Isn't it time..

[AquaMan]

we started to think about removing the low water dam? The design kills people who are unlucky enough or unknowing enough to get caught in its undertow. It is an attractive nuisance that apparently we aren't going to be able to repair or replace for many years. It attracts fishermen, young people with little experience around rivers and impounds (probably the largest group of users of the river, not not just those who bike or run near it) and then kills them.

Sand Springs cut their losses and blew their low water dam up back in the 80's after a dozen or so of their citizens were swept away. How many will we tolerate just to have a shallow pond to look at?

[heironymouspasparagus]

I would vote to get rid of it...but only if there is a covenant or state constitutional amendment to never build another one.  This is a cycle we have gone through a couple times now.  Stop building them at all.

[AquaMan]

It might force us to be more creative in managing water in rivers like ours. Rather than trying to control nature, we would have to work with nature. Dams are a blunt force instrument in river management.

Understand, this didn't have to be such a cluster muck. We, in effect, built a defective swimming pool with a whirlpool on one end that can suck you into oblivion, but then opted not to provide on water rescue, lifeguards, boathouses and security because we (a.) couldn't afford it (b.) didn't think it was justified and (c) didn't want to attract that demographic anyway. I know we had a dredger to keep the water boatable, and at one time a boathouse near the skate park that got washed away in the 84' flood, but then we just sort of gave up and made it mostly off limits other than to upper demographic rowing clubs and occasional kayakers.

I agree with you H. If we can't afford to buy gas for the Cadillac, let someone else have it. Blow it up, dismember the RPA and make the paths a parks obligation and use the savings to landscape the banks. If we later decide to seriously make the river usable for water activities we can progress with some knowledge of what its going to entail.

[Townsend]

Who can make the decision and take action?

Of those, who are willing to make that decision?

[Conan71]

I guess I will have to go to the other extreme:

Why take away the enjoyment of responsible citizens for the sake of a few idiots who lack common sense?

[swake]

It might force us to be more creative in managing water in rivers like ours. Rather than trying to control nature, we would have to work with nature. Dams are a blunt force instrument in river management.

Understand, this didn't have to be such a cluster muck. We, in effect, built a defective swimming pool with a whirlpool on one end that can suck you into oblivion, but then opted not to provide on water rescue, lifeguards, boathouses and security because we (a.) couldn't afford it (b.) didn't think it was justified and (c) didn't want to attract that demographic anyway. I know we had a dredger to keep the water boatable, and at one time a boathouse near the skate park that got washed away in the 84' flood, but then we just sort of gave up and made it mostly off limits other than to upper demographic rowing clubs and occasional kayakers.

I agree with you H. If we can't afford to buy gas for the Cadillac, let someone else have it. Blow it up, dismember the RPA and make the paths a parks obligation and use the savings to landscape the banks. If we later decide to seriously make the river usable for water activities we can progress with some knowledge of what its going to entail.

There is nothing natural about the river with or without the dam.

[AquaMan]

I guess I will have to go to the other extreme:

Why take away the enjoyment of responsible citizens for the sake of a few idiots who lack common sense?

The enjoyment is a visible one only. Those idiots are the children of a different culture than yours. Someone's brother, son, boyfriend. Maybe less educated than you but here visiting and learning a trade (welding school) and enjoying doing what they've seen on TV. They are not stupid they are just young and inexperienced. I see them walking on the low water dam and fishing waist deep in the turbulence below it all the time as I cross the pedestrian bridge. There is no sign around saying, "Beware. Poorly designed dam that will suck you under. Dozens have died doing what you're doing." And one or two security guys for the entire path system to enforce rules.

But its nice to not have to see the sand. Some trade off.

[AquaMan]

There is nothing natural about the river with or without the dam.

I know what you're saying. I would say there are varying degrees of natural. I am not advocating tearing down the flood control system and returning to binge/purge flooding. Keystone and the other big dams serve their purpose. But these low water dams that attempt to hold back water for recreational purposes come with a price. If we aren't willing to pay the price of maintenance, repair, safety, security and usefulness, then we should tear it out and let it return to a more natural state than it is now.

Growing grass and mowing my lawn is not a natural thing either. I'm considering dropping that activity too.

