Fish & Wildlife Study Impact On River Plan

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

The more you learn about a subject, the more you realize that decisions are rarely black/white. The way you can tell who's well informed is by their iron clad positions on a subject. This project is a good example of that. After looking at it from all angles, one can defend both positions. But if you look at the cost vs the benefits and take a pragmatic view you can't help but support it.

Look at the alternative. Another failed proposal means fewer and fewer river development efforts in the future as interest wanes. The river stays unimproved, with no clean up cause the public shows it doesn't really care. Roads and infrastructure stay pretty much status quo. Sewer treatment plants become invisible again yet continue to smell. Candidates for office, buoyed by the prospect of being elected by being against stuff, become less and less progressive and more status quo.

The city begins to resemble all the negative features so joyfully pointed out by detractors.
Onward thru the fog AA.

Waterboy, if the tax does not pass I don't think river development will fade away.  We are only a year removed from the ambitious "Channels" announcement.  Even though that plan apparently is DOA, we do owe the Stakeholders a debt of gratitude for moving discussion further along about the river far more than has happened in over 20 years.

If it fails, they will sit back, take a look at where it failed, hopefully collect more data, shore up details, and come up with a better marketing plan with more information.

I don't think interest will wane, it still needs to be built-up and I think that's possible if everyone will just be patient for another six months to a year.  Rushing this to a vote was a huge mistake, IMO.  I think too many voters feel like there is a gun to their head to make this happen now and the pants-wetting aspect of getting this approved right away scares some people who have a general distrust of our city and county governments.

One glaring problem I've seen all along is this is brought up for a county vote and you have the leaders of two of the largest suburbs speaking out loudly against it.  Secondly, they should have let Smaligo or Perry be the ramrod on this project instead of the lightning rod that Randi Miller is.  I notice Terry Simonson has been eerily silent for the last six weeks on this issue- he is someone most Tulsan's have trusted for a long time.  

V-2025 worked because there was something for every community and demographic in the county.

I think the city needs to take the lead on it's part of the river and let Jenks and Sand Springs follow suit if they are interested as well.

Simonson is leary of the coat tails effect of signing on to a losing project and an unpopular leader. Doesn't say much for him. Like I said, I think they all read the wrong polls or they read them before fairgrounds Randi screwed up.
I don't like that its rushed either.

As far as reconsidering and re-proposing...do you really think, having read posts here and watching North Tulsa contrived demonstrations, that any plan will be supported by the anti-forces? I hope you're right.

I thought only BA had come out against the plan. What other major community do you refer to?

[Conan71]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I read or heard Owasso is against it.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by twizzler

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I read or heard Owasso is against it.

Owasso city council voted for a resolution in favor of it; state Senator Randy "Mr. TABOR" Brogden, whose district covers much of Owasso, opposes it.

That's where I got Owasso being against it from, then.  Thanks.

[tim huntzinger]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

One of the reasons I am for the river improvement tax is because you are against it, doubleA.

I am willing to pay a little more for a better place to live...you are whining a little more and living a bitter life.

What part of the environment are you for, Michael? The F&W fellah seems awfully concerned, and he may as well be farting in the wind for all it is concerned.  Savetulsabaseball? Save the least tern!

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Originally posted by What part of the environment are you for, Michael?

I am for the outside part.

[Tony]

I have met with Gaylon Pinc as well I have attended every INCOG function hoping to get a NAY word in on the proposed development for the river -- I also agree the vote is way early in a proposal that hasn't gotten the first permit to build much less any "concrete" designs. If you look at all the PRO pep rallies on their face and the early vote it is fairly obvious this vote is going down in flames, polls taken have defeat about 5:1. The called vote by the county is being used as an expensive poll which will allow the PRO proponents to find out where the opposition is coming from - this is nothing new and has been used in other bond elections - Tulsa County had a real good idea this vote wouldn't fly before the bond election was set. This gives them some time to sit on the 2025 bond and get their ducks in a row before re-submitting the "improved" version.

