iiwhistlerii

Just now, lost a lure said:

What is the "set minimum" for Lake St. Lawrence?


Sent from my SM-G950U using Lake Ontario United mobile app
 

231 feet and change before it effects water supplies

9 hours ago, LongLine said:

iiWh' - 

 

You complain about low water  in  Lake St Lawrence yet you forget that that lake didn't exist before the seaway was built.  Area became known as "the lost villages."  Not only people (over 6,500) but all the houses (over 500) were relocated.  Anyone who has built there since should have seen this repeat in history was going to happen, according to your (and your supporters) arguments.   The fact that it hasn't happened in the last 60 yrs has no bearing on it.

 

Additionally, you've stated environmental improvements are made with higher and lower water levels.  Well, you just got your wish with Lake St Lawrence now being so low.  So why complain about that, maybe you'll catch some real muskies next season.  

 

 

Not complaining about Lake st. Lawrence water levels 1 bit.  I'm applauding them for doing exactly what they are doing and draining it down.  Its rapidly dropping levels are showing you why that these flows arent possible once lake ontario drops below a certain level like I've explained to you over and over now.  If they did this in September they would have reached minimum in 2 weeks and then had to back off the rest of the fall.  It wouldnt of helped.  Doing it now is genius.  They are going to have to back off flow for ice formation anyway so all this water being let out now is a bonus because when they reduce flows for iceformation lake st. Lawrence will rise back towards normal levels during a time when flows would have had to be reduced anyway. 

 

 As far as real muskies go I'm sorry I dont believe in the make believe 6 footers you probably believe in and think you've seen.  Again I believe in what is real and factual.  My boats 2 over 56" and 17 over 50" this season from the St. Lawrence will have to do.  

10 hours ago, lost a lure said:

Levels were both low and high before and after the seaway was built. Would the 2019 level have been as high without the dams? According to your theory the flow would have been higher when the water level was higher, especially without the Iroquois Dam "bottleneck"

Iroquois dam isnt the bottleneck.  Iroquois dam was put in place after they eliminated the worst part of the bottleneck and created the locks.  That whole area used to be Rapids before they created the seaway and the lakes.  Have you ever looked at water levels prior to the seaway?  Yes lake Ontario could have been much higher at times without the flood control and ability to even out flows using the lakes reservoirs .

7 minutes ago, HB2 said:

Is the LO lake level dropping ? 

Holding steady. Itll take some time for the water to pass through the narrows in the river.  Lake Ontario was expected to rise as much as 2 inches this month tho so if we dont lose any ground and remain even that's huge.  No matter what it's a win, this is a window that doesnt present itself very often and they've never taken advantage of before.

10 hours ago, lost a lure said:

 
Where did you take your measurements?

From the army corps of engineers web site. Or how about the fact that water went from the docks to 200 feet out this week at Wilson hill and Ogdensburg hasnt changed at all. You think these pictures are fake? Lake Ontario is at 246 and holding and lake st. Lawrence should hit set minimum by the weekend.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

Over 10 thousand were already evacuated from thier homes during those 2 month time period. Dams were at risk of failing where things could have gotten way worse real quick. Levys did fail, it was a true state of emergency and not just water in the basement. To gain an inch on our end each week we would have had to bury them another food deeper and probably evacuate thousands more. Water flowed down neighborhood streets already, the costs of flooding them further would have probably been astronomical. But your right, we'd be 16 inches or so lower right now, theyd be rebuilding and maybe 2020 wouldnt look like another repeat, but how could anybody have known that in 2017 when it all started. That's a call I wouldnt want to have to make.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

My point is if you look at it from all angles I honestly feel like it's been pretty equal. People from lake Ontario argue nature wouldnt have saved them if the dams werent there. They forget that same argument applies here. Have you ever looked at the lake ontario levels from before the seaway was built? Nature would have washed away their property 40 years ago without the seaway stabilizing lake levels.

