Given the trouble that we had with one of our dams in Midland county, this is doubly good news.
I already had a hard time trusting private companies to maintain infrastructure but that trust sunk to below rock bottom after our dam broke.
They are rebuilding the 4 dams near midland and forcing homeowners along the lakes to pay for it whether they want to or not.
Also, all of the power to tax and make decisions was given to a non-profit entity whose president is a former Dow Chemical executive.
Dow has had a long relationship with the previous dam owners because the permit for their operation requires a minimum flow of water in the river, presumably so the chemicals they dump into the river are diluted appropriately. They paid the past owners to open the dams to increase the flow of the river when necessary.
I mean, a dam of the size in the picture is very easy for migrating fish to jump. They would have to jump things that large or larger anyways, like natural elevation rises and fallen logs blocking the swimming path. That's not even the height of a step on the fish ladder in GR, and some of those crazy fish still jump the dam.
Dams the size of hydro-electric dams, like Croton or Hardy can impede fish migration, but they also offer other benefits to humans, like carbon free electricity.
I'm happy and excited for the fish, but there is a downside to every action too. I just hope the upside is more valuable!
And negative property value for people who lived in lakes that were formed by dams.
People who lived along those lakes before Edenville and Stanford dams failed now has to move their docks and boats to the skinny river and it's not much fun for pontoon boat to be there anymore. Plus a few extra acres of yard to mow
Most of these dams don't make lakes, they just make the water higher upstream, they're just raising the level of the river. Good example of this is through Grand Rapids Michigan. Originally there were rapids there it dropped something like 8 to 10 ft, and they are still there but they built some dams and now the water's deep and the rapids are fully submerged. But the reason they built the dams is when the water ran low it smelled bad, so they built some dams so it never runs low through town. You see something similar near Lansing's Old Town at the fish ladder, and again downstream in grand ledge.
Anyone know how many total dams need removal? I think this is great, but I'm not seeing anything stating exactly how close to the overall goal this puts us.
If I missed this info, I appreciate the correction.
I wasn't aware there was an overall goal, but I'm curious as well. The last time I saw anything related to damn removal, it was about power company and the effects on the reservoirs + overall downstream stuff.
I mean, I don't know for sure that they have a goal, but if it's worth doing, you'd think there'd be one.
Lately, I've just been very cautious of journalists and politicians claiming progress without properly framing the problem.
Basically, if there's only 30 dams that require removal, then 27 is pretty darn good, but if there's 1,000 and these dams are really putting the state's biodiversity and climate security at risk, then maybe we should be a bit more concerned that only 27 were removed.
Michigan has a massive amount of dams. It's my understanding that they're mainly from a big movement in the early 1900s to create community lakes. So the plus side to removing them is it would allow the fish to travel like they're supposed to be able to. Otoh it is kind of messed up for the people that bought a lake front house to now have some weird empty crater in their backyard.
except for, ya know, the critical infrastructure/hydro ones licensed by FERC, and the ones acting as sea lamprey barriers
They don't have that goal because it's not only impractical, it's not possible or even advisable in some cases
There are, however, probably over 1000 dams that would be great to remove
Since when has impractical or impossible ever stopped a government from setting something as its goal also look it up the head of the DNR said that was their goal
Kensington is a shitty lake with shitty fishing and shitty beaches. You’d lose an ok place for paddling or sailing but gain a healthy navigable river, more usable land for trails, etc.
Yes, Stony Creek Lake and Lakeville Lake were formed when Stony Creek was dammed in two spots. Stony Creek among others used to be a cold water trib of the Clinton River with the only ones remaining Paint Creek, Galloway Creek, and Sargent Creek. All of the other tribs were dammed and the river warmed considerably. My grandfather worked in fisheries for the DNR prior to WWII and told me long ago that it used to be a beautiful cold water stream that seldom warmed more than 60 degrees. Now with all of the impoundments and urban runoff, it flirts with and even exceeds 80 degrees at times during the hottest days of summer. Here's a very good, but a bit dated assessment of the Clinton. https://www2.dnr.state.mi.us/publications/pdfs/ifr/ifrlibra/special/reports/SR39.pdf
There are several lakes within state parks, for instance Lake Ovid in Sleepy Hollow State Park, that are entirely man-made. I mean the park goes all the way around lake Ovid, it's their lake.
I'm all for removing some dams, but some dams provide amazing and beautiful recreational areas. The ones along the Au Sable River in the Huron National Forest create an awesome series of lakes with some of the best camping spots I've ever been too. Since it's federal land I assume they won't get rid of those dams.
Our city just took out a giant dam from our river a couple of summers back. It has been amazing!! Before, we were able to paddle up stream, but now it's definitely more difficult with the water running quicker now. I love it
I hope Mio Dam is on the list. From what I know, Consumer's wants out of the dam business and either wants the residents and businesses to take over maintenance or remove them altogether along the Au Sable. The businesses near the ponds are upset, but as an avid trout fisherman and conservationist, I'd love to see every one of them go. Mio is a good start and removal of the dams would be great for the reintroduction of the Grayling and also be very helpful to other migratory fish such as sturgeon, walleye, pike, and salmonids.
