Some amazing preliminary observations of the flood records

[ozark trout fisher]

39 minutes ago, cart7 said:

To be fair, I voted against the dam way back but my choice had nothing to do with saving the river or any tree hugging issues.  No, it had more to do with the findings that kept popping up during the initial construction that was pointing to the dam as going the way of a boondoggle that would eventually leak, and badly, due to the geology of the ground in and around the dam site itself.  You can read about it here:

 

http://www.rollanet.org/~conorw/cwome/article69&70combined.htm

 

Political pressures had that dam site moved from around St Clair up to Sullivan.  The grounds in and around St Clair were more conducive to a dam with no issues, up around Sullivan, the Karst geology of the surrounding area made it highly likely that the Meramec Dam would've likely never held water without significant repairs having to be made after construction and even those wouldn't have fixed the problem.  IE: see the Hales Barr dam in TN that eventually was decommissioned due to significant leakage even after costly repairs were attempted or the Cumberland Lake dam in KY having similar issues over the years.

It would've been nice to have a reservoir on the Meramec, the Bourbeuse and Big rivers all within about an hours drive from St Louis.  This city is sadly lacking in lakes/reservoirs around it compared to so many other cities in the US.

A dam without issues? I'm sure I don't agree with that.

I would consider "turning my favorite (and notably very quiet) floating/fishing stream into a gigantic water ski park that due to its location would make LOZ look serene" to be a major issue. I always get a kick out of how the solution to flooding is to create a much larger, permanent one. Humans are an amazing species, to be sure.

I've tempered my stance on a lot of issues of late, but if anyone in a position of power even whispers about putting up a dam any larger than that of a fair sized stock pond in the Meramec basin, they will have an immediate pushback stern enough to make whoever is responsible regret ever broaching the idea.There are a lot of people who are dead serious about that one. That's a "quit my job and come back to Missouri to lend a hand, if it would help" level issue for me. Doubt I'm the only one.

[cart7]

11 minutes ago, ozark trout fisher said:

A dam without issues? I'm sure I don't agree with that.

I would consider "turning my favorite (and notably very quiet) floating/fishing stream into a gigantic water ski park that due to its location would make LOZ look serene" to be a major issue. I always get a kick out of how the solution to flooding is to create a much larger, permanent one. Humans are an amazing species, to be sure.

I've tempered my stance on a lot of issues of late, but if anyone in a position of power even whispers about putting up a dam any larger than that of a fair sized stock pond in the Meramec basin, they will have an immediate pushback stern enough to make whoever is responsible regret ever broaching the idea.There are a lot of people who are dead serious about that one. That's a "quit my job and come back to Missouri to lend a hand, if it would help" level issue for me. Doubt I'm the only one.

My statement concerning issues involved the actual construction and viability of the dam itself, not outside political or environmental issues.

 

"Very quiet floating/fishing stream"?  I've been on that river floating several times in the past.  Let's not try and describe that river in terms of a scene out of a "River Runs Through it" shall we?

Sand bars loaded with drunks, jet boats screaming up and down the river.  Idylic isn't a word I'd use to describe the majority of the users of those float rivers these days.  I'd have no problem not damming the Current, Jacks Fork, 11 point or some of the others in the Ozark watershed area though many of those rivers have the same issues the Meramec has but the Bourbeuse and Big rivers are hardly what I'd call pristine watersheds and the loss of either to damming wouldn't bother me a bit.  Not everybody is on the same page as you in regards to keeping those rivers intact.  In fact, you'd probably find the numbers for a dam on either of those rivers creating lakes close to St Louis would far outnumber those against it.  Be that as it may, the corps haven't been in the dam building business for many years so nobody need worry. 

[MoCarp]

I remember seeing a computer model at University that suggested the Ozarks would get cooler and wetter under "global warming"

the earth IS getting warmer has been for 12,900 years since the last ice age

climate change amplitude before younger dryas and after being wildly variable compared to the last 10k years

the "norm" for the earth is warmer than present according to present data, are humans causing warming?

here is an interesting take http://sacredgeometryinternational.com/randall-carlson-climate-change-real-deniers

[Al Agnew]

The political pressures that moved the damsite made sense at the time.  The farther downstream you go on the Meramec, the more developed and more valuable the land along the river is.  The Meramec Park damsite was about as far upstream as you could go and still have a large enough dam to make a difference, and about as far downstream as you could go without getting into land that was too expensive.

And while I agree that "it would've been nice" to have reservoirs that close to St. Louis, I'm another that was and is unalterably opposed to damming these three rivers.  Yeah, on weekends the middle Meramec can be a zoo.  Go during the week or in the offseason and it's still pretty much the way OTF described.  In fact, in my experience, the Current and Jacks Fork are far more likely to be crowded on weekdays than the Meramec.  To put it simply, I've floated pretty much every piece of floatable water in the Ozarks, and the middle Meramec is as high quality as any and higher quality than most.  

[cart7]

Quote

The projects were delayed and altered until the 1960’s when the project started moving forward.   Changes included moving the main Meramec Dam upstream from St. Clair to Sullivan along with the addition and removal of some supplemental dams.  The original dam site at St. Clair was geologically a good location, as that area of the basin was much less cavernous than the Meramec Park Site.  The dam was moved upstream to one of the most cavernous regions in the basin due to lobbying by the Sullivan Chamber of Commerce (Ruddy, 1992).

http://www.rollanet.org/~conorw/cwome/article69&70combined.htm

[ozark trout fisher]

2 hours ago, cart7 said:

 

"Very quiet floating/fishing stream"?  I've been on that river floating several times in the past.  Let's not try and describe that river in terms of a scene out of a "River Runs Through it" shall we?

 

The simple answer here is that we are not  talking about the same river. You were referring to, among other things, how you'd like to have a reservoir on the Bourbeuse River, which, in fact, is extremely quiet, and also happened to be my home river/baby for about 10 years. If you want to talk about damming do not expect me to respond kindly. 

Same goes for the Meramec and Big, but for different (and for me, less sentimental) reasons. Although if I were actually presenting the case I'd have no trouble giving you a bunch of good, objective reasons why the Bourb is more ecologically and culturally important than you guess. For example I know the location of a number of well preserved native American dwellings/artifact sites that you are talking about putting under 30 feet of water. Yeah, I'm ready to use that information if anyone ever wants to dam it up.

Maybe not a lot of people are aware of that and other similar things, but the fact that few outdoorsmen take the time to explore that river and the area around it is not an excuse to advocate destroying it.

[cart7]

I was going to say don't worry, there's no way a dam will be built.  I still feel that way but apparently there's been some push from county commissioner Tim Brinkman to get one built.  The CoE still says it isn't economically feasible.

 

http://www.emissourian.com/local_news/county/corps-union-dam-would-not-prevent-flooding-project-not-economically/article_c7fe569a-4ca2-57c0-acd7-d0cbd0871897.html

[snagged in outlet 3]

Sorry to say bit it ain't gonna happen.  Wait till you see a price tag for that!

[Gavin]

Always wondered why that bridge at Noser Mill was so big.

[moguy1973]

This is kind of what it would look like.  Would suck to make a permanent flood that would affect a lot of people to save a few people that have build in flood plains from temporary ones that occur every now and then.