Long term health of the lake is impossible without natural shorelines and natural erosion. Armoring the entire shorline and eliminating natural seasonal flooding will slowly but surely turn this lake into an empty lifeless swimming pool.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

So asking for equal treatment is F everyone else?  LO water levels were allowed to flood another 1.1 feet higher to protect Montreal from Ottawa River flooding.  Asking that the flooding burden be at least shared equally between Montreal and LO is a selfish prospective?  Yet protect Montreal at all costs for Ottawa River flooding is the fair thing to do?  Seems you are the one with a skewed perspective.

Over 10 thousand were already evacuated from thier homes during those 2 month time period. Dams were at risk of failing where things could have gotten way worse real quick. Levys did fail, it was a true state of emergency and not just water in the basement. To gain an inch on our end each week we would have had to bury them another food deeper and probably evacuate thousands more. Water flowed down neighborhood streets already, the costs of flooding them further would have probably been astronomical. But your right, we'd be 16 inches or so lower right now, theyd be rebuilding and maybe 2020 wouldnt look like another repeat, but how could anybody have known that in 2017 when it all started. That's a call I wouldnt want to have to make.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

As of 05:00 1/6/2020 Lake St. Lawrence is 11.42" below lwd down stream of the Iroquois Dam.  Sent from my SM-G950U using Lake Ontario United mobile app  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

So lake Ontario and the upper st. Lawrence is at 246 feet and holding and Lake st. Lawrence has gone from 243 feet to 235 feet this week but u want me to believe the difference is only 11"??? Did lake Ontario drop 8 feet too?? Can you see chimney shoal out of the water in Ogdensburg??[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

32 minutes ago, GAMBLER said:

People all around Lake Ontario have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years worth of erosion in one year, loss of businesses, loss of revenue from loss of business ect.  If the water is low on Lake St Lawrence and people had trouble getting their boats out or not being able to icefish bays its not detrimental.  I lost 2 months of the fishing season due to the docks being under water at my marina.  I am thankful that it was not worse.  It was not a big deal because it is miniscule compared to the damage others have suffered.  Down here on Edgemere Drive by my work, houses were filled with 2' of water in 2017.  This year, the water was coming over the berm built by the town and flooding those same homes again.  The storm / Sanitary sewer system on Edgemere Drive was flooding and they were pumping sewage into the lake.  The Brockport Yacht Club on Sandy Creek spend thousands of dollars to have a break wall raised up and a pump system put in.  The water came over the new break wall and flooded out the building again.  Low water on Lake St Lawrence is not the end of the world.  As long as municipalities are not affected, no one is flooding,  keep it low until you no longer can. 

Lets expand that to not just include us again.  People all around the great lakes have lost cottages, homes, hundreds of years of erosion.  Over 10,000 people have been forced to evacuate there homes near montreal for months twice in the last 3 years.  Increased currents below the dam have caused severe erosion.  Businesses were forced to close along the fox river and green bay due to high water.  Marinas on the west end of lake Erie were unusable much of 2019.   Lighthouse cove on Lake st. Clair and St. Clair shores dealt with severe flooding repeatedly this summer due to the record high water levels that forced evacuations.  Look up some of those videos, water actually flowed through the streets like rivers during every storm surge.  The list is never ending and the stories from lake to lake all read the same.  Yes we are suffering, but we are not alone and I honestly dont believe we've even had it the worst.

2 hours ago, lost a lure said:

I did not argue that the shipping wants lower flows or higher water. Those are your words. When are you going to realize that major corporations don't tell the truth about their profits? What happened to your argument about the water flows could not reach 10,400?

My argument is that flows cannot be sustained above what they were without dropping lake st. Lawrence.  Remember your whole iroquois dam argument?  Well the dam has been wide open all fall and Lake st. Lawrence just dropped 7 feet in 7 days under these flows.  You call that sustainable?  If they didnt absolutely prove my point for me idk what will explain it to you any better.  You wanted to see that in october?  Dont worry, most launches and docks are only a couple hundred feet from water there now.  Would have been fine.  Oh but none of that matters to you because you dont live on that portion of the river.  Your part is all that matters.  I'd love to see how your tune would change if u were a few miles northeast.

