Keystone dam broken?

[dbacks fan]

1986 was the fullest I can remember, all the way from the dam to well beyond Bixby.

[guido911]

I don't mean to be tough on the river's appearance, but am I correct that Tulsa is called "river city"? I am being completely serious. If it is, then why can't we have a real river (I know, mother nature plays a significant part). And what is the point of all this talk about "river development"? Branson Landing was developed where its at because there was a legitimate water source (not a river, but a very thin lake) and there is a real feel of being near a river. I go to Riverwalk in Jenks, and I get the feeling I am up against the crappiest beach on the planet.

I am not venting, just needing to know why the river is the way it is and what could be done to fix it.

[AquaMan]

This is the best description of water releases on this river I have seen. It is for those kayakers who want to float the wave below the PSO jettie just south of the pedestrian bridge. The Arkansas in Oklahoma/Kansas is now a "hydraulic" river which means its flow is not natural but controlled for reasons unrelated to what we would like to see or do with the river.

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/uv?site_no=07164500

Or this one: http://www.swt-wc.usace.army.mil/KEYS.lakepage.html

[Go to the gauge above, Tulsa Wave (TW) is all about the release from Keystone Dam. There is no good way to predict releases or times. Normally, on the Keystone Lake gauge, the level has to be above 723 feet for regular releases. Most often, if it gets around 728 to 730 - they will release a lot and for an extended period. But, you never know. Some times no releases for months, then suddenly releases every day.  The new hole comes alive a little below 12,000 cfs.  There are no specs yet like they had for the old Tulsa Wave/hole, but time will give them.  The action starts around 6k and gets better the more flow until it washes out at high flows.]

That link will also give you access to historical graphs of water levels. Last time I analyzed those historical graphs I was pretty surprised. Turns out that the river has been full (> than 2ft deep at the 21st street bridge) at least part of the day for about 80% of the time for the last 30 years or so. But the releases are not at peak drive times when you may be observing your patch of river.

Today's median water flow historically should be around 6850 cfs. Enough to float the twin engine 18ft v-hull police boat easily. It sits at 120 cfs right now.  

edit: I should add that there are more sand bars and less water near Bixby and Jenks because the river widens, slows down and meanders in that area. The upshot is that the river slows down and drops sand out of suspension. The flat land in that area may be great for building homes, but the combination of these elements makes it flood easier when water flows are high.
-Hydraulic Avenger

[dbacks fan]

Technically you can call Phoenix, Dallas, Ft. Worth, OKC, and others 'river cities' because they do have water ways designated as rivers. (Yes the Salt River is dry most of the year) I think what you are refering to guido, is more common with eastern cities where the rivers are part of a waterway navigation system that has actual shipping traffic on them. Most of the rivers west of the Mississippi are not shipping lanes, but a part of water distribution systems, especialy in the southwest, and to an extent most of the western US. Out here the rivers are a different lifeblood then the north east.

[guido911]

I think what you are refering to guido, is more common with eastern cities where the rivers are part of a waterway navigation system that has actual shipping traffic on them.

Yeah, you're right. And I really am being unfair here. Being from the St. Louis area, I am way biased given how the river area has been developed there.

[dbacks fan]

Since I moved here 13 years ago and before I moved here there has been an outcry to have the Glen Canyon dam in Parker, AZ removed from the Colorado River because of enviromental concerns. The dam on average generates 1million kilowatts of electricty. Next to the dam in Page is a coal fired plant that uses coal mined from NE Arizona on Indian land, so it is a hot topic. JMO if they were to removeve the dam, the loss of tourism dollars from Lake Powell would affect AZ, UT, and Colorado, not to mention the electricity provided, and areas of the Grand Canyon would be affected as well. Places that people pay to go to now would be gone, and what would they want next, eliminate Hoover? That would forever change the southwest. To lose Powell, and if they pushed hard enough Mead, it would crush the southwest.

[dbacks fan]

I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.

[carltonplace]

What ever became of the 2 low water dams we voted for in the Vision 2025 plan??  Will we have to vote no them again in a few years??   

The proposed low water dams were not funded in the V2025 plan, the money we approved in V2025 was to study viability
See Linky: http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams

Funding for a dam in Sand Springs to regulate flow and a dam near Jenks to create a new lake (for the casino, riverwalk, aquarium) and a "living river" concept (51st to 71st) was brought and defeated as a county wide item championed by then contraversial wannabe mayor county commissioner Randi Miller (who was photographed standing in the river with her thigh highs in hand and quoted as calling the Arkansas a "masterful jewel").

Since the defeat of the county wide vote, once mayor (who strong armed the creation of Zink lake) now esteemed Senator Inhofe found some pork to help to fund the dams, but in our current austere federal form I doubt that funding will ever materialize.

