• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
HighAndDry

Great Lakes levels 2013

203 posts in this topic

Snow is finally melting, how are the suffering lakes doing?

 

superior_zpsb6ba9591.gif

Superior looks OK; at last years low-ish but OK level. Big plus has been more ice on the lake and MUCH more snow that last year. As this time last year the little snow the basin got was already melted... As of today most of the lower lake is surrounded by two feet of snowpack.

 

 

mh_sc_cl_zps06edabaa.gif

Huron and Michigan are suffering, over a foot below last years crappy level. How does the spring look?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Youngstown Levels on Lake Ontario are way down as well.

 

New format in 2014................nevermind............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have bought a centerboard boat, two years ago.

 

This might be the new normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michigan is still very low. It will cause some problems in the marinas for spring launching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, all the coverage that the extended winter in the mid-west has been getting, I hoped this would have things looking up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, all the coverage that the extended winter in the mid-west has been getting, I hoped this would have things looking up.

Unfortunately most of the snow that has fallen during the late winter storms will wind up melting and draining into the Mississippi River Basin and not the Great Lakes Basin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh, all the coverage that the extended winter in the mid-west has been getting, I hoped this would have things looking up.

Lots of snow, not in the right places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit I was a little bit depressed by the size of the beach last weekend when I went for a drive-by. Lake Erie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have bought a centerboard boat, two years ago.

 

This might be the new normal.

new normal is what i'm thinking too

might be part of the reason j70's are booming around here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This chart makes it clear that although all the Great Lakes are pretty low, Michigan-Huron is by far the worst. Barely above record low and the farthest of all the lakes below average. The Corps needs to do something about too much water going out through the St. Clair River. http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/GreatLakesWaterLevels/WaterLevelForecast/WeeklyGreatLakesWaterLevels.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that the State of Michigan is going to spend a few million to dredge the municipal marinas . .but there are many private marinas that are in need to dredging .I slip on Muskegon Lake out of curiosity I went out on the ice at my slip and did some measuring . .It appears I have 5" under my keel and it is now a 3 foot fall from the fixed dock to the deck of my boat . . they (the owners) plan on dredging and lowing the docks .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The saving grace here is that it was a colder winter with less evaporation, and we got above average snowfall for a change, a lot of it is still on the ground in the Great White North. If we get a decent amount of spring rainfall, we should be better, at least for the summer. No question that there will be harbors that will be unaccessible and a whole lot more bumping going on. Last fall was an adventure in Lk St Clair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This chart makes it clear that although all the Great Lakes are pretty low, Michigan-Huron is by far the worst. Barely above record low and the farthest of all the lakes below average. The Corps needs to do something about too much water going out through the St. Clair River. http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/GreatLakesWaterLevels/WaterLevelForecast/WeeklyGreatLakesWaterLevels.aspx

 

Can the corps do anything about the exit of water via the St. Claire? Stop dredging? Lakers still gotta get through.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Corp could open up the gates at Lake Superior and let it flow down hill. We promise we will return the favour someday...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any speculation on the impact on the Mac races?

Don't plan on a slip or rafting up in the inner harbor if you draw more than 6'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Corp could open up the gates at Lake Superior and let it flow down hill. We promise we will return the favour someday...........

 

We have plans to bomb the locks if the water at Pike's gets too low.

 

 

 

 

PS - to top-secret NSA sniffer programs, just kidding about the bomb the locks thing.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 49 years I've been monitoring my parents' beach on Lakeshore Rd in Sarnia, Ontario...I've never seen such a big beach. And this far exceeds the huge beach we had in the late '60's / early '70s. Amazing how low the water is now.

 

But it's a cycle. Always has been.

 

My cousin has, though, for the first time in over 150 years of our family's farming (in Harrow, Ontario) dug a massive reservoir in one of his farms to capture rain water and keep filled to irrigate his tomato crop this coming year. Quite telling...but they grow over a thousand acres of tomatoes for Heinz so not a bad move really.

 

Hope the spring run-off has some surprises this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta wonder at what point we all stand back and say, "This is serious."

 

or maybe scream it.

 

most Texas lakes are man made reservoirs , but the fact is our entire state's water reserve is down by 25% over the last few years. Some of our lakes are flat out empty...grass growing wehre there used to be a hundred feet of water. Lake Travis , where I live, is down 50 feet from its mode level.

 

It has rained sufficiently to raise the lake only eight of the last 2500 days...

 

Should we be worried yet??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta wonder at what point we all stand back and say, "This is serious."

 

or maybe scream it.

 

most Texas lakes are man made reservoirs , but the fact is our entire state's water reserve is down by 25% over the last few years. Some of our lakes are flat out empty...grass growing wehre there used to be a hundred feet of water. Lake Travis , where I live, is down 50 feet from its mode level.

 

It has rained sufficiently to raise the lake only eight of the last 2500 days...

 

Should we be worried yet??

Travis lake is low? Must be the beginning of armageddon!

 

Isn't Travis lake a "reservoir"?

 

I think your problem may be perceived.

 

Take a metaphorical walk upstream, check it out...

 

Then, pack your bag, and get the hell out of texas!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went out on the Vanguard yesterday, it was like throwing the boat off a cliff to get it in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

 

Dredging in Michigan Harbors is coming from state funds.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/02/michigan_dredging_plan_locatio.html

 

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

 

Maddening that a City and State with the smallest amount of shoreline has the largest impact on the Great Lakes. Even more maddening is that leadership at all levels is inept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

 

Dredging in Michigan Harbors is coming from state funds.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/02/michigan_dredging_plan_locatio.html

 

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

 

Maddening that a City and State with the smallest amount of shoreline has the largest impact on the Great Lakes. Even more maddening is that leadership at all levels is inept.

