# Boardman---WOW



## Tron322 (Oct 29, 2011)

We are taking a liberal viewpoint? I call it common sense.

So we are past five years on numerous dams but the probability of breach gets closer to zero every year huh?

Well that's good news bud, let's leave these dams alone...according to Ngy's research they get safer with time.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

Yes dams do have a failure rate closer to zero after five years, there is an inverse relationship between the age of a dam and the probability it will fail. As a dam gets older, the chance it fails is lessened. After five years old, a dam has established a strong pattern and flow pathway. 

The company removed the dam admitted the main reason for removal was cost savings, the dam could stay operational, but would cost a large amount of money to do so, do they favored removing the dam.

Also, what you say is common sense is actually your opinion, you have failed to bring about any valid points other than your opinions.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Tron322 (Oct 29, 2011)

I agreed with you...everyone keep building in floodplains below dams coming up on a century old, those dams only get better with age.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

the rapids said:


> Have the landowners noticed that it isn't just the boardman that is flooded? All of the rivers from the Muskegon on up are above flood stage. The Muskegon has 3 dams between croton and big rapids, but none of those are protecting the downstream residents from flooding. In fact, the flooding could be more catastrophic because of the dams.
> 
> 
> None of the dams on the boardman were built primarily (or even secondarily?) for flood control. They were/are in disrepair. Would they really want to trust a faulty dam to handle a large flood event?
> ...


Can you post your source for saying that the Brown Bridge dam was not built for flood control, because I think you're guessing and you're wrong?

Just a source article, or other other information source will do?


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

UltimateOutdoorsman said:


> Dams don't stop floods. Especially if it's old and in disrepair.


Interesting that there hasn't been a problem until they started tearing the dam out, screwed up and flooded the river below the dam and again this spring, the first spring the dam has been completely removed. 

My guess is we're going to see a major revision in the original plans for tearing out these dams. The DNR is finally figuring out what a lot of people told them before hand. They already announced that plans to continue the removals are being put on hold.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

Totally agree with Bucko, it is financial suicide to pull the dams, no major flooding in how many years?

If the area does flood after the dams are removed as it has with brown bridge, the insurance companies will have a field day suing the parties involved.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## the rapids (Nov 17, 2005)

I'm pretty sure the dam had nothing to do with our atypical weather patterns the last two years, which is what causes atypical flooding on rivers with dams and without dams in Michigan.


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

I, along with a few other guys on here, live in the area and frequent that area ALOT. I've been out a few times since the warm up doing deer work. I drive by RR just about every time. I was out Monday doing some more deer work and I too noticed the river there at RR was blown over. That has nothing to do with any dam. The amount of snow we had and a quick warm up set the stage for this. I feel bad for the folks that chose to live on the river and got wet but if it is going to flood, it's going to flood. I'm sure the RR owners and other owners in the BB Quiet Area above the former pond know that too and accept the risk. I will speculate even if the dam was still up there would have been some flooding downstream of the dam and we would read about it in the news.


I did a quick look on Google News to see if the Boardman has flooded before. The second return is from the 4/8/28 edition of the Ludington Daily. Probably more recent ones if I wanted to spend the time looking but everyone gets the idea.....the Boardman flooding is not anything new. If I owned property on the Boardman, I would never build anything there unless it was on stilts.....just like some of the barrier island houses on the Gulf or Outer Banks. I would think it would be very difficult for the Boardman property owners to get flood insurance anymore. Of course years ago the homeowners and insurance companies could have done some due diligence research on this subject.












Where do you go from here?


1. The dam is not going back up
2. The homeowners and insurance companies could try to sue and hope they have a winnable case 
3. The Feds or state could buy out those property owners and get rid of the houses and turn those areas into parks or back to natural state
4. The Feds or state could figure out a way to get a trust fund started and work with the homeowners to try and shore up these properties somehow
5. The homeowners and insurance companies are S.O.L. for living/insuring in a known flood plain 
6. I would tell the city/county/state do not issue anymore building permits in that area unless the property owner(s) signs a release of liability clause and/or all new builds have to be zoned as stilt/elevated only.

At the end of the day.....someone, somewhere will not be happy with any solution.


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

For context and more currently, here is a 1985 article from the Owosso newspaper about the same thing.


----------



## msfcarp (Jun 6, 2006)

NbyNW said:


> Yes dams do have a failure rate closer to zero after five years, there is an inverse relationship between the age of a dam and the probability it will fail. As a dam gets older, the chance it fails is lessened. After five years old, a dam has established a strong pattern and flow pathway.
> 
> The company removed the dam admitted the main reason for removal was cost savings, the dam could stay operational, but would cost a large amount of money to do so, do they favored removing the dam.
> 
> ...


