Is there hope ?

[iiwhistlerii]

2 hours ago, lost a lure said:

I did not argue that the shipping wants lower flows or higher water. Those are your words. When are you going to realize that major corporations don't tell the truth about their profits? What happened to your argument about the water flows could not reach 10,400?

My argument is that flows cannot be sustained above what they were without dropping lake st. Lawrence.  Remember your whole iroquois dam argument?  Well the dam has been wide open all fall and Lake st. Lawrence just dropped 7 feet in 7 days under these flows.  You call that sustainable?  If they didnt absolutely prove my point for me idk what will explain it to you any better.  You wanted to see that in october?  Dont worry, most launches and docks are only a couple hundred feet from water there now.  Would have been fine.  Oh but none of that matters to you because you dont live on that portion of the river.  Your part is all that matters.  I'd love to see how your tune would change if u were a few miles northeast.

[GAMBLER]

20 minutes ago, iiwhistlerii said:

More could have been done?.  In early fall?  God forbid they drop flows so lake st. Lawrence can level out and the people who have been begging for flow reductions to let the water reach the launches again can get there boat out of the water or use thier docks.  God forbid they lower flows just enough so residents along the river on Lake St. Lawrence can remove thier boats for the river and access their own docks for a few days.  I get it.  F everybody but us.  Current conditions on lake st. Lawrence below  Pics from today.  1 week of high flows and it's almost to absolute minimum.  The lowest anybody I've talked to can ever remember seeing it.   They are only doing this now because they know they will have to drop flows for ice formation eventually but they've sacrificed another area for ours.  Say thank you.  It's an extreme measure we should be thankful for and river residents are already losing thier minds about it.  Good chance water will be too low to launch there clear into next spring, no ice fishing in the bays there this year as they are bone dry.  We arent the only ones suffering.  

 

 

People all around Lake Ontario have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years worth of erosion in one year, loss of businesses, loss of revenue from loss of business ect.  If the water is low on Lake St Lawrence and people had trouble getting their boats out or not being able to icefish bays its not detrimental.  I lost 2 months of the fishing season due to the docks being under water at my marina.  I am thankful that it was not worse.  It was not a big deal because it is miniscule compared to the damage others have suffered.  Down here on Edgemere Drive by my work, houses were filled with 2' of water in 2017.  This year, the water was coming over the berm built by the town and flooding those same homes again.  The storm / Sanitary sewer system on Edgemere Drive was flooding and they were pumping sewage into the lake.  The Brockport Yacht Club on Sandy Creek spend thousands of dollars to have a break wall raised up and a pump system put in.  The water came over the new break wall and flooded out the building again.  Low water on Lake St Lawrence is not the end of the world.  As long as municipalities are not affected, no one is flooding,  keep it low until you no longer can. 

[iiwhistlerii]

32 minutes ago, GAMBLER said:

People all around Lake Ontario have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years worth of erosion in one year, loss of businesses, loss of revenue from loss of business ect.  If the water is low on Lake St Lawrence and people had trouble getting their boats out or not being able to icefish bays its not detrimental.  I lost 2 months of the fishing season due to the docks being under water at my marina.  I am thankful that it was not worse.  It was not a big deal because it is miniscule compared to the damage others have suffered.  Down here on Edgemere Drive by my work, houses were filled with 2' of water in 2017.  This year, the water was coming over the berm built by the town and flooding those same homes again.  The storm / Sanitary sewer system on Edgemere Drive was flooding and they were pumping sewage into the lake.  The Brockport Yacht Club on Sandy Creek spend thousands of dollars to have a break wall raised up and a pump system put in.  The water came over the new break wall and flooded out the building again.  Low water on Lake St Lawrence is not the end of the world.  As long as municipalities are not affected, no one is flooding,  keep it low until you no longer can. 

Lets expand that to not just include us again.  People all around the great lakes have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years of erosion.  Over 10,000 people have been forced to evacuate there homes near montreal for months twice in the last 3 years.  Increased currents below the dam have caused severe erosion.  Businesses were forced to close along the fox river and green bay due to high water.  Marinas on the west end of lake Erie were unusable much of 2019.   Lighthouse cove on Lake st. Clair and St. Clair shores dealt with severe flooding repeatedly this summer due to the record high water levels that forced evacuations.  Look up some of those videos, water actually flowed through the streets like rivers during every storm surge.  The list is never ending and the stories from lake to lake all read the same.  Yes we are suffering, but we are not alone and I honestly dont believe we've even had it the worst.