 

 

https://www.newyorkupstate.com/weather/2019/05/is-plan-2014-getting-a-bad-rap-for-lake-ontario-flooding.html

 

You guys will love this one.  He must have gotten paid off by the ijc.  Probably works for the shipping industry.

52 minutes ago, GAMBLER said:

Like I have been saying all along. More could have been done. It would have minimized the flooding. Also more could have been done in the early fall but they continually dropped flow. Now we are sitting higher than last year at this time. Erie is also higher than last year at this time so that only
means more water coming in.


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United mobile app

More could have been done?.  In early fall?  God forbid they drop flows so lake st. Lawrence can level out and the people who have been begging for flow reductions to let the water reach the launches again can get there boat out of the water or use thier docks.  God forbid they lower flows just enough so residents along the river on Lake St. Lawrence can remove thier boats for the river and access their own docks for a few days.  I get it.  F everybody but us.  Current conditions on lake st. Lawrence below  Pics from today.  1 week of high flows and it's almost to absolute minimum.  The lowest anybody I've talked to can ever remember seeing it.   They are only doing this now because they know they will have to drop flows for ice formation eventually but they've sacrificed another area for ours.  Say thank you.  It's an extreme measure we should be thankful for and river residents are already losing thier minds about it.  Good chance water will be too low to launch there clear into next spring, no ice fishing in the bays there this year as they are bone dry.  We arent the only ones suffering.  

 

 

 
And who is telling the Standard what to print? The shipping industry

Do a google search man. Its public knowledge and common sense. I even lose 6mph on top end trying to go into that current and it takes me 4000 rpm to stay on plane where usually I can do it at 3 when I'm just cruising into the current. Nobody wants those rapids below the dam. You argue the shipping industry wants lower flows but then argue they want higher water. Guess what, those 2 things dont go together. With higher water come higher flows, they definitely dont want this.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

3 hours ago, LongLine said:

 

Just another example of your reading what nots there.  READ the first sentence of your copied article.  "Canadian & U.S economies..."  

Yes..  3-4 million per day loss in business revenues.  BUSINESS REVINUES from the SHIPPING INDUSTRY.  

12 hours ago, LongLine said:

$1 Billion loss to the (overall) economy - wow!

 

 

1 billon divided by 6 trillion  x 100%  = 0.02%.  I wonder how many CFOs jumped off their ships fantail for that tremendous loss?  Probably none as they received discounted seaway passage fees this year.

Associating GDP with shipping industry profits.  That's cute.   Think about that for a minute.

9 minutes ago, lost a lure said:

 

Multiple messages commending you. That's funnier than Hanks snowball comment.

If I argued the Sun rises and sets each day you'd tell me I dont know what I'm talking about.  Some people chose to learn at every opportunity.  Others are...  well....  you.  I can screen shot messages all day but what's the point, you'll just say I'm making it up.  It's all a conspiracy.

5 hours ago, Sk8man said:

Man.....this thread sure has taken on its own life might be easier and perhaps even more productive to just "agree to disagree"

Far less entertaining...  plus I've gotten multiple messages from guys on the site commending me for taking on the impossible task of convincing those scorn that there may be more to this than they are willing to see.  Lots of people appreciate the info and like to learn how the system works whether they chose to agree or not.  We are all adults, as long as people dont start taking things personal it's all good educational banter.

Oh and please tell me again about how they slowed flow in august to help shipping and not because lake st. Lawrence was beginning to drop without the water being as high.  They tapered down the flows as flow from lake Ontario slowed as it dropped.    Here is what happens with 249 ft flows when we are at 246ft...  lake st. Lawrence losing a foot a day and at a historical low that would have went over real well in August.  Lake ontario is holding steady as water is working it's way through the bottleneck of the river.  Probably at about 8,000, it's natural drainage rate for this level.