Kirby or RM will correct me if I've made any egregious errors above. 

[carltonplace]

I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.

As Aquaman pointed out, the Keystone dam allows our buildings in the Arkansas river flood plain to remain fairly safe and stable against flooding except in the case of dam failure or major catastrophic release.

[Salukipoke]

The proposed low water dams were not funded in the V2025 plan, the money we approved in V2025 was to study viability
See Linky: http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams

Funding for a dam in Sand Springs to regulate flow and a dam near Jenks to create a new lake (for the casino, riverwalk, aquarium) and a "living river" concept (51st to 71st) was brought and defeated as a county wide item championed by then contraversial wannabe mayor county commissioner Randi Miller (who was photographed standing in the river with her thigh highs in hand and quoted as calling the Arkansas a "masterful jewel").

Since the defeat of the county wide vote, once mayor (who strong armed the creation of Zink lake) now esteemed Senator Inhofe found some pork to help to fund the dams, but in our current austere federal form I doubt that funding will ever materialize.

Kirby or RM will correct me if I've made any egregious errors above. 

From that link:


Background:
Vision 2025 funds will be utilized to construct two low water dams, which along with Zink Lake, will provide a series of lakes in the Arkansas River corridor. These low water dams will enhance the Tulsa area's most visible physical asset by creating a series of urban lakes within the river channel.

Sounds like we should have low water dams by now.

[Salukipoke]

From the original verbage the we voted for...

http://www.vision2025.info/includes/pages/aboutvision2025/uploads/03/file.pdf

(from page 5 of the pdf)
Construct two low water dams on Arkansas River the
locations of which will be determined in the Arkansas
River Corridor Plan. $5,600,000


Again, these dam dams should be constructed by now.

[carltonplace]

$5.6 million is not enough to cover the cost of building the low water dams

Here is a Tulsa world piece on the subject from yesterday: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110713_11_0_WASHIN187457&rss_lnk=1

Arkansas River study a loser with no earmarks, Inhofe says

By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
Published: 7/13/2011  11:19 PM
Last Modified: 7/13/2011  11:19 PM

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe revealed Wednesday that a federal agency has turned down a request to fund its share of an Arkansas River study, prompting the Oklahoma Republican again to warn that the project could go dormant.
Inhofe said the development is exactly what he predicted would happen when his fellow Republicans insisted on giving up earmarks on local projects.
"I hate to say it," he said, but "when Republicans decided they weren't going to be doing earmarks, we just shifted all that to the president, and the president decided he didn't want to do this."
Inhofe said the amount requested came to only $1.65 million, and he pointed out that the project, the Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan, already had been authorized by Congress in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
"I don't feel optimistic" about the project's prospects, he said.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110713_11_0_WASHIN187457&rss_lnk=1

[swake]

From the original verbage the we voted for...

http://www.vision2025.info/includes/pages/aboutvision2025/uploads/03/file.pdf

(from page 5 of the pdf)
Construct two low water dams on Arkansas River the
locations of which will be determined in the Arkansas
River Corridor Plan. $5,600,000


Again, these dam dams should be constructed by now.

That was just partial funding, very partial. We also have $25 million from a state bond issue and a commitment (though no money yet) from the feds for another $75 million. And we are likely going to need millions more than that. I think there's some 3rd penny money for the river too.

Until the federal money comes in we are no where close to building the dams, and in light of the current federal budget, that could be a long wait.

[AquaMan]

I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.

I lived here for 13 years before the dam was built. We weren't economically underpriveledged or in constant fear from floods. Since the other upstream dams had been built the flooding was decreasing. When they built the dam we thought things were going to change forever but forever turns out to be about 40-50 years for this dam. What then? Huge expenditures to rebuild or rehab this dam. Eventually has to be done.

That said I am no champion for destroying it or other large dams without some tremendous planning for the consequences. I just don't think its even plausible to turn lake front property into "former" lakefront property. Most of the movement for removing dams is centered on the poorly built and ecologically destructive smaller dams built from the late 19th to mid 20th century built for industrial/commercial purposes. They are unsafe, create pollution problems and need to be destroyed.

THe one you speak of on the Colorado is a complicated mess. I hope clear minds prevail. As far as no more low water dams on this river, I won't lose any sleep. They were designed for commercial purposes and in my estimation in the wrong places. THey will create more problems than economic returns can exceed.

[Salukipoke]

Good article here explaining what Swake brings up...

http://glenpoolpost.com/news/article_2f5627ad-feef-5f65-a095-e7c47035ea6d.html

My overall point was/is, we were essentially lied to during the V2025 voting.  Wonder how much of the $5.6M is left after the terrazzo flooring upgrade at the bok??   

Ah, good 'ol Tulsa.