Edited January 6, 2020 by iiwhistlerii

[GAMBLER]

15 minutes ago, iiwhistlerii said:

Lets expand that to not just include us again.  People all around the great lakes have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years of erosion.  Over 10,000 people have been forced to evacuate there homes near montreal for months twice in the last 3 years.  Increased currents below the dam have caused severe erosion.  Businesses were forced to close along the fox river and green bay due to high water.  Marinas on the west end of lake Erie were unusable much of 2019.   Lighthouse cove on Lake st. Clair and St. Clair shores dealt with severe flooding repeatedly this summer due to the record high water levels that forced evacuations.  Look up some of those videos, water actually flowed through the streets like rivers during every storm surge.  The list is never ending and the stories from lake to lake all read the same.  Yes we are suffering, but we are not alone and I honestly dont believe we've even had it the worst.

The other lakes are not controlled to the extent Lake O is.  I have customers all over the Great Lakes and have heard and seen photos of their stories.  My point is if Lake St Lawrence is low and people don't get to enjoy recreation, its not the end of the world.  I would take missing an entire boating season over having people losing homes, sewage pumped into the lake and people losing business. 

[lost a lure]

My argument is that flows cannot be sustained above what they were without dropping lake st. Lawrence.  Remember your whole iroquois dam argument?  Well the dam has been wide open all fall and Lake st. Lawrence just dropped 7 feet in 7 days under these flows.  You call that sustainable?  If they didnt absolutely prove my point for me idk what will explain it to you any better.  You wanted to see that in october?  Dont worry, most launches and docks are only a couple hundred feet from water there now.  Would have been fine.  Oh but none of that matters to you because you dont live on that portion of the river.  Your part is all that matters.  I'd love to see how your tune would change if u were a few miles northeast. 

 

 

As of 05:00 1/6/2020 Lake St. Lawrence is 11.42" below lwd down stream of the Iroquois Dam.  Sent from my SM-G950U using Lake Ontario United mobile app 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AAA]

8 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

Lets expand that to not just include us again.  People all around the great lakes have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years of erosion.  Over 10,000 people have been forced to evacuate there homes near montreal for months twice in the last 3 years.  Increased currents below the dam have caused severe erosion.  Businesses were forced to close along the fox river and green bay due to high water.  Marinas on the west end of lake Erie were unusable much of 2019.   Lighthouse cove on Lake st. Clair and St. Clair shores dealt with severe flooding repeatedly this summer due to the record high water levels that forced evacuations.  Look up some of those videos, water actually flowed through the streets like rivers during every storm surge.  The list is never ending and the stories from lake to lake all read the same.  Yes we are suffering, but we are not alone and I honestly dont believe we've even had it the worst.

There is no question that flooding has impacted lots of areas.  Most of the other examples given do not have the outflow controls LO has and their run off is more naturally controlled.  The point is more could and should have been done to proactively reduce the LO levels since there are outflow controls which make it possible.  85% percent of LO inflow comes from Lake Erie.  With the high water levels in all the other Great Lakes, LO levels should have been more aggressively reduced over the winter to make room for the inflow.  As far as the everyone has flooding issues argument, the point is why should LO bear the higher burden / impact?  Montreal was flooded by the Ottawa River while LO was under flood levels.  Plan 2014 as administered by the IJC resulted in unequal flood protection for those it served.  Rather then equally spread the flooding, LO outflow was reduced to keep it no more than the F level and in effect buffer the Ottawa River run off by holding back water in LO.  This added 1.1 feet to LO water level according to the video posted from the fluid engineer.  I don't understand how lack of recreational access can even be in the same sentence impact wise as flooding and erosion impacts.  The LO outflow level management will never make everyone happy, but it needs to be more fair and more proactive.

[Lucky13]

11 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

  F everybody but us. 

You have finally hit the nail on the head, this is the attitude of NYS Lake Ontario shoreline property owners, and especially boating fishermen and "professional" aquatic  Uber drivers, also known as charter captains!

