M
Mike
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2006
- Messages
- 5,562
From where and from whom is it thought that the money mentioned in #39 above would originate? And the estimated price tag would be????
S
Smike
Member
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2011
- Messages
- 233
Its a long and complex process, but the overall situation is that the dam is a federally owned and regulated entity. Which means they serve the public through a congressional mandate. If modifications are found to be warranted and approved through in part or in whole via congressional action, then its federal dollars which pay for the modifications. I’ve heard ball park estimates of 11 million to modify the release tower to allow the option to pull water from multiple levels instead of just the bottom.
The first major step now complete towards this reality is this:
http://www.thelehighriver.org/img/20150709_Walter%20IAR_FINAL.pdf
This is an Army Corps Appraisal Report of the dam completed in 2015. The last paragraph in the conclusion on page 38 reads:
“Based on the consideration of potential increased recreational benefits (rafting and fishing), inlake and downstream aquatic system improvements, and economic benefits to the region, there is sufficient reason to further investigate the feasibility of changes in authorization, operation, and physical modifications of the project to better serve the public interest.”
Now the feasibility study can proceed which if it can support benefits to modifications then I believe it moves to petitioning with congress to update the dams mandate and acquire federal funding for the changes.
L
LehighRegular
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 749
Smike is correct. The only thing is that the Feasibility Study needs to be co-sponsored and cost shared. Some co-sponsors have been identified (NYC, DRBC have shown most interest) to put up half the price tag of $3million for the Study. The PFBC has no money, but needs to make its interest known to these entities and work with these agencies because I doubt trout is a large priority. PADEP would and could be a strong advocate for this because of the water quality improvement possibilities.
Once the Feasibility study is completed, then federal dollars can be allocated to the ACOE for construction.
Once the Feasibility study is completed, then federal dollars can be allocated to the ACOE for construction.
PhilC
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 596
What else can we do in the meantime?
albud1962
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 785
They both appear to be stocked fish
L
LehighRegular
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 749
In the meantime..... anglers can stay involved in the annual Flow Plan meetings and process. If the Corps, PFBC, DCNR doesn't see the angler interest, guess where all the water will go to? Squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Anglers can keep in touch with PFBC representatives and commissioners and urge them to move this important work forward and remind them that the commissioners set a Tailwater Policy to develop these fisheries in PA.
Letting your state and federal legislators know about this wouldn't hurt. Staying on top of issues surrounding the river always helps. Supporting local angler/conservation groups helps too.
And most importantly, go fish the river. More angler hours the better. If PFBC sees more fisherman using the river, they may just catch on that this is a pretty good place to fish for trout, both wild and stocked. For example - Big Pine....look at the increased investment the PFBC is making on that river now.
Anglers can keep in touch with PFBC representatives and commissioners and urge them to move this important work forward and remind them that the commissioners set a Tailwater Policy to develop these fisheries in PA.
Letting your state and federal legislators know about this wouldn't hurt. Staying on top of issues surrounding the river always helps. Supporting local angler/conservation groups helps too.
And most importantly, go fish the river. More angler hours the better. If PFBC sees more fisherman using the river, they may just catch on that this is a pretty good place to fish for trout, both wild and stocked. For example - Big Pine....look at the increased investment the PFBC is making on that river now.
krayfish2
Well-known member
I can hardly wait for the PFBC responses to your quote:
This initiative was announced in what, 2013 or 2014? What's been done so far, stocking fish in the habitatless outflow of Quemahoning? Hurray! Still nothing on Raystown or Wallenpaupack.
Below is the link from PFBC with Arway's "Straight Talk" about the tailwater initiative program. Best part is at the bottom of page 2 by his signature is a photo marked "Lehigh Tail Water Trout"
https://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/people/exec_dir/straight_talk/2014_09_10_tail.pdf
This initiative was announced in what, 2013 or 2014? What's been done so far, stocking fish in the habitatless outflow of Quemahoning? Hurray! Still nothing on Raystown or Wallenpaupack.
Below is the link from PFBC with Arway's "Straight Talk" about the tailwater initiative program. Best part is at the bottom of page 2 by his signature is a photo marked "Lehigh Tail Water Trout"
https://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/people/exec_dir/straight_talk/2014_09_10_tail.pdf
L
LehighRegular
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 749
Here ya go guys:
http://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Media/News-Releases/Article/932483/army-corps-to-hold-public-comment-meeting-for-fe-walter-dam-recreation-plan/
Contact
Steve Rochette
215-656-6432
The U.S. Army Corps Engineers’ Philadelphia District will host a meeting to review the 2016 Francis E. Walter Dam recreation plan and solicit feedback for next year’s plan.
The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Oct. 18 at the White Haven Area Community Library at 99 Towanda St, White Haven, PA 18661. Organizational leadership is encouraged to attend and provide recommendations and feedback.