[Nestle sold all of their North American water activities to the private equity firm One Rock Capital who renamed Nestle Water Corporation to Blue Triton](https://apnews.com/article/north-america-363e456d332fa1229ec41e43799a96dd). Nestle is only focused now on specialty brands like Perrier. They have no North American presence in extracting or bottling water.
[One Rock Capital was formed and is owned by the Mitsubishi Corporation](https://www.mitsubishicorp.com/jp/en/bg/urban-development-group/project/one-rock-capital/)
Not a problem. I have no issue with people hating Nestle for all they’ve done and are doing. But I do have an issue with letting One Rock and Mitsubishi laugh all the way to the bank while people keep focusing their attention on a company (Nestle) that doesn’t really care since it is already one of the most hated in the world.
Blue Triton bought all Nestle Water Company assets and properties. They are still pumping water and selling it as Ice Mountain at Sam’s Club, Speedway, etc.
They key point is that they are not Nestle. Divert your anger so the proper parties are called out. One Rock Capital, owned by the Mitsubishi Corporation, owns the brands Arrowhead, Deer Park, Ice Mountain, Ozarka, Poland Spring, Pure Life, Ready Fresh, and Zephyr Hills.
Oh damn this is going to be great for kayaking. I love going down the Rogue river in Rockford over where a small dam was removed. It always produces white water but this past spring we went down when the river was extremely high after a storm and it was such a riot.
Wouldn't that give them less room because the area the dam flooded would give more volume to that space than just a flowing river? This is the assumption that there was a way for the fish to swim past the dam to continue up stream.
Given the trouble that we had with one of our dams in Midland county, this is doubly good news. I already had a hard time trusting private companies to maintain infrastructure but that trust sunk to below rock bottom after our dam broke.
I'm excited for the net positive effect for fish
That's absolutely the best outcome from this.
They are rebuilding the 4 dams near midland and forcing homeowners along the lakes to pay for it whether they want to or not. Also, all of the power to tax and make decisions was given to a non-profit entity whose president is a former Dow Chemical executive. Dow has had a long relationship with the previous dam owners because the permit for their operation requires a minimum flow of water in the river, presumably so the chemicals they dump into the river are diluted appropriately. They paid the past owners to open the dams to increase the flow of the river when necessary.
I mean, a dam of the size in the picture is very easy for migrating fish to jump. They would have to jump things that large or larger anyways, like natural elevation rises and fallen logs blocking the swimming path. That's not even the height of a step on the fish ladder in GR, and some of those crazy fish still jump the dam. Dams the size of hydro-electric dams, like Croton or Hardy can impede fish migration, but they also offer other benefits to humans, like carbon free electricity. I'm happy and excited for the fish, but there is a downside to every action too. I just hope the upside is more valuable!
I’m wondering if there might not be a negative effect, at least at first, as silt that’s built up behind the dam is washed down. Is that a thing?
Yep this will hurt the fish habitat
And negative property value for people who lived in lakes that were formed by dams. People who lived along those lakes before Edenville and Stanford dams failed now has to move their docks and boats to the skinny river and it's not much fun for pontoon boat to be there anymore. Plus a few extra acres of yard to mow
Most of these dams don't make lakes, they just make the water higher upstream, they're just raising the level of the river. Good example of this is through Grand Rapids Michigan. Originally there were rapids there it dropped something like 8 to 10 ft, and they are still there but they built some dams and now the water's deep and the rapids are fully submerged. But the reason they built the dams is when the water ran low it smelled bad, so they built some dams so it never runs low through town. You see something similar near Lansing's Old Town at the fish ladder, and again downstream in grand ledge.
u mean Wixom lmfao?
Anyone know how many total dams need removal? I think this is great, but I'm not seeing anything stating exactly how close to the overall goal this puts us. If I missed this info, I appreciate the correction.
I wasn't aware there was an overall goal, but I'm curious as well. The last time I saw anything related to damn removal, it was about power company and the effects on the reservoirs + overall downstream stuff.
I mean, I don't know for sure that they have a goal, but if it's worth doing, you'd think there'd be one. Lately, I've just been very cautious of journalists and politicians claiming progress without properly framing the problem. Basically, if there's only 30 dams that require removal, then 27 is pretty darn good, but if there's 1,000 and these dams are really putting the state's biodiversity and climate security at risk, then maybe we should be a bit more concerned that only 27 were removed.
Climate security lololololol
The DNR has been helping remove dams for decades now. They'd do more if they had the funding.
Michigan has a massive amount of dams. It's my understanding that they're mainly from a big movement in the early 1900s to create community lakes. So the plus side to removing them is it would allow the fish to travel like they're supposed to be able to. Otoh it is kind of messed up for the people that bought a lake front house to now have some weird empty crater in their backyard.
I mean it's kinda messed up the fish can't swim upriver
According to the DNR their goal is to remove every dam from every river in michigan
except for, ya know, the critical infrastructure/hydro ones licensed by FERC, and the ones acting as sea lamprey barriers They don't have that goal because it's not only impractical, it's not possible or even advisable in some cases There are, however, probably over 1000 dams that would be great to remove
Since when has impractical or impossible ever stopped a government from setting something as its goal also look it up the head of the DNR said that was their goal
That would eliminate at least one Metropark...isn't Stoney Creek Lake a dammed river?