[iiwhistlerii]

As of 05:00 1/6/2020 Lake St. Lawrence is 11.42" below lwd down stream of the Iroquois Dam.  Sent from my SM-G950U using Lake Ontario United mobile app  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

So lake Ontario and the upper st. Lawrence is at 246 feet and holding and Lake st. Lawrence has gone from 243 feet to 235 feet this week but u want me to believe the difference is only 11"??? Did lake Ontario drop 8 feet too?? Can you see chimney shoal out of the water in Ogdensburg??[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Lucky13]

10 hours ago, GAMBLER said:

People all around Lake Ontario have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years worth of erosion in one year, loss of businesses, loss of revenue from loss of business ect.  If the water is low on Lake St Lawrence and people had trouble getting their boats out or not being able to icefish bays its not detrimental.  I lost 2 months of the fishing season due to the docks being under water at my marina.  I am thankful that it was not worse.  It was not a big deal because it is miniscule compared to the damage others have suffered.  Down here on Edgemere Drive by my work, houses were filled with 2' of water in 2017.  This year, the water was coming over the berm built by the town and flooding those same homes again.  The storm / Sanitary sewer system on Edgemere Drive was flooding and they were pumping sewage into the lake.  The Brockport Yacht Club on Sandy Creek spend thousands of dollars to have a break wall raised up and a pump system put in.  The water came over the new break wall and flooded out the building again.  Low water on Lake St Lawrence is not the end of the world.  As long as municipalities are not affected, no one is flooding,  keep it low until you no longer can. 

The Edgemere Drive area storm and sanitary sewer system has been overtaxed by illicit sump pump connections from individual basements for years, and sewage has been  discharged to the land surface, the lake and the ponds on many occasions regardless of Lake level, virtually any rainstorm of over 1" will cause problems down there.  Edgemere Drive is a sandbar, part of the floodplain that likely will be underwater in less than 100 years just from glacial isostatic rebound, and those properties should have never been developed.  Much of the lakefront in Parma and west was originally just tent platforms that were then gradually built up to houses.  Before retirement, I would routinely get called out to investigate odors, and we would find another straight pipe just discharging to the lake.  When you build a house or put a dock on the floodplain, once in a while the floodplain will be on the house or dock.

[Missdemeanor]

Completely unnecessary.. Very "Professional" of you... Of course I'm not surprised....

You have finally hit the nail on the head, this is the attitude of NYS Lake Ontario shoreline property owners, and especially boating fishermen and "professional" aquatic  Uber drivers, also known as charter captains!

 

Sent from my VS996 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

 

 

 

[AAA]

1 hour ago, Lucky13 said:

You have finally hit the nail on the head, this is the attitude of NYS Lake Ontario shoreline property owners, and especially boating fishermen and "professional" aquatic  Uber drivers, also known as charter captains!

So asking for equal treatment is F everyone else?  LO water levels were allowed to flood another 1.1 feet higher to protect Montreal from Ottawa River flooding.  Asking that the flooding burden be at least shared equally between Montreal and LO is a selfish prospective?  Yet protect Montreal at all costs for Ottawa River flooding is the fair thing to do?  Seems you are the one with a skewed perspective.

[iiwhistlerii]

So asking for equal treatment is F everyone else?  LO water levels were allowed to flood another 1.1 feet higher to protect Montreal from Ottawa River flooding.  Asking that the flooding burden be at least shared equally between Montreal and LO is a selfish prospective?  Yet protect Montreal at all costs for Ottawa River flooding is the fair thing to do?  Seems you are the one with a skewed perspective.

Over 10 thousand were already evacuated from thier homes during those 2 month time period. Dams were at risk of failing where things could have gotten way worse real quick. Levys did fail, it was a true state of emergency and not just water in the basement. To gain an inch on our end each week we would have had to bury them another food deeper and probably evacuate thousands more. Water flowed down neighborhood streets already, the costs of flooding them further would have probably been astronomical. But your right, we'd be 16 inches or so lower right now, theyd be rebuilding and maybe 2020 wouldnt look like another repeat, but how could anybody have known that in 2017 when it all started. That's a call I wouldnt want to have to make.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[iiwhistlerii]

Over 10 thousand were already evacuated from thier homes during those 2 month time period. Dams were at risk of failing where things could have gotten way worse real quick. Levys did fail, it was a true state of emergency and not just water in the basement. To gain an inch on our end each week we would have had to bury them another food deeper and probably evacuate thousands more. Water flowed down neighborhood streets already, the costs of flooding them further would have probably been astronomical. But your right, we'd be 16 inches or so lower right now, theyd be rebuilding and maybe 2020 wouldnt look like another repeat, but how could anybody have known that in 2017 when it all started. That's a call I wouldnt want to have to make.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

My point is if you look at it from all angles I honestly feel like it's been pretty equal. People from lake Ontario argue nature wouldnt have saved them if the dams werent there. They forget that same argument applies here. Have you ever looked at the lake ontario levels from before the seaway was built? Nature would have washed away their property 40 years ago without the seaway stabilizing lake levels.

