Is There Nothing That Can Be Done??

[GENTLE]

For some more interesting commentary, go to their Facebook page

[Devan S.]

29 minutes ago, Phil Lilley said:

The post talks as if Beaver has lots of room for storage and lakes below it are high.  Just the opposite is true.

If you look at patterns, 5 weeks ago they ran flood gates at Beaver and lowered the lake within a foot of seasonal power pool.  Then we got a 4-6 inch rain and it shot back up.  Table Rock did too and BS rose but not too bad.  TR opened gates and got it back down but it rained again and it almost got to 920.  Gates helped it to get back down to pool presently and gates are shut.  Mind you when I say gates I mean 4 units.  They really don't open gates until TR is above 920 feet.

So my question is - 5 weeks ago they followed a pattern to get Beaver down quickly.  So why didn't they or why don't they get it down now, now that levels on all lakes are the same as they were as early January?  Why hold Beaver within 6 inches of flood pool?  There's no control there - they'll have to release everything that comes into the lake.  That's not control.  But I understand control means running the whole system... it does not make sense.

And they say they're mandated to run as to a model of some kind.  Then there should be some consistency, something recognizable.  I'm not seeing it.

Its totally unsubstantiated but I think the reasoning is that Beaver has the smallest drainage basin and based on historical data Beaver has to ability to pass all of its inflow short term. Meaning running right at full pool level is overall less risky. Compared to allowing Table Rock to run high. Bull Shoals is obviously last in the chain and is regulated based on downstream conditions so it will always be the catch all basin. 

IIRC Beaver has released on the magnitude of 90kcfs at a time and as I recall the maximum inflows were in the magnitude of 110kcfs.

Table Rock is second in the list has 2 huge drainage basins north and south(meaning a storm tracking slightly north or south still puts water in the lake). Both the Kings and James can get very large inflows even if it doesn't rain a drop right over the lake itself. Inflows that historically Table Rock has not and will not pass through EXCEPT for an absolute worst case scenario. 

IIRC Table Rocks max historical release is something like 80kcfs or that ball park and max inflows is on the order of 250kcfs. The James river and Kings river alone based on historical maximums could be something on the magnitude of 120-130kcfs. 

The idea being once they let a drop of water out of Beaver dam unless they can pass it to the White downstream of BS they will not risk the huge release through TRL. 

 

 

 

 

[Phil Lilley]

@Devan S. I like your explanation.

[Devan S.]

Remember only one of 3 dams got the "emergency" spillway. You can bet they will do what they can to avoid having to use that. 

[tjm]

17 minutes ago, Devan S. said:

I think the reasoning is that Beaver has the smallest drainage basin and based on historical data Beaver has to ability to pass all of its inflow short term. Meaning running right at full pool level is overall less risky. Compared to allowing Table Rock to run high. Bull Shoals is obviously last in the chain and is regulated based on downstream conditions so it will always be the catch all basin. 

The "can't put it back"  comment says exactly that  Devon S,   if Beaver is full and beaver gets rain but Table Rock isn't full or getting enough rain to flood then Beaver can dump all; but if they dump Beaver just prior to or during a rain event on T.R. that doesn't hit Beaver, they have a storage unit at Beaver that can't be used. 

[Devan S.]

BTW The regulating criteria for Beaver is:

Firm power until TRL and BS is within 2' of conservation pool. 
 

[Jerry Rapp]

there is something that can be done to help minimize both the White and Osage River floods and reservoir releases,  but that "something" will never be done in today's environment.  I could go into detail into the overall operation plans and how every release of every lake in the Mississippi River drainage basin has effects from here to New Orleans.  MoPan has done a very good job of explaining it, so need to keep explaining since everyone seems to have their own Master Water Control Plan.  The "something" I refer is more flood control lakes, not just in our area, but throughout the entire Mississippi drainage.  That would give people so many more scenarios to gripe about how they are getting screwed by dam operators that discussions would never end.  By the way, it is forecast to rain tomorrow.

[AR Huzgr]

16 hours ago, Jerry Rapp said:

there is something that can be done to help minimize both the White and Osage River floods and reservoir releases,  but that "something" will never be done in today's environment.  I could go into detail into the overall operation plans and how every release of every lake in the Mississippi River drainage basin has effects from here to New Orleans.  MoPan has done a very good job of explaining it, so need to keep explaining since everyone seems to have their own Master Water Control Plan.  The "something" I refer is more flood control lakes, not just in our area, but throughout the entire Mississippi drainage.  That would give people so many more scenarios to gripe about how they are getting screwed by dam operators that discussions would never end.  By the way, it is forecast to rain tomorrow.

Agree.  I don't think many people have ever read the water control plan and the fact that River conditions on the other side of the state can dictate Beaver releases more than TRL.  

White River Water Control Plan

http://www.swl-wc.usace.army.mil/pages/docs/White_River_Master_Manual.pdf