 

GLE, can you cite a credible source? My gut feeling is the outflow out of Chicago is negigible compared to the other sinks. It has been some time, but is the first lock on the canal a lift?

 

No big deal but I don't see much outflow in Chicago and would really appreciate a reference.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The snowpack up north has not melted. Hopefully it will help a bit when it does.

 

nsm_swe_2013040105_National.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 49 years I've been monitoring my parents' beach on Lakeshore Rd in Sarnia, Ontario...I've never seen such a big beach. And this far exceeds the huge beach we had in the late '60's / early '70s. Amazing how low the water is now.

 

But it's a cycle. Always has been.

 

(...)

 

Hope the spring run-off has some surprises this year.

 

Same here on Lake St Louis in Montreal. Normally have the lake right up brimming at the Seawall my mid April. Horizontally it's about 30' back from where it normally is, which equates to about 5 vertical feet. Yikes! And we have a rocky lake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The snowpack up north has not melted. Hopefully it will help a bit when it does.

 

nsm_swe_2013040105_National.jpg

 

We've been hit today with white-out conditions and a winter weather advisory is still in effect. Snow squalls just keep on moving through and dumping more of the white stuff. While all precipitation will be helpful to the lakes (and another few inches are forecast for tomorrow) this is getting old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

 

Dredging in Michigan Harbors is coming from state funds.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/02/michigan_dredging_plan_locatio.html

 

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

 

Maddening that a City and State with the smallest amount of shoreline has the largest impact on the Great Lakes. Even more maddening is that leadership at all levels is inept.

 

GLE, can you cite a credible source? My gut feeling is the outflow out of Chicago is negigible compared to the other sinks. It has been some time, but is the first lock on the canal a lift?

 

No big deal but I don't see much outflow in Chicago and would really appreciate a reference.

 

Thanks.

 

I believe the US Army Engineers constructed a few huge underground tunnels yrs ago contrary to the agreement between Canada and US

They quietly allow water to flow down to the Mississippi in order to keep enough depth for shipping

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

 

Dredging in Michigan Harbors is coming from state funds.

http://www.mlive.com...an_locatio.html

 

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

 

Maddening that a City and State with the smallest amount of shoreline has the largest impact on the Great Lakes. Even more maddening is that leadership at all levels is inept.

 

GLE, can you cite a credible source? My gut feeling is the outflow out of Chicago is negigible compared to the other sinks. It has been some time, but is the first lock on the canal a lift?

 

No big deal but I don't see much outflow in Chicago and would really appreciate a reference.

 

Thanks.

 

I believe the US Army Engineers constructed a few huge underground tunnels yrs ago contrary to the agreement between Canada and US

They quietly allow water to flow down to the Mississippi in order to keep enough depth for shipping

 

Thats true. I live in Minneapolis and the huge valve for this sucker is in my back yard. Should I run out and turn it off????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took this pic at the Holland pier on Saturday. It isn't exactly encouraging.

488359_10151383541028995_2014881886_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was home back in feb I couldn't beleive how far down the lakes where. Lake Erie and Lake Michigan just looked sad. I feel bad for anyone not running a shoal draft sailboat this year.

 

 

On a side note if you have beach front propert, go out and bulkhead where the new low water level is, and you will probably gain an extra 200-300' of property

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google US Army Engineer water projects Chicago to Missiippi River

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This chart makes it clear that although all the Great Lakes are pretty low, Michigan-Huron is by far the worst. Barely above record low and the farthest of all the lakes below average. The Corps needs to do something about too much water going out through the St. Clair River. http://www.lre.usace...aterLevels.aspx

 

Can the corps do anything about the exit of water via the St. Claire? Stop dredging? Lakers still gotta get through.

 

Yes. Back in the 60s the Corps dredged the St. Clair. Then, with the natural rocky bottom removed, additional scouring occurred so that the St. Clair is now much deeper than before. More water goes out than if the dredging had not occurred. And even more water goes out than the Corps calculated, because of the scouring.

 

The Corps could bring the bed of the St. Clair back to its pre-scouring level (back to the level intended to have been achieved by the dredging) by simply dumping a few barge loads of rocks. However that solution is too simple and the Corps are too ponderous for it to occur. Meanwhile Lake Michigan / Huron riparian owners and harbors incur millions in dredging costs and other costs to adapt to near record low water levels, which the other Great Lakes are not seeing. Superior's level is not affected by the St. Clair, and the lakes downstream of the St. Clair are benefiting from the additional water they receive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-15596-0-23199300-1364926502_thumb.png

 

Cottage Grove boat ramp on Muskegon Lake.

 

Remarkable for two reasons. 1. A week ago people were ice boating from here. 2. Note the water level! No ramp left and the beach at the top has never been a beach before in my memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This chart makes it clear that although all the Great Lakes are pretty low, Michigan-Huron is by far the worst. Barely above record low and the farthest of all the lakes below average. The Corps needs to do something about too much water going out through the St. Clair River. http://www.lre.usace...aterLevels.aspx

 

Can the corps do anything about the exit of water via the St. Claire? Stop dredging? Lakers still gotta get through.

 

Yes. Back in the 60s the Corps dredged the St. Clair. Then, with the natural rocky bottom removed, additional scouring occurred so that the St. Clair is now much deeper than before. More water goes out than if the dredging had not occurred. And even more water goes out than the Corps calculated, because of the scouring.