During the 2016 season, USACE scheduled 24 whitewater releases and numerous fisheries enhancement water releases. Several additional increments could be scheduled if enough water is accumulated in the reservoir. The 2016 plan is available here.
http://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Media/News-Releases/Article/932483/army-corps-to-hold-public-comment-meeting-for-fe-walter-dam-recreation-plan/
Contact
Steve Rochette
215-656-6432
The U.S. Army Corps Engineers’ Philadelphia District will host a meeting to review the 2016 Francis E. Walter Dam recreation plan and solicit feedback for next year’s plan.
The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Oct. 18 at the White Haven Area Community Library at 99 Towanda St, White Haven, PA 18661. Organizational leadership is encouraged to attend and provide recommendations and feedback.
During the 2016 season, USACE scheduled 24 whitewater releases and numerous fisheries enhancement water releases. Several additional increments could be scheduled if enough water is accumulated in the reservoir. The 2016 plan is available here.
afishinado
Moderator
Staff member
DaveS
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,025
I have never fished the Lehigh, although I have been invited to do so by some board members. If you all would be so kind as to give the names and addresses of those individuals seeking public comment, as well as any specific bullet points, I'll happily send them a letter.
(Basically spoon feed me the info, I'll cover the stamp.)
: )
(Basically spoon feed me the info, I'll cover the stamp.)
: )
S
Smike
Member
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2011
- Messages
- 233
I don't speak for the Lehigh River Cold Water Alliance, but based on being at the meeting last year and the results of this year I would propose the following:
I would say this year was a success for the conservation side of the plan. (at least based on available water)
Successes from this year:
1. Army Corps sticking to the minimum flow plan, (using storage to increase the flow by 100CFS) which helped tremendously in the low water levels.
2. Army Corps constant communications on upcoming changes to flow and flow plans
Here is what I would asked for in 2017:
1. Consider any methods possible to conserve the cold water pool for as long as possible. (Use of the bypass gates when feasible)
2. Reduce low water fluctuations during Sept-Oct to help keep water levels up for spawning trout.
3. Coordination with Beltzville Dam to allow cold water release to help mitigate stream temps (i.e. reduce wasted cold water release from Beltzville during high water releases from F.E.W.) Releasing surplus over longer periods from Beltzville to have longer effects.
As for the PAFBC representative in the room, there needs to be more pressure to acknowledge that under current conditions trout just below the dam is mostly a put and take situation, and that the real viable wild trout sustaining waters are further down from the dam (think Lehigh Gorge to Slatington.) As an example is Penns Creek, abundant wild trout that survive in what could be termed a “cool water” stream as best in summer.
Also the need to protect trout that are seeking refuge in tributaries in summer from high water temps. (Pohopoco being the biggest)
I would say this year was a success for the conservation side of the plan. (at least based on available water)
Successes from this year:
1. Army Corps sticking to the minimum flow plan, (using storage to increase the flow by 100CFS) which helped tremendously in the low water levels.
2. Army Corps constant communications on upcoming changes to flow and flow plans
Here is what I would asked for in 2017:
1. Consider any methods possible to conserve the cold water pool for as long as possible. (Use of the bypass gates when feasible)
2. Reduce low water fluctuations during Sept-Oct to help keep water levels up for spawning trout.
3. Coordination with Beltzville Dam to allow cold water release to help mitigate stream temps (i.e. reduce wasted cold water release from Beltzville during high water releases from F.E.W.) Releasing surplus over longer periods from Beltzville to have longer effects.
As for the PAFBC representative in the room, there needs to be more pressure to acknowledge that under current conditions trout just below the dam is mostly a put and take situation, and that the real viable wild trout sustaining waters are further down from the dam (think Lehigh Gorge to Slatington.) As an example is Penns Creek, abundant wild trout that survive in what could be termed a “cool water” stream as best in summer.
Also the need to protect trout that are seeking refuge in tributaries in summer from high water temps. (Pohopoco being the biggest)
L
LehighRegular
Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 749
Those are good points of emphasis.
Basically, I think we are almost maxed out with these flow plans and have tweeked them as much as we can to benefit the fishery and increase angling opportunities based on the amount of water available. There might be some minor things that can be changed, but it probably wouldn't be worth the effort and would not be well received by other user groups.
But that doesn't mean anglers can get complacent. Still need to keep a presence and the pressure on requesting significant operational changes at FEW reservoir to benefit the fishery.
Basically, I think we are almost maxed out with these flow plans and have tweeked them as much as we can to benefit the fishery and increase angling opportunities based on the amount of water available. There might be some minor things that can be changed, but it probably wouldn't be worth the effort and would not be well received by other user groups.
But that doesn't mean anglers can get complacent. Still need to keep a presence and the pressure on requesting significant operational changes at FEW reservoir to benefit the fishery.