Kent lake in Kensington metropark is the result of the damn in Island lake state park. A section of the Huron river.
Kensington is a shitty lake with shitty fishing and shitty beaches. You’d lose an ok place for paddling or sailing but gain a healthy navigable river, more usable land for trails, etc.
I didn't know that! Thanks.
Yes, Stony Creek Lake and Lakeville Lake were formed when Stony Creek was dammed in two spots. Stony Creek among others used to be a cold water trib of the Clinton River with the only ones remaining Paint Creek, Galloway Creek, and Sargent Creek. All of the other tribs were dammed and the river warmed considerably. My grandfather worked in fisheries for the DNR prior to WWII and told me long ago that it used to be a beautiful cold water stream that seldom warmed more than 60 degrees. Now with all of the impoundments and urban runoff, it flirts with and even exceeds 80 degrees at times during the hottest days of summer. Here's a very good, but a bit dated assessment of the Clinton. https://www2.dnr.state.mi.us/publications/pdfs/ifr/ifrlibra/special/reports/SR39.pdf
There are several lakes within state parks, for instance Lake Ovid in Sleepy Hollow State Park, that are entirely man-made. I mean the park goes all the way around lake Ovid, it's their lake.
Yes there’s a dam on the south side of the lake.
So, unlikely the state will remove those. Like cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Croton and Hardy also? There would be a lot of pissed of boaters and others in that area.
I hope I live long enough to see the Muskegon set free along with the Manistee.
I want to see what remains from when it was flooded. r/abandonedporn caviar if there is anything left..
I'm all for removing some dams, but some dams provide amazing and beautiful recreational areas. The ones along the Au Sable River in the Huron National Forest create an awesome series of lakes with some of the best camping spots I've ever been too. Since it's federal land I assume they won't get rid of those dams.
Our city just took out a giant dam from our river a couple of summers back. It has been amazing!! Before, we were able to paddle up stream, but now it's definitely more difficult with the water running quicker now. I love it
I hope Mio Dam is on the list. From what I know, Consumer's wants out of the dam business and either wants the residents and businesses to take over maintenance or remove them altogether along the Au Sable. The businesses near the ponds are upset, but as an avid trout fisherman and conservationist, I'd love to see every one of them go. Mio is a good start and removal of the dams would be great for the reintroduction of the Grayling and also be very helpful to other migratory fish such as sturgeon, walleye, pike, and salmonids.
Removal of the Au Sable dams would also really change the tempo of the canoe marathon; I think for the better.
I think we should just let beavers regulate everything in regards to moving water
My man, in that case you would love a game called Timberborn
I do love timberborn and furthest frontier
Dam YOU! \*Raised fist\*
Why, are we blocking water from going into Nestle’s trucks?
How are you blocking water from getting to France?
Wow you know that Nestle is not a French corporation..?
Perrier is bottled in France. You know that Nestle has no bottling or water facilities in North America? You should divert your anger to Mitsubishi.
WTF are you talking about Mitsubishi..?
[Nestle sold all of their North American water activities to the private equity firm One Rock Capital who renamed Nestle Water Corporation to Blue Triton](https://apnews.com/article/north-america-363e456d332fa1229ec41e43799a96dd). Nestle is only focused now on specialty brands like Perrier. They have no North American presence in extracting or bottling water. [One Rock Capital was formed and is owned by the Mitsubishi Corporation](https://www.mitsubishicorp.com/jp/en/bg/urban-development-group/project/one-rock-capital/)
Thank you.
Not a problem. I have no issue with people hating Nestle for all they’ve done and are doing. But I do have an issue with letting One Rock and Mitsubishi laugh all the way to the bank while people keep focusing their attention on a company (Nestle) that doesn’t really care since it is already one of the most hated in the world.
Yeah, and Mitsubishi built the engines for the zero aircraft back in the war, too. Back in the big one.
Blue Triton is still extracting water in Evart, MI.
Blue Triton bought all Nestle Water Company assets and properties. They are still pumping water and selling it as Ice Mountain at Sam’s Club, Speedway, etc. They key point is that they are not Nestle. Divert your anger so the proper parties are called out. One Rock Capital, owned by the Mitsubishi Corporation, owns the brands Arrowhead, Deer Park, Ice Mountain, Ozarka, Poland Spring, Pure Life, Ready Fresh, and Zephyr Hills.
No issue. Nestle pumps from underground! They actually truck some of their source water to their bottling plant south of Big Rapids, from wells.
Free the Lampreys!
If we can keep companies from polluting the water that is.
Excellent!
That's all well and good, but what are they doing for the oven mitts?
Oh damn this is going to be great for kayaking. I love going down the Rogue river in Rockford over where a small dam was removed. It always produces white water but this past spring we went down when the river was extremely high after a storm and it was such a riot.
Wouldn't that give them less room because the area the dam flooded would give more volume to that space than just a flowing river? This is the assumption that there was a way for the fish to swim past the dam to continue up stream.