 

The Corps could bring the bed of the St. Clair back to its pre-scouring level (back to the level intended to have been achieved by the dredging) by simply dumping a few barge loads of rocks. However that solution is too simple and the Corps are too ponderous for it to occur. Meanwhile Lake Michigan / Huron riparian owners and harbors incur millions in dredging costs and other costs to adapt to near record low water levels, which the other Great Lakes are not seeing. Superior's level is not affected by the St. Clair, and the lakes downstream of the St. Clair are benefiting from the additional water they receive.

 

There are huge tunnels under Chicago that divert water to the Mississippi. Not widely a lot of info on them as they contravene an agreement between US and Canada. They were made in the 50's to protect the Mississippi levels as a lot of shipping runs up and down the Midwest. Look at Chicago's location and it just makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Dredging OKed in Lexington Harbor& Port Sanilac Harbor Lake Huron thank you For your Federal tax payments.

 

St Clair river is lined with boat hoists (boats winter stored in them) over dry land on both sides. Docks put in at the last hi water levels are over beaches going no ware.

 

Kettle Ponit, Ont. is a must see for those in the area. Miles of "Kettles" above the water with the point walkable about 2 mi out into the Lake Huron.

 

Water levels are are NOT much lower now then the last low water I remember back in the early 60s. These lakes cycle low to hi back to low in a cycle nothin new about this really.

 

Dredging in Michigan Harbors is coming from state funds.

http://www.mlive.com...an_locatio.html

 

A lot of water has been diverted to the Mississipi through Chicago

 

Maddening that a City and State with the smallest amount of shoreline has the largest impact on the Great Lakes. Even more maddening is that leadership at all levels is inept.

 

GLE, can you cite a credible source? My gut feeling is the outflow out of Chicago is negigible compared to the other sinks. It has been some time, but is the first lock on the canal a lift?

 

No big deal but I don't see much outflow in Chicago and would really appreciate a reference.

 

Thanks.

 

According to this article, it's about 2.1 Billion gallons per day that is siphoned out of Lake Michigan and dumped into the Mississippi River Basin. It also states that this amounts to about a 2 inch drop in the long term water levels.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/pressure-mounts-to-restore-great-lakes-water-levels-f76ug5a-170854881.html

 

The other (good) side to the Chicago River flowing backwards is that all of Chicago's sewage also goes down the Mississippi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that 2.1 billion a day equals 2 " in water level lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that 2.1 billion a day equals 2 " in water level lol

 

It is a really big lake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that 2.1 billion a day equals 2 " in water level lol

 

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This chart makes it clear that although all the Great Lakes are pretty low, Michigan-Huron is by far the worst. Barely above record low and the farthest of all the lakes below average. The Corps needs to do something about too much water going out through the St. Clair River. http://www.lre.usace...aterLevels.aspx

 

Can the corps do anything about the exit of water via the St. Claire? Stop dredging? Lakers still gotta get through.

 

Yes. Back in the 60s the Corps dredged the St. Clair. Then, with the natural rocky bottom removed, additional scouring occurred so that the St. Clair is now much deeper than before. More water goes out than if the dredging had not occurred. And even more water goes out than the Corps calculated, because of the scouring.

 

The Corps could bring the bed of the St. Clair back to its pre-scouring level (back to the level intended to have been achieved by the dredging) by simply dumping a few barge loads of rocks. However that solution is too simple and the Corps are too ponderous for it to occur. Meanwhile Lake Michigan / Huron riparian owners and harbors incur millions in dredging costs and other costs to adapt to near record low water levels, which the other Great Lakes are not seeing. Superior's level is not affected by the St. Clair, and the lakes downstream of the St. Clair are benefiting from the additional water they receive.

 

There are huge tunnels under Chicago that divert water to the Mississippi. Not widely a lot of info on them as they contravene an agreement between US and Canada. They were made in the 50's to protect the Mississippi levels as a lot of shipping runs up and down the Midwest. Look at Chicago's location and it just makes sense.

 

And you know this how? What a crock. The only "tunnels" are the water gates which let water from Lake Michigan into the Chicago river. Those are in plain sight and in fact I have stood above them and watched the water come through. Better get your tinfoil hat and then think about how do you know about these secret tunnels, but the Canadians -- nor any of the other states bordering Lakes Michigan - Huron -- have never found out about them.....because I guarantee if they exist, my Wisconsin state representatives would be all over that issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snow levels on the south shore of Lake Superior. Melt baby melt!

 

GRAND_MARAIS_SNOWBANK%202013.jpg?w=440&h=330&aspect=nostretch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes. Back in the 60s the Corps dredged the St. Clair. Then, with the natural rocky bottom removed, additional scouring occurred so that the St. Clair is now much deeper than before. More water goes out than if the dredging had not occurred. And even more water goes out than the Corps calculated, because of the scouring.

 

The Corps could bring the bed of the St. Clair back to its pre-scouring level (back to the level intended to have been achieved by the dredging) by simply dumping a few barge loads of rocks. However that solution is too simple and the Corps are too ponderous for it to occur. Meanwhile Lake Michigan / Huron riparian owners and harbors incur millions in dredging costs and other costs to adapt to near record low water levels, which the other Great Lakes are not seeing. Superior's level is not affected by the St. Clair, and the lakes downstream of the St. Clair are benefiting from the additional water they receive.

 

There are huge tunnels under Chicago that divert water to the Mississippi. Not widely a lot of info on them as they contravene an agreement between US and Canada. They were made in the 50's to protect the Mississippi levels as a lot of shipping runs up and down the Midwest. Look at Chicago's location and it just makes sense.

 

And you know this how? What a crock. The only "tunnels" are the water gates which let water from Lake Michigan into the Chicago river. Those are in plain sight and in fact I have stood above them and watched the water come through. Better get your tinfoil hat and then think about how do you know about these secret tunnels, but the Canadians -- nor any of the other states bordering Lakes Michigan - Huron -- have never found out about them.....because I guarantee if they exist, my Wisconsin state representatives would be all over that issue.