Long term health of the lake is impossible without natural shorelines and natural erosion. Armoring the entire shorline and eliminating natural seasonal flooding will slowly but surely turn this lake into an empty lifeless swimming pool.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[AAA]

17 minutes ago, iiwhistlerii said:

Over 10 thousand were already evacuated from thier homes during those 2 month time period. Dams were at risk of failing where things could have gotten way worse real quick. Levys did fail, it was a true state of emergency and not just water in the basement. To gain an inch on our end each week we would have had to bury them another food deeper and probably evacuate thousands more. Water flowed down neighborhood streets already, the costs of flooding them further would have probably been astronomical. But your right, we'd be 16 inches or so lower right now, theyd be rebuilding and maybe 2020 wouldnt look like another repeat, but how could anybody have known that in 2017 when it all started. That's a call I wouldnt want to have to make.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

No one wants to see flooding.  But it seems to me some of the opinions expressed here were kind of that's what they get for building in a flood plane.  Yet Montreal isn't is a flood plane and somehow should have different treatment?  I wouldn't want to make the call to flood one area over another, but the management plan needs to be revisited as it does not work in extreme conditions to equally protect all interests to the extent possible.  You can't tell me that over a two year period more water couldn't have safely been released knowing that more water was on it's way based on the levels of the other Great Lakes.  What has been done is history, but they need to learn from this history and adjust the water management plan to be more proactive.

[chinook35]

No one wants to see flooding.  But it seems to me some of the opinions expressed here were kind of that's what they get for building in a flood plane.  Yet Montreal isn't is a flood plane and somehow should have different treatment?  I wouldn't want to make the call to flood one area over another, but the management plan needs to be revisited as it does not work in extreme conditions to equally protect all interests to the extent possible.  You can't tell me that over a two year period more water couldn't have safely been released knowing that more water was on it's way based on the levels of the other Great Lakes.  What has been done is history, but they need to learn from this history and adjust the water management plan to be more proactive.

Exactly why I am glad to see more and more input by officials , Elected and appointed , like the recent forum in Watertown. The more pressure put on the IJC to re-evaluate and change p-2014 , the better They can’t go on ignoring the fact that the plan is NOT working. Or at least the way the majority of the public wants. It may benefit someone. But definitely not the majority


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[lost a lure]

7 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

So lake Ontario and the upper st. Lawrence is at 246 feet and holding and Lake st. Lawrence has gone from 243 feet to 235 feet this week but u want me to believe the difference is only 11"??? Did lake Ontario drop 8 feet too?? Can you see chimney shoal out of the water in Ogdensburg??

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

11" below lwd and the drop in water level are two different things. Lake Ontario did not drop 8 feet. You can see part of Chimney Island shoal.

[lost a lure]

19 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

My argument is that flows cannot be sustained above what they were without dropping lake st. Lawrence.  Remember your whole iroquois dam argument?  Well the dam has been wide open all fall and Lake st. Lawrence just dropped 7 feet in 7 days under these flows.  You call that sustainable?  If they didnt absolutely prove my point for me idk what will explain it to you any better.  You wanted to see that in october?  Dont worry, most launches and docks are only a couple hundred feet from water there now.  Would have been fine.  Oh but none of that matters to you because you dont live on that portion of the river.  Your part is all that matters.  I'd love to see how your tune would change if u were a few miles northeast.

 

The open the Iroquois Dam comment was to provoke a response from anyone who knows how it actually works or thinks they do. I never said the high flows were sustainable without the level of Lake St. Lawrence dropping. Once again "none of that matters to you because you don't live on that portion of the river" are your words not mine. My tune is not changing no matter where I live.

 

 

 

 

 

 

'

Edited January 6, 2020 by lost a lure

[lost a lure]

6 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

My point is if you look at it from all angles I honestly feel like it's been pretty equal. People from lake Ontario argue nature wouldnt have saved them if the dams werent there. They forget that same argument applies here. Have you ever looked at the lake ontario levels from before the seaway was built? Nature would have washed away their property 40 years ago without the seaway stabilizing lake levels.

Long term health of the lake is impossible without natural shorelines and natural erosion. Armoring the entire shorline and eliminating natural seasonal flooding will slowly but surely turn this lake into an empty lifeless swimming pool.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Levels were both low and high before and after the seaway was built. Would the 2019 level have been as high without the dams? According to your theory the flow would have been higher when the water level was higher, especially without the Iroquois Dam "bottleneck"

[lost a lure]

9 hours ago, iiwhistlerii said:

So lake Ontario and the upper st. Lawrence is at 246 feet and holding and Lake st. Lawrence has gone from 243 feet to 235 feet this week but u want me to believe the difference is only 11"??? Did lake Ontario drop 8 feet too?? Can you see chimney shoal out of the water in Ogdensburg??