3-4 million dollars per day at 10,400.  They were at 10,400 most of the summer.  I'm sure it's just propaganda.  

15 minutes ago, LongLine said:

Prediction for 2019 shipping by marine chamber:

https://www.marinedelivers.com/media_release/great-lakes-seaway-ports-forecast-stellar-2019-shipping-season/

 

Results reported:

(right click & open in another tab/window if you can't read it)

Yes - down at US ports 6.4%, but was due to tariffs on metals. Other materials all broke records.

Yes - "Massive cargo ships" (salties) from all over the world came all the way in this year.

Yes - IJC was going to close seaway in Dec but didn't because of industry protests

Yes - with another week, they will exceed their 2018 goals. (note this was posted 12/24)

 

There's another post in the above link (further down it) as to how they extended the shipping season another week this year.

 

Yep - shipping lost money all right...NOT!  (Now I got'ta go buy a new meter, you just bent the needle on the old BS meter.) 

 

Tom B.

(LongLine)

 

 

 

Increased fuel costs alone from operating in that current are astronomical.  You really think these ships want that river flowing at 10,000+?   Those flows not only increase fuel costs, they cause delays, and the high water imposes lower speed limits.  Please tell me again how much they are loving this...  Its amazing the opinions you are able to form when you chose to ignore the facts that dont fit your agenda.  Use all the data and then form your opinions without prejudice.  

 

 

That's cute.  Realistically the high water has cost shipping about a billion dollars so far but ok if you say so. 

 

2014 was put in place to help shipping and increase power production. It will help shipping by allowing the lake to drop further in the winter extending flows into the late fall.  In years past they've had to drop fall flows in the late fall because lake ontario was reaching minimum.  Same idea and benefit for power production.   None of this applies at all to what's happened in the last 3 years tho.  High water has clusterfuched the plan since the get go.  Been operation outside of its peramiters with over maximum flows non stop.  This isnt helping anybody but ur going to believe what u believe no matter what is said.  I do appreciate the entertainment tho.

We did say you are full of shat. We said you didn’t get “it”. “It” being what is important. People that lost their homes, businesses, time on the water, home values, land etc etc don’t care about the water level on Lake St Lawrence, especially with what is coming down the pipeline. What is that expression “don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining .”

Point is flows were constantly adjusted to maintain levels on Lake st. Lawrence. When it began to drop they lowered flow to maintain while still draining lake Ontario as fast as the water was coming through the river. Everyone wants flows of 10,000 non stop and this is the demonstration of why it's not possible and shows why the argument flows were dropped for the benefit of shipping is poor. These high lake levels are killing the shipping industry, increased currents have cost them almost 1 billion. If they would have dumped the water on Montreal for those 4 months we'd be 16" lower, flow would be down and the shipping industry would have saved millions. It's a poor argument that doesnt make sence.

It's ok to be upset about water levels here at home as we all should be, but you have to be mad at the right people for the right reasons or we just look like idiots with an invalid argument. Be upset they sacrificed Lake Ontario residents for Montreal twice for 2 months each time. The rest is just a poor argument not supported by the actual facts of what's occurring.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=175762606825898&id=100031764788513

 

Amazing

6 minutes ago, iiwhistlerii said:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=175749266827232&id=100031764788513

 

If you have facebook and can check out this link check it out.  This is above the dam right now.  Water is insanely low already.  Amazing what they can do in just hours when they open it up without enough water coming in to refill it 

That's the lowest anybody can ever remember seeing it up there.  1 day at those flows and it dropped that far.  Maybe I wasnt full of **** afterall.........

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=175749266827232&id=100031764788513

 

If you have facebook and can check out this link check it out.  This is above the dam right now.  Water is insanely low already.  Amazing what they can do in just hours when they open it up without enough water coming in to refill it