was like that the majority of last year, 15-17 (flood or above) until the late fall.

I think we had a total of 4 weeks out of 5 months that were 11-13 feet, and those were all random weeks.

I think our pool was dropped about 3 feet in just a day or so last month. But looks as it has maintained that same level since they dropped it. Still on the higher side of what it could be.

[Shoot]

You know that if they dropped the pool to 8' the spring spawn would suffer tremendously.

I was all excited about flood duty OT but the city came up with a different idea this year. We will see how it works out. They are talking about taking away any accrued time off for two months to minimize overtime.

BS, what about the guys/gals who had plans with their families, weddings, vacations and such. They are screwed because the city doesn't want to build a flood wall.

Politicians are crooked

[xranger77]

An 8' pool level wouldnt effect the spawn. Dont see how it would change anything at all. All the flooding occurs before the spawn anyway, water temps are in the 40's maybe low 50's when the water rises.

8' pool level here in 19 just means the little wing dams and sand bars are visible. There is still miles of water that is available.

[martinbs]

Now showing 18+' for pool 19 by next Tuesday. With the rain up North that will change in the next couple days.

If the idiots working for the Corps had even a small amount of intelligence, they would have dropped everything down ahead of the obvious water that would be coming from 70" of snow up North.

This is not rocket science. As previously stated, it is a huge difference between adding 7' - 12' of water to a 8ft pool than it is to a 11-13ft pool which is where they kept it all winter.

I quite honestly think some people at the Corps are just too dumb to keep their jobs using my tax dollars.

This high water is doing much more damage to habitat and bass populations on the river than a lower pool. Most of the grass is virtually gone from all the high water and the fishing has suffered as a result.

[xranger77]

Looks like a rise of 1' per day for the next week. Thats all the projection goes...so maybe we will hit 25' and destroy this whole year. Not to mention all the work that goes into attempting to protect the areas.

[martinbs]

Now only showing pool 19 to be at 16.5 instead of 18.5 which that 2' is good news for everyone. Keep your fingers crossed that we have a dry spring and the river may be good early this year.


Modified by martinbs at 9:17 PM 3/24/2011

[Wags]

Yeah lets hope, I did see they are closing the flood gate at 9th Ave boat ramp here in Clinton, we will see how long that is for.

[xranger77]

Yeah, that 16.5 isnt all that bad. I hope it stays around there and then drops. A dry spring would help a lot.

[Wags]

<table width="90%" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 align=center><tr><td>Quote, originally posted by martinbs &raquo;</td></tr><tr><td class="quote">Just my opinion, but I believe that the Corp Of Engineers could do a much better job to prevent major flooding. No reason they could not have all the gates free flowing and dropped the river down to say 8' instead of the 12'-13' they have been keeping it at in our pool.

A 12' rise from snow up North would bring the river to 20' instead of 24' - 25'. Just plain stupid if you ask me. Huge difference between 20' and 25'. Every year it floods, they easily drop the pool a foot a day after crest with no problem. No reason they cannot have pool 19 at 8' right now.

River to be about 11' the next day or two and then back to 13' three days later. Someone has to explain to me where that water is coming from?

I think what we have here is just bad management of river level?</td></tr></table>

I agree thinking they could be pro active on flood control, I seen this in QC times and thought I would share.
http://qctimes.com/news/local/....html

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/...loods/

[martinbs]

I guess if it is illegal then that explains it, but then why have I seen the gates full free flowing more than once every year. Why dont they just leave the gates down during high water if it makes no difference?

It is an absolute fact that opening the gates full will not prevent a flood as they state.

It is also an absolute fact that if you drop the river before the melt, the flood impact will be far less. Nobody with a brain in their head can argue against that and the articles do not address that question. They just state that opening the gates will not prevent flooding.

As previously stated and as the article states you cannot stop the melt and the water to raise and flood. If you drop the river 4ft then you get a 4ft lower crest from the melt. That is a difference of major flood in our pool of 21ft and record flood of 25ft with major damage.

It is also an absolute fact that the less you restrict the flow the faster water passes thru and the lower the water is. If you want to see proof of this I welcome anyone to come watch the water flow down my creek after a big rain and see what happens if my culverts get partially blocked.

I will believe my lying eyes before I believe the lying government idiots.

[martinbs]

One more case in point to disprove the argument that the dams do not effect flooding.

Why in 2008 when every pool North from the last dam on the river (#26) had a record crest or top two crest with the exception of #26 and St Louis which has no dams below it was 11' below their record along with every other gauge location below them?

Must be just a coinicidence?

Note that the record stage for all gauges below L & D 26 were all basically in 1993 when every pool above also had record levels. How did that all change from 1993 if the dams have no control?

[Wags]

I'm with you Bill, I'm no expert but what you have posted all makes sence to me