 

Hmm. I'm going with a late April Fools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snow levels on the south shore of Lake Superior. Melt baby melt!

 

GRAND_MARAIS_SNOWBANK%202013.jpg?w=440&h=330&aspect=nostretch

 

Me thinks i recognize that prehistoric lab..........(the one on the left)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lake Michigan/Huron went up 3 cm (1.18 inchs) from March to April. Take it where we can get it.

 

Start rain dancing! We need a few good soakers and the snow melt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

 

Sailing on the eastern end of Lake Erie, I can assure you that is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

google Great Lake Water Diversions Chicago

They have been diverting water since early 1900's

I dont have a tin hat lol. perhaps there aren't tunnels but there is 2.1 billion gallons per day since early 60's and up to 5 in a treaty singed in 1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

 

Sailing on the eastern end of Lake Erie, I can assure you that is not the case.

 

No. That Statement only shows what it flowing over Niagara falls, and it was only used as a comparison to show just how much water flows down the St. Clair River every day. Water is also flowing out of Lake Erie via the Welland and Erie Canals.

 

To your point though, in terms of historic water levels, Lake Erie is not nearly as close to all time record lows as Huron and Michigan. Lake Michigan set all time record lows for the months of November-February and are barely above them now. We will all benefit from the snowfall this winter in the UP and Canada when it melts, but we should also do the rain dance for some decent spring rains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. The four niagara power plants can divert 150000 cfs from the falls. during tourist season 100,000 cfs so the falls still look like falls. the average flow rate in the niagara river is 200,000 cfs. the treaty allows flow regardless of lake levels. this is new & should help make this a banner year for beaches:

 

Ontario completes huge hydro project

 

 

March 27, 2013 | By Barbara Vergetis Lundin

 

The Ontario government has completed a renewable electricity project -- the largest hydroelectric project to come into service in Ontario in the past 50 years -- that will provide the province with clean energy for the next 100 years.

The Niagara Tunnel Project, part of Ontario's Long-Term Energy Plan, is more than six miles long and channels additional water from the Niagara River to the Sir Adam Beck Generating Station at 132,086 gallons per second -- fast enough to fill an Olympic swimming pool in just seconds.

Hydro accounts for almost one-third of Ontario Power Generation's electricity production today. Since 2003, more than 360 MW of new, upgraded and refurbished water power projects have come online in Ontario. In 2011, hydroelectric generation produced 32.4 terawatt-hours.

For more:

- see Ontario's Long-Term Energy Plan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

 

Sailing on the eastern end of Lake Erie, I can assure you that is not the case.

 

No. That Statement only shows what it flowing over Niagara falls, and it was only used as a comparison to show just how much water flows down the St. Clair River every day. Water is also flowing out of Lake Erie via the Welland and Erie Canals.

 

To your point though, in terms of historic water levels, Lake Erie is not nearly as close to all time record lows as Huron and Michigan. Lake Michigan set all time record lows for the months of November-February and are barely above them now. We will all benefit from the snowfall this winter in the UP and Canada when it melts, but we should also do the rain dance for some decent spring rains.

 

Water does not "flow" down the Welland and Erie Canals. I ride my bike along the Erie Canal fairly frequently when I am in this part of the world. The water is damn near stagnant. Pretty much the same in the Welland, another place I spend some time in the summer.

 

One thing that hasn't been noted is the opening of the new canal for the Canadian power authority (whatever it is technically called, HydroCanada maybe) in the Niagara River. It was just completed and opened. Long standing agreement for the Canucks to suck more water out of the river ahead of the falls for power creation. I suspect it will have some impact in the level of Lake Erie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hard to believe that 2.1 billion a day equals 2 " in water level lol

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

The St Clair River outflow into Lake St Clair is over double the outflow of Niagara Falls?. Have a link for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistically...on western Lake Ontario, I'm going to pay about $2000 for a dock in a harbour which had 7.8' of water under my transducer last spring. As of yesterday the level was measured at 5.5' midway along the dock. My boat draws 6'. Not looking good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The beach at the side of the Grosse Pointe Farms Park (Lake St. Clair) has shrunk a lot since the winter low water mark. The GP police can breath easier as a Metro Beach south appears to be unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

This is probably a bettter source.

 

http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/Outflows.aspx

 

They measure the St Clair at several points, near the head the current is much higher. I have a hard time believing those outflow numbers because there the St Clair River outflow to Lake St Clair is several narrow and shallow channels. I just can't see that volume of water moving through them.

 

 

Also, ran across this site, shows a nice graphical representation of historical, you choose dates and datasets.

 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

This is probably a bettter source.

 

http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/Outflows.aspx

 

They measure the St Clair at several points, near the head the current is much higher. I have a hard time believing those outflow numbers because there the St Clair River outflow to Lake St Clair is several narrow and shallow channels. I just can't see that volume of water moving through them.

 

 

Also, ran across this site, shows a nice graphical representation of historical, you choose dates and datasets.

 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/

I couldn't quite make sense of the USACE spreadsheet, but I'm not disputing the numbers. Like I said, I made the comparison between the St. Clair River and Niagara Falls, not the Niagara River.

 

The interactive water level site is pretty cool. I've played around with it before.

 

Bottom line is there is a shit ton of water that flows under the Blue Water Bridge and out of the upper Great Lakes. The US and Canadian government could do something to slow it down a bit without limiting shipping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The snow cover around here is about 75% melted without the assistance of rain, and our rivers are as high as I have ever seen them. Hopefully this is a common theme around the region. If we combine this with some steady spring rains, perhaps we will see the water level rise a bit before summer. There are no plans to dredge the marina here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We just spent about $100K to dredge our Club in western Lake Erie. Hope it works. Never seen the water this low at this time of year before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

lockquote>

 

This is probably a bettter source.