[AquaMan]

Who can make the decision and take action?

Of those, who are willing to make that decision?

Inhofe pushed the thing through. Our current mayor could destroy it. The office has the power to lead.

However, as we all know, once authorities are created, they rarely dissolve even when no longer necessary. This one will fight its demise along with those who hold out hope that it can once again be meaningful. The citizens (mostly the burbs) have repeatedly scoffed at one plan after another and Tulsa won't go it alone because frankly, we're not a water community like Gulf shore cities or Mississippi River cities. We want something pretty to look at but we want it cheap.

I've been listening to a little of the Borgia's on Netflix. Sure seems timely.

[Conan71]

The enjoyment is a visible one only. Those idiots are the children of a different culture than yours. Someone's brother, son, boyfriend. Maybe less educated than you but here visiting and learning a trade (welding school) and enjoying doing what they've seen on TV. They are not stupid they are just young and inexperienced. I see them walking on the low water dam and fishing waist deep in the turbulence below it all the time as I cross the pedestrian bridge. There is no sign around saying, "Beware. Poorly designed dam that will suck you under. Dozens have died doing what you're doing." And one or two security guys for the entire path system to enforce rules.

But its nice to not have to see the sand. Some trade off.

Did someone take the obvious warning signs down underneath the bridge?  I've known since I was first told at four or five years old near a dam isn't a safe place to be in the water.  I also know you NEVER go in the water to attempt a rescue unless you have the proper equipment for the situation.  Something else most people are well-aware of.  I suspect most people know this as well but some choose to ignore the obvious danger and go ahead and put themselves and their would be rescuers at risk.

Some people ignore and exploit an obvious risk and I'm supposed to feel guilty because of it?

Note sign at 12 seconds in the clip:

http://player.vimeo.com/video/71508065

"No wading or boating within 150 feet of dam"

"Swimming prohibited in all areas"

[swake]

I'm not in favor of tearing it down. I doubt many people are.

[AquaMan]

H mentioned it before in another post. This forum is not very representative of the many classes, education and income in the city. We do what used to be called some serious "cross culturalization" around here eg. we're smart and experienced, logical, well employed and consistent...isn't everyone? Let them eat cake I say!

The reality is that in exchange for a slow moving, sediment filled, often nasty little pond whose dam leaks and has been noted by engineers in development meetings as a flawed design that we wouldn't build today because it has terrible undertow, we get sand covered with water, boats that can't operate (including TU rowing club most of the time) and deaths by drowning as a yearly occurrence. That's alright its their fault for being dumb eh? Didn't read the sign? You die and decrease the excess population. Save a friend? What you got a death wish? Driving without a helmet, seat belt, or cars with no airbags? Darwinism will get you! Just don't mess with my pretty little pond.

I supported the last river plan that would have re-created some natural rhythms of the river. That doesn't mean I want the river to revert to an un-improved state. We tear down buildings and bridges as dangerous and obsolete that aren't as useless as this dam.  I was following "the rescue" this morning and they noted that rescue boats were en route to the area....and that was an hour after the original 911 call. What, you can't keep a rescue boat on or near the only population accessible part of the river surrounded by paths, fishermen and swimmers (well they should have read the sign).

My point is this: If we aren't going to modernize the dam, truly regulate it, secure it and afford the same chance of rescue as folks have at other attractive nuisances like Brady, Turkey Mtn etc. then for heavens sake tear the thing down and wait til we can afford to do so. Actually have town hall meetings to ask the population whether, when faced with facts, they really want to keep taxes allocated to this post card pond. You might be surprised. It might just wake up some people as to how really stupid it is to keep acting like there really is something unique and important in paying for a 35 year old dream that never really materialized. Maybe they'll even decide to fix it.

[sgrizzle]

Build a real dam around 101st. Sure, Jenks might be underwater but you could make sure there was always water in the river.

[AquaMan]

Knowing those clever Native Americans, they would change Riverwalk into a floating casino.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Inhofe pushed the thing through. Our current mayor could destroy it. The office has the power to lead.

That is why in the past I have referred to that as the "Jim Inhofe Memorial Sewage Lagoon".