My PROFESSIONAL opinion is the dams which are on the drawing boards will cause further degradation of water quality in the area around the proposed sites. These are STILL dams with a laydown gate design. There are more ECO friendly ways of accomplishing water in the river, that will allow pedestrian access to actually interact with the water and banks other than standing on a concrete hiking trail and looking at a static lake. You can bring in rock and RAISE the elevation in the proposed dam sites and create a long downstream elevation drop flume, this will in effect create a shallow lake which allows fish passage, water recreation in the form of light watercraft, eliminates siltation and is not a TAX drain on the county to operate. Instead of two lakes you could then have a series of these creating an area which also cleans the water as it flows by, the only need for concrete would be in a foundation under the rocks and below stream bed elevation. This plan and the planners have serious flaws, Zink dam has been responsible for drownings of many people since it was built in 1986. (see weir dam drowning machines)Zink dam is also partly responsible for the disappearance of the Arkansas River Shiner and Zebra darter (and if they find any in the current PHASE III USACE survey the dams WON'T be allowed at all (due to Federal Endangered Species Act) -- I am not against plans which actuall improve the river but I am dead set against the current planners who lead the day. This will be a somewhat moot point after the election -- but at least it has gotten Tulsa County to consider that the Arkansas river is a RESOURCE important to many people.

[TheArtist]

Does anyone know where one could find this "Fish and Wildlife Study" that shows what impact the kind of dams and such that are in the Kaiser Plan will supposedly have?

[Conan71]

Tony, thanks for weighing in and sharing your opinions on the various topics we have going on this right now.  I, for one, appreciate it.

[cks511]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Does anyone know where one could find this "Fish and Wildlife Study" that shows what impact the kind of dams and such that are in the Kaiser Plan will supposedly have?

The F&W people have not changed their tune since they were involved with the master plan.  

http://www.incog.org/ark%20river/default.htm

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Does anyone know where one could find this "Fish and Wildlife Study" that shows what impact the kind of dams and such that are in the Kaiser Plan will supposedly have?

That is exactly what the ongoing phase 3 study is by the Corps of Engineers (who is the regulatory authority) is developing.

[Tony]

I haven't looked William but I believe you can find SOME of the reports in the Tulsa District USACE website or call USACE and request a copy. ODWC as yet has NOT completed Phase III assessments due to high water all summer -- looks like they will be able to get back in now that the gates have closed.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by cks511

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Does anyone know where one could find this "Fish and Wildlife Study" that shows what impact the kind of dams and such that are in the Kaiser Plan will supposedly have?

The F&W people have not changed their tune since they were involved with the master plan.  

http://www.incog.org/ark%20river/default.htm

I was under the impression that some of the changes that this new river plan has in it were in response to some of the F&W concerns.
This plan has half the dams that the master plan proposed, which was at least 6 I believe. The dams and other things in this current proposal are significantly different in design, especially with the larger Sand Springs dam and the new Living River concept. I find it hard to believe they have done an impact study so quickly after this new proposal was put out.

[Tony]

The Kaiser "Living River" concept [?]is an improvement over the original six dams proposed for the river -- the original plan was not doable due to municipal sewage discharge and dam siting --  but the Kaiser plan is still a bait /switch routine in that the dams proposed by Kaiser plan are STILL controlled flow with gates -- the plan relies on faulty flow data from USACE. The promise to us(those that are concerned with fish passage)from Gaylon Pinc is that the gates would be opened during the prime fish migration season (spring months) good idea, but fish migrate up and down all year due to variables in Temperature, water quality, and flow -- impeding this movement (as would happen during drought) would decimate many fish species residing in the river. (as Zink already has done)prolonged drought even in a river without dams impacts fish as well. Dams just exacerbate and magnify the problem. Fish can still migrate up or down even with only 2" of water covering sand or gravel -- As proposed the dams elevations are too deep, this will also cause anoxia to any fish in the vicinity when the dams are closed and water quality in summer months is poor -- just because there is a lake doesn't mean the fish can survive in it. (if I hold you down and choke the life out of you and your heart stops -- I can't revive you with a new shot of oxygen.) Four sport species of commercial importance to Oklahoma will be impacted by these dams, they include Sauger -- which rely on the gravel beds below and above Zink to spawn, Striped Bass which migrate over 75 MILES in a 24 hour period and rely on a free flowing river to spawn, paddlefish which RELY on phytoplackton pushed by current, White Bass rely on the sandy banks for spawning, (but they can also open water broadcast spawn as well.) Spotted Bass, catfish, largemouth also utilize the river, as do several hundred species of forage fish that Least Terns depend on as well as Eagles -- a static lake will eventually cause Striped Bass, Paddlefish and White bass to disappear from the river in the Tulsa area, White bass and Striped Bass have been in serious decline since Zink was installed compared to historical levels pre Zink. ODWC is still conducting studies on this and reports should follow with the USACE phase III reports.