 

http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/Outflows.aspx

 

They measure the St Clair at several points, near the head the current is much higher. I have a hard time believing those outflow numbers because there the St Clair River outflow to Lake St Clair is several narrow and shallow channels. I just can't see that volume of water moving through them.

 

 

Also, ran across this site, shows a nice graphical representation of historical, you choose dates and datasets.

 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/

I couldn't quite make sense of the USACE spreadsheet, but I'm not disputing the numbers. Like I said, I made the comparison between the St. Clair River and Niagara Falls, not the Niagara River.

 

The interactive water level site is pretty cool. I've played around with it before.

 

Bottom line is there is a shit ton of water that flows under the Blue Water Bridge and out of the upper Great Lakes. The US and Canadian government could do something to slow it down a bit without limiting shipping.

 

 

Again I would question the numbers, but I think you are missing the bigger picture. The entire Great Lakes basin needs to be managed cohesively, not just single lakes or spots,. Water bottling, the Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal diversion, the Niagara River, the St Lawrence Seaway, etc. Limiting the flow of the St Clair River without addressing other areas just lowers the levels in Lake St Clair, Erie and Ontario. And if shipping can't transit Lake St Clair, it doesn't matter whether Lakes Huron and Michigan are a few inches higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. The four niagara power plants can divert 150000 cfs from the falls. during tourist season 100,000 cfs so the falls still look like falls. the average flow rate in the niagara river is 200,000 cfs. the treaty allows flow regardless of lake levels. this is new & should help make this a banner year for beaches:

 

Ontario completes huge hydro project

 

 

March 27, 2013 | By Barbara Vergetis Lundin

 

The Ontario government has completed a renewable electricity project -- the largest hydroelectric project to come into service in Ontario in the past 50 years -- that will provide the province with clean energy for the next 100 years.

The Niagara Tunnel Project, part of Ontario's Long-Term Energy Plan, is more than six miles long and channels additional water from the Niagara River to the Sir Adam Beck Generating Station at 132,086 gallons per second -- fast enough to fill an Olympic swimming pool in just seconds.

Hydro accounts for almost one-third of Ontario Power Generation's electricity production today. Since 2003, more than 360 MW of new, upgraded and refurbished water power projects have come online in Ontario. In 2011, hydroelectric generation produced 32.4 terawatt-hours.

For more:

- see Ontario's Long-Term Energy Plan

 

If the diversion from the Niagara river takes place below the level of the outflow of the river from Lake Erie, then the diversion can have no effect on Lake Erie's level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

Sailing on the eastern end of Lake Erie, I can assure you that is not the case.

 

No. That Statement only shows what it flowing over Niagara falls, and it was only used as a comparison to show just how much water flows down the St. Clair River every day. Water is also flowing out of Lake Erie via the Welland and Erie Canals.

 

To your point though, in terms of historic water levels, Lake Erie is not nearly as close to all time record lows as Huron and Michigan. Lake Michigan set all time record lows for the months of November-February and are barely above them now. We will all benefit from the snowfall this winter in the UP and Canada when it melts, but we should also do the rain dance for some decent spring rains.

 

Water does not "flow" down the Welland and Erie Canals. I ride my bike along the Erie Canal fairly frequently when I am in this part of the world. The water is damn near stagnant. Pretty much the same in the Welland, another place I spend some time in the summer.

 

One thing that hasn't been noted is the opening of the new canal for the Canadian power authority (whatever it is technically called, HydroCanada maybe) in the Niagara River. It was just completed and opened. Long standing agreement for the Canucks to suck more water out of the river ahead of the falls for power creation. I suspect it will have some impact in the level of Lake Erie.

How could it affect the level of Lake Erie if the water is being taken out of the river below the elevation of Lake Erie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can we now start calling them The Great Lakes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

It converts to about 195,000 cubic feet per minute pumped out of Chicago compared to almost 11 million cubic feet per minute flowing out of the St. Clair River and about 5 million cubic feet per minute flowing over Niagara Falls.

 

 

So you are saying Lake Erie is filling up at the rate of 6 million cubic feet per minute?

Sailing on the eastern end of Lake Erie, I can assure you that is not the case.

 

No. That Statement only shows what it flowing over Niagara falls, and it was only used as a comparison to show just how much water flows down the St. Clair River every day. Water is also flowing out of Lake Erie via the Welland and Erie Canals.

 

To your point though, in terms of historic water levels, Lake Erie is not nearly as close to all time record lows as Huron and Michigan. Lake Michigan set all time record lows for the months of November-February and are barely above them now. We will all benefit from the snowfall this winter in the UP and Canada when it melts, but we should also do the rain dance for some decent spring rains.

 

Water does not "flow" down the Welland and Erie Canals. I ride my bike along the Erie Canal fairly frequently when I am in this part of the world. The water is damn near stagnant. Pretty much the same in the Welland, another place I spend some time in the summer.

 

One thing that hasn't been noted is the opening of the new canal for the Canadian power authority (whatever it is technically called, HydroCanada maybe) in the Niagara River. It was just completed and opened. Long standing agreement for the Canucks to suck more water out of the river ahead of the falls for power creation. I suspect it will have some impact in the level of Lake Erie.

How could it affect the level of Lake Erie if the water is being taken out of the river below the elevation of Lake Erie?