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

 

Where did you take your measurements?

[LongLine]

iiWh' - 

 

You complain about low water  in  Lake St Lawrence yet you forget that that lake didn't exist before the seaway was built.  Area became known as "the lost villages."  Not only people (over 6,500) but all the houses (over 500) were relocated.  Anyone who has built there since should have seen this repeat in history was going to happen, according to your (and your supporters) arguments.   The fact that it hasn't happened in the last 60 yrs has no bearing on it.

 

Additionally, you've stated environmental improvements are made with higher and lower water levels.  Well, you just got your wish with Lake St Lawrence now being so low.  So why complain about that, maybe you'll catch some real muskies next season.  

 

Lucky 13 -

 

So the high water is just making a bad situation worse.  That's a great justification!   BTW, Isostatic rebounding is a tipping of the lake bottom that has been recognized with the St Lawrence going up & the Niagara area equally going down - just like a teeter-totter. (The middle which is like a fulcrum isn't affected)  If my recollection is correct, it's something like 0.0035 inches per year so don't worry your grandkids and their grandkids and their grandkids and many many more generations won't have to worry about it.  

[HB2]

Is the LO lake level dropping ? 

[iiwhistlerii]

10 hours ago, lost a lure said:

 
Where did you take your measurements?

From the army corps of engineers web site. Or how about the fact that water went from the docks to 200 feet out this week at Wilson hill and Ogdensburg hasnt changed at all. You think these pictures are fake? Lake Ontario is at 246 and holding and lake st. Lawrence should hit set minimum by the weekend.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Edited January 7, 2020 by iiwhistlerii

[iiwhistlerii]

7 minutes ago, HB2 said:

Is the LO lake level dropping ? 

Holding steady. Itll take some time for the water to pass through the narrows in the river.  Lake Ontario was expected to rise as much as 2 inches this month tho so if we dont lose any ground and remain even that's huge.  No matter what it's a win, this is a window that doesnt present itself very often and they've never taken advantage of before.

[iiwhistlerii]

10 hours ago, lost a lure said:

Levels were both low and high before and after the seaway was built. Would the 2019 level have been as high without the dams? According to your theory the flow would have been higher when the water level was higher, especially without the Iroquois Dam "bottleneck"

Iroquois dam isnt the bottleneck.  Iroquois dam was put in place after they eliminated the worst part of the bottleneck and created the locks.  That whole area used to be Rapids before they created the seaway and the lakes.  Have you ever looked at water levels prior to the seaway?  Yes lake Ontario could have been much higher at times without the flood control and ability to even out flows using the lakes reservoirs .

Edited January 7, 2020 by iiwhistlerii

[iiwhistlerii]

9 hours ago, LongLine said:

iiWh' - 

 

You complain about low water  in  Lake St Lawrence yet you forget that that lake didn't exist before the seaway was built.  Area became known as "the lost villages."  Not only people (over 6,500) but all the houses (over 500) were relocated.  Anyone who has built there since should have seen this repeat in history was going to happen, according to your (and your supporters) arguments.   The fact that it hasn't happened in the last 60 yrs has no bearing on it.

 

Additionally, you've stated environmental improvements are made with higher and lower water levels.  Well, you just got your wish with Lake St Lawrence now being so low.  So why complain about that, maybe you'll catch some real muskies next season.  

 

 

Not complaining about Lake st. Lawrence water levels 1 bit.  I'm applauding them for doing exactly what they are doing and draining it down.  Its rapidly dropping levels are showing you why that these flows arent possible once lake ontario drops below a certain level like I've explained to you over and over now.  If they did this in September they would have reached minimum in 2 weeks and then had to back off the rest of the fall.  It wouldnt of helped.  Doing it now is genius.  They are going to have to back off flow for ice formation anyway so all this water being let out now is a bonus because when they reduce flows for iceformation lake st. Lawrence will rise back towards normal levels during a time when flows would have had to be reduced anyway. 

 

 As far as real muskies go I'm sorry I dont believe in the make believe 6 footers you probably believe in and think you've seen.  Again I believe in what is real and factual.  My boats 2 over 56" and 17 over 50" this season from the St. Lawrence will have to do.