I implore those of you take a few minutes learn the REASONS Wildlife Agencies all over the US have taken stands against Low Head dams -- we are trodding over ground which has been cussed and discussed and studied to DEATH all over the country -- but here we go again  - the government agencies have to be PC and cause us millions of dollars in wasted TAX money just so the game can play out -- the Science has already long ago (before Vision 2025) weighed in on screwing around with wetlands - and the RESULT of all those studies agree low head dams harm a river ecology.  A living river already exists thru Tulsa County as stewards of that resource we should all be concerned.[]

[cannon_fodder]

What species will be helped by the low water dams?  Certainly the list of winners is equally large - migratory birds, water fowl, humans - what else?  You even mentioned that Sauger rely on gravel beds to spawn... beds created by the last dam put in.

Also, of what commercial importance are ANY of the fish in this portion of the Arkansas river?  I've never known anyone to eat a fish out of that river (in the area discussed), let alone charter a guide or host bass tournament on it.

Most catfish live just as well in a stagnant
farm pond as they do a a river bottom.  The flow is not nearly as important to them as one might think.  They are even adept at survival in low oxygen situations.  So my concern for them is minimal.  

Stripped bass are an introduced species that NATURALLY would not exist in Oklahoma anyway.  They are also more known as a lake fish than a river fish.

White bass need sandy banks to spawn, but I did not realize the river plan called for the removal of the sandy banks from the river.  Zink has sandy banks.  Keystone has sandy banks.  Frankly, so long as the river still has sand in it there will be sandy banks and bars...

The Paddle Fish will feed below the dams.  They probable will see an increase in food supply as the amount of surface area for plankton increases.  The only place I have seen them within Tulsa County is below Keystone or below Zink lake.  True, they will suffer during low flow - as they do now.

Speaking of which, what fish do well in smaller stagnant ponds that form currently?  Once the dams are filled the FLOW will still be the same.  Certainly the oxygen reserve in a large pool like Zink is more sustaining than a smaller pool formed between sand bars?

You make a compelling argument and I probably do not know the science as well as you, but nonetheless was able to raise some issues.  The status quo is so far from nature that the nature argument is lost on me.  It is currently a living river and all indications are that it will continue to be a living river with or without the dams.

[Tony]

I would differ on the list of winners -- Least Terns rely on the minnow population in SHALLOW water for food -- these minnow species are uniquely adapted to a this river -- proposed dams will alter that -- ODWC relies on White Bass, Sauger and Striped Bass obtained in the Arkansas in Tulsa for STATEWIDE stocking programs, to produce SAUGEYE and Hybrid Striped Bass at the Byron Fish hatchery - used in stocking programs ACROSS the state, and in trade with sister states for other valuable sport fish. -- Striped Bass WERE and are Native to the Mississippi basin of which the Arkansas connects to -- navigation all but wiped them out and they were REINTRODUCED to the range in 1968  -- so by your arguement if you were not born in Oklahoma before 1969 YOU are not native to the state.

All of Tulsa county including the fish and wildlife ALREADY existing in the TOWN greenbelt,(even wading humans) would continue to thrive and you could have a beautiful ECO friendly corridor with a change in Dam design -- that so hard to do???

I am not against the mere pittance of a tax, but FOR the river, Those of us who actually USE the river are in a minority in todays culture of bubbas, whose experience with the RIVER are on concrete walking trails, or in their cars as they pass by.