 

 

Look at it this way: say you've got a 5 gallon bucket that is nearly full of water. There is a hole on the side in the middle that lets about one pint an hour flow out. The bucket has a faucet that leaks into it at a pint per hour, so you have equilibrium, more or less.

 

Now you add another hole in the bucket directly adjacent to the original hole, which is 1/50th the size (as an example) of the original hole, and the water flow stays constant as before.

 

Doesn't it stand to reason that the water level in the bucket is going to decrease given the additional hole?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How could it affect the level of Lake Erie if the water is being taken out of the river below the elevation of Lake Erie?

 

***

Look at it this way: say you've got a 5 gallon bucket that is nearly full of water. There is a hole on the side in the middle that lets about one pint an hour flow out. The bucket has a faucet that leaks into it at a pint per hour, so you have equilibrium, more or less.

 

Now you add another hole in the bucket directly adjacent to the original hole, which is 1/50th the size (as an example) of the original hole, and the water flow stays constant as before.

 

Doesn't it stand to reason that the water level in the bucket is going to decrease given the additional hole?

 

*****

 

 

Peter,

 

To take your analogy a little closer to the facts, there is a pipe which drains the hole in the side of the bucket. Rather than adding a new hole in the side of the bucket, we are adding a new hole in the side of the pipe. Why would that affect the amount of water which drains from the hole in the bucket into the pipe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GG,

 

Are you still allowing the water to flow naturally through the hole in the side of the bucket, down the pipe, and through the new hole, or are you placing a siphon on that new hole and forcing the water to flow faster? If so, then you are affecting the amount of water that drains from the bucket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could it affect the level of Lake Erie if the water is being taken out of the river below the elevation of Lake Erie?

 

***

Look at it this way: say you've got a 5 gallon bucket that is nearly full of water. There is a hole on the side in the middle that lets about one pint an hour flow out. The bucket has a faucet that leaks into it at a pint per hour, so you have equilibrium, more or less.

 

Now you add another hole in the bucket directly adjacent to the original hole, which is 1/50th the size (as an example) of the original hole, and the water flow stays constant as before.

 

Doesn't it stand to reason that the water level in the bucket is going to decrease given the additional hole?

 

*****

 

 

Peter,

 

To take your analogy a little closer to the facts, there is a pipe which drains the hole in the side of the bucket. Rather than adding a new hole in the side of the bucket, we are adding a new hole in the side of the pipe. Why would that affect the amount of water which drains from the hole in the bucket into the pipe?

 

 

First....I'm not suggesting that the new power plant channel in Canada is going to make a perceptible difference. Mother Nature has a far greater influence, even day to day, and sometimes hour to hour.

 

I forget the exact treaty name, but it was signed by the US and Canada back in the early 1900's, which created the International Joint Commission, for the purpose of making sure water wasn't diverted out of the lakes to an excessive extent.

 

Rerouting water flow around the Falls does more to impact the noticable level of the upper Niagara, and the flow over the Falls than it does the level of Lake Erie. The reason for the treaty though was to make sure the lake level was never seriously changed.

 

Here is something from the Ohio DNR that sort of sums it up.

 

From here - http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/tabid/7829/default.aspx

 

 

Currently, three power generation facilities at Niagara take water from the Niagara River above Niagara Falls and discharge it below the Falls. A popular belief is that these activities have raised Lake Erie's level through damming. However, the power plants at Niagara are unlike hydroelectric plants in the western United States that use tall dams to impound large amounts of water. The Niagara power facilities use the natural elevation drop of the Niagara River to generate power. Therefore, there are no tall dams on the river. The overall effect of the power plants actually is to somewhat lower the level of the Niagara River. To ensure that the Falls remain visually impressive with less water going over them, weirs (low dams) deepen the water slightly in the vicinity of the Falls and an "International Control Structure" helps to spread the flow of water across the full width of the Horseshoe (Canadian) Falls.

It is possible to measure how much each of these human-made factors removes from or contributes to the overall system and arrive at a net effect on the level of Lake Erie. Taking into account the controls on Lake Superior and the various diversions, the overall effect of artificial controls on Lake Erie's level is -0.3 feet. In other words, Lake Erie is about four inches lower than it would be without controls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GG,

 

Are you still allowing the water to flow naturally through the hole in the side of the bucket, down the pipe, and through the new hole, or are you placing a siphon on that new hole and forcing the water to flow faster? If so, then you are affecting the amount of water that drains from the bucket.

 

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

 

>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Clair_River

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niagara_Falls

 

I realize that wikipedia is not the most reliable source of info, but its where I got those numbers from. It's weird because the flow rate of the Niagara River is much higher than the Falls. Must be those power plants that amount to the difference.

lockquote>

 

This is probably a bettter source.

 

http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Missions/GreatLakesInformation/Outflows.aspx

 

They measure the St Clair at several points, near the head the current is much higher. I have a hard time believing those outflow numbers because there the St Clair River outflow to Lake St Clair is several narrow and shallow channels. I just can't see that volume of water moving through them.

 

 

Also, ran across this site, shows a nice graphical representation of historical, you choose dates and datasets.

 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/

I couldn't quite make sense of the USACE spreadsheet, but I'm not disputing the numbers. Like I said, I made the comparison between the St. Clair River and Niagara Falls, not the Niagara River.

 

The interactive water level site is pretty cool. I've played around with it before.

 

Bottom line is there is a shit ton of water that flows under the Blue Water Bridge and out of the upper Great Lakes. The US and Canadian government could do something to slow it down a bit without limiting shipping.

 

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

 

hooey. the relative lack of precip into the basin over the 15 years is the issue. consider the opposite case: high water, e.g., 1986. would all y'alls lakefront owners be complaining that the st. clair river was transporting too much water? i don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this a dumb thought, but this IS SA, right?

 

How about distributing responsibility for the water to the states, proportional to how much of their area is in the Great Lakes watershed?

 

great_lakes_watershed.gif

 

Every DROP of rain and snow that falls in Michigan ends up in the great lakes. MN and WI, not so much. And Illinois is a laughter. Looks like Ontario would get a say as well.

 

Told you it was dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

 

hooey. the relative lack of precip into the basin over the 15 years is the issue. consider the opposite case: high water, e.g., 1986. would all y'alls lakefront owners be complaining that the st. clair river was transporting too much water? i don't think so.

No kidding eh? If all of Huron's water issues were because it was flowing away down through St. Clair, why is Erie and Ontario so fucking low?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

 

I am a riparian property owner on Lake Michigan. I also sail on other lakes that are affected besides Huron and Michigan. Yes the water levels are down in Lakes Michigan and Huron. Newsflash, the entire GL basin is at or near historic lows. The problem here is that you want to make yourself whole at the expense of other lakes downstream. The St Clair River is not the magic bullet that is going to make all your problems go away. FFS , the St Clair River was dredged in 1963, there were very high water levels during the mid 1980s. Did water not flow through the St Clair River then?. This has far more to do with warmer temperatures leading to increased evaporation and less rain and snow fall than flow through the St Clair River.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with that message barley.

 

People are looking for simple solutions, not logical answers.

 

The loudest crybabies are in Georgian Bay.

 

Canada should just build a dam at Tobermory.

 

edit - where is the sarcasm thingy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The snow cover around here is about 75% melted without the assistance of rain, and our rivers are as high as I have ever seen them. Hopefully this is a common theme around the region. If we combine this with some steady spring rains, perhaps we will see the water level rise a bit before summer. There are no plans to dredge the marina here.

 

I have the sump in the basement working pretty hard today with all the rain. I am doing what I can for the water levels. My sump might be the difference maker!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low water was when the Alpena ridge was used to herd and hunt animals. Lots of room before we get to that point again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low water was when the Alpena ridge was used to herd and hunt animals. Lots of room before we get to that point again.

 

Only 36 feet to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

 

hooey. the relative lack of precip into the basin over the 15 years is the issue. consider the opposite case: high water, e.g., 1986. would all y'alls lakefront owners be complaining that the st. clair river was transporting too much water? i don't think so.

No kidding eh? If all of Huron's water issues were because it was flowing away down through St. Clair, why is Erie and Ontario so fucking low?

 

I am with you on the superior, huron, and Michigan, but depending on what people mean by "historic lows", not so sure that erie and ontario fit the description.

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/now/wlevels/dbd/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure of the significance, but living a couple KM from the Great Lakes basin I can say that land is at least as wet as ever. Last year saw the most flooding that my area has seen in decades and as my property is already half flooded, I would say it could repeat itself this year. It could be easy to say that the great lake levels are a result of global warming; but we have been and continue to mess with water distribution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Jet Fuel I'm a Chicagoan and lets get a few of your misplaced facts right.

 

First there is a system called the deep tunnel. It was a project created to ensure Chicago never flooded. It is a large holding tank deep under the city which all the storm run off goes into. This is then pumped in reservoirs before it is treated and returned to Lake Michigan. The tunnel does not lead into the Mississippi

 

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/367.html

 

Yes the river was reversed and the sanitary and ship canal as well as the Chicago river flow into the Mississippi, however since the completion of this amazing piece of engineering there have been strict rules which regulate how much water is allowed to flow from Lake Michigan by the Great Lakes Commission which is a joint US, Canadian group. The US Supreme Court ruled the system can only divert more than 3200 cubic feet per second (cfs) from Lake Michigan for navigation, domestic or sanitary uses. http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-ogl-diversions-decreesummary.pdf, The 3200 cubic feet per second also includes the drinking water for the entire city and surrounding area. In total the city only send about half of this, 1 billion US gallons a day down the chicago river.

 

​There is no conspiracy, nothing secret. Its all out there with a quick google search, good place to start as always is wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River#cite_note-61

 

In all, Chicago went 321 days without 1in of rain or snow fall last year... we are in a drought. Thats most of the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Jet Fuel I'm a Chicagoan and lets get a few of your misplaced facts right.

 

First there is a system called the deep tunnel. It was a project created to ensure Chicago never flooded. It is a large holding tank deep under the city which all the storm run off goes into. This is then pumped in reservoirs before it is treated and returned to Lake Michigan. The tunnel does not lead into the Mississippi

 

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/367.html

 

Yes the river was reversed and the sanitary and ship canal as well as the Chicago river flow into the Mississippi, however since the completion of this amazing piece of engineering there have been strict rules which regulate how much water is allowed to flow from Lake Michigan by the Great Lakes Commission which is a joint US, Canadian group. The US Supreme Court ruled the system can only divert more than 3200 cubic feet per second (cfs) from Lake Michigan for navigation, domestic or sanitary uses. http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-ogl-diversions-decreesummary.pdf, The 3200 cubic feet per second also includes the drinking water for the entire city and surrounding area. In total the city only send about half of this, 1 billion US gallons a day down the chicago river.

 

​There is no conspiracy, nothing secret. Its all out there with a quick google search, good place to start as always is wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River#cite_note-61

 

In all, Chicago went 321 days without 1in of rain or snow fall last year... we are in a drought. Thats most of the problem.

never said there was a conspiracy lol Just the fact that there is water, a lot of water being diverted through Chicago t the Mississippi, and that there was a tunnel. I dont have any facts but you have proved me right to a degree. To say there is no diversion is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot's O'rain over Michigan and Huron over the past 48 hours.

 

Keep rain dancing everybody! April has been a soaker so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A pretty thorough read on the history of dredging in the St. Clair and Detroit River systems - HERE. A quick spin through the data available at the GLERL site actually does lend some credence to the Georgian Bay folks notions about dredging impacting Lk Huron-Michigan water levels. I never really looked at much, but its pretty clear that there has been a decrease in the height difference between Huron and St. Clair over the years. This would imply that the St. Clair River has been transporting more water into Lk. St. Clair over time. Hmmm ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a big watershed for such big lakes. If you look at annual mean water level from 1960 to today, you can see that Ontario is maintaining itself, and all the others are on a down slope, Michigan/Huron being the worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The snow cover around here is about 75% melted without the assistance of rain, and our rivers are as high as I have ever seen them. Hopefully this is a common theme around the region. If we combine this with some steady spring rains, perhaps we will see the water level rise a bit before summer. There are no plans to dredge the marina here.

 

I have the sump in the basement working pretty hard today with all the rain. I am doing what I can for the water levels. My sump might be the difference maker!

Eclipse, check my sump pump, im out of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ok Jet Fuel I'm a Chicagoan and lets get a few of your misplaced facts right.

 

First there is a system called the deep tunnel. It was a project created to ensure Chicago never flooded. It is a large holding tank deep under the city which all the storm run off goes into. This is then pumped in reservoirs before it is treated and returned to Lake Michigan. The tunnel does not lead into the Mississippi

 

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/367.html

 

Yes the river was reversed and the sanitary and ship canal as well as the Chicago river flow into the Mississippi, however since the completion of this amazing piece of engineering there have been strict rules which regulate how much water is allowed to flow from Lake Michigan by the Great Lakes Commission which is a joint US, Canadian group. The US Supreme Court ruled the system can only divert more than 3200 cubic feet per second (cfs) from Lake Michigan for navigation, domestic or sanitary uses. http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-ogl-diversions-decreesummary.pdf, The 3200 cubic feet per second also includes the drinking water for the entire city and surrounding area. In total the city only send about half of this, 1 billion US gallons a day down the chicago river.

 

​There is no conspiracy, nothing secret. Its all out there with a quick google search, good place to start as always is wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River#cite_note-61

 

In all, Chicago went 321 days without 1in of rain or snow fall last year... we are in a drought. Thats most of the problem.

never said there was a conspiracy lol Just the fact that there is water, a lot of water being diverted through Chicago t the Mississippi, and that there was a tunnel. I dont have any facts but you have proved me right to a degree. To say there is no diversion is wrong.

 

Cool glad we ironed that out...

 

Yes water does leave the lakes, but remember water is supposed to leave the lakes, wether it is through the St. Lawrence Seaway, the Erie Canal (how come no one has brought this up as sucking away the water?) Chicago river, or any way else the lakes flow the lakes naturally flow to the sea (ok yes two of my examples the Chicago river and Erie Canal are not natural). but still the issue that we are letting to much water leave the lakes is debatable, the real reason they are so low is we have had several years of droughts with only one or two flood years in between. Its been much warmer the last decade then it has been in the previous ones and therefore less and less snow and rain to fill the lakes. As the cycle changes we will get our water back, but for the time being everyone get floating docks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The snow cover around here is about 75% melted without the assistance of rain, and our rivers are as high as I have ever seen them. Hopefully this is a common theme around the region. If we combine this with some steady spring rains, perhaps we will see the water level rise a bit before summer. There are no plans to dredge the marina here.

 

I have the sump in the basement working pretty hard today with all the rain. I am doing what I can for the water levels. My sump might be the difference maker!

Eclipse, check my sump pump, im out of the country.

And we thank you for that. That was your house I saw floating by then!?!?!? Hope you are in a better place than we are here...snowing at the F*@#$ing moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The point I was attempting to make is this: dropping Great Lakes water levels are a big issue, and are costing a lot of people a lot of money, especially around Lakes Michigan - Huron. In the harbor where I sail, 5 different riparian owners each have incurred tens of thousands of dollars in dredging costs just in the last 6 weeks. So, we need to focus on what's important.

 

The amount of water going out of the St. Lawrence river, going through a power plant, and then returning to the St. Lawrence River, is not important. The amount of water going out through the Chicago River is not important. The amount of water being "lost" to mythical water bottling operations (Ha!) is not important.

 

The amount of water being sucked out of Lake Huron because of sloppy dredging in the St. Clair River, and laziness on the part of the Army Corps of Engineers is VERY important. Lakes Michigan and Huron -- by the Corps' own admission -- would be 20 inches higher RIGHT NOW if not for such dredging. That 20 inches, in my harbor and in a lot of others, is the difference between needing to dredge, and not needing to dredge.

 

See for example http://www.grandhaventribune.com/article/299771

 

The man-made hole at the bottom of the St. Clair River is what needs fixing. The rest is just a distraction.

 

hooey. the relative lack of precip into the basin over the 15 years is the issue. consider the opposite case: high water, e.g., 1986. would all y'alls lakefront owners be complaining that the st. clair river was transporting too much water? i don't think so.

The relative lack of precip into the basin over the last 15 years is responsible for much of the current shortfall. But the Army Corps of Engineers has ADMITTED that lakes Michigan-Huron would be 20" higher if not for the dredging of the St. Clair. Again, that 20" is the difference between having to dredge and not having to dredge, THIS YEAR. The Corps busted it, they should fix it.

 

As for 1986, that's water over the dam, so to speak. We need to solve NOW the problem we have NOW, a problem created by our careless and shortsighted government. If the water gets that high in the future, fine. We still have all the seawalls, riprap, and raised docks which we built in 1986-1987.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0