Typically most dam failures occur when a significant rain event happens and the spillway of the dam cannot pass enough water. The pond level rises and starts going over the earth embankments, shortly the embankments fail.

The ferc is mandating the owners of many dams now made modifications to pass a 100 year flood. Of course thse mods can cost millions of dollars, hence no one can afford it.

And of course, you can still have an event that could be greater than 100 year flood at any time also.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

So John, your reference is from 29 years ago? 

Also, referencing the properties above the dam and below the dam are not equals. It could be assumed the water above the dam would regularly flood, but land beneath the Dam may not.

If you have ever used flood insurance, they use the percentage chance of your property that it will flood. So if the last time boardman flooded was 1985, you are in a once a thirty year flood plain. So roughly a 3% chance any given year. 

But twice in the last year the area has flooded, the insurance companies will have a field day with those statistics, at the very least will cost the persons in charge of removing and the decisions process jumbo amounts in attorney fees.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## msfcarp (Jun 6, 2006)

bucko12pt said:


> Can you post your source for saying that the Brown Bridge dam was not built for flood control, because I think you're guessing and you're wrong?
> 
> Just a source article, or other other information source will do?


Most of the larger dams where built between 1906 and 1920 specifically to produce hydroelectric power, not flood control.


----------



## NbyNW (Jun 30, 2012)

Carp, can you reference where it has been proven that a dam that is used for hydroelectric power does not effect the flood water levels of a river?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

TVCJohn said:


> I, along with a few other guys on here, live in the area and frequent that area ALOT. I've been out a few times since the warm up doing deer work. I drive by RR just about every time. I was out Monday doing some more deer work and I too noticed the river there at RR was blown over. That has nothing to do with any dam. The amount of snow we had and a quick warm up set the stage for this. I feel bad for the folks that chose to live on the river and got wet but if it is going to flood, it's going to flood. I'm sure the RR owners and other owners in the BB Quiet Area above the former pond know that too and accept the risk. I will speculate even if the dam was still up there would have been some flooding downstream of the dam and we would read about it in the news.
> 
> 
> I did a quick look on Google News to see if the Boardman has flooded before. The second return is from the 4/8/28 edition of the Ludington Daily. Probably more recent ones if I wanted to spend the time looking but everyone gets the idea.....the Boardman flooding is not anything new. If I owned property on the Boardman, I would never build anything there unless it was on stilts.....just like some of the barrier island houses on the Gulf or Outer Banks. I would think it would be very difficult for the Boardman property owners to get flood insurance anymore. Of course years ago the homeowners and insurance companies could have done some due diligence research on this subject.
> ...


The water you're talking about at RR was collected at Brown Bridge before it reached the areas that are a problem now, which are below Brown Bridge. BB was drawn down in the winter so it could handle the excess water during the spring thaw and then released downstream at a slower rate. Now there is no such control since BB was torn out.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

the rapids said:


> I'm pretty sure the dam had nothing to do with our atypical weather patterns the last two years, which is what causes atypical flooding on rivers with dams and without dams in Michigan.


Well, there hasn't been a problem for two years, it's only been this year. The problem last year was when the temporary draw down dam failed while the main dam was being removed. This caused massive flooding and homeowners downstream sued as a result. 

You can say this winter was an unusual winter with 200" plus snow and it was. I can see in the future, a fairly typical winter with 150" of snow, quick melt and 3-5" of rain in 24 hours, producing the same flooding, or worse, again. Situations like that, I'm sure, happened any number of years in the past, but the effects weren't felt because Brown Bridge dam controlled it. That's no longer the case.


----------



## bucko12pt (Dec 9, 2004)

msfcarp said:


> Most of the larger dams where built between 1906 and 1920 specifically to produce hydroelectric power, not flood control.


Can you post your source?


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

bucko12pt said:


> The water you're talking about at RR was collected at Brown Bridge before it reached the areas that are a problem now, which are below Brown Bridge. BB was drawn down in the winter so it could handle the excess water during the spring thaw and then released downstream at a slower rate. Now there is no such control since BB was torn out.



There was flooding with the dam in place. There is flooding without the dam in place. I'm not seeing much difference. 


If we want to do some leg work and get scientific, we would take a look at the flow rates before and after the dam removal at different points along the river. If there are some restrictions in flow rate now we may be able to say the sediment has restricted the flow to the point where the excess capacity goes over the banks. If there are no makeable changes in flow rate, it may be tough to blame this year on the dam. I think it was last year the hydro guys were at the RR bridge taking flow measurements so I know someone has the data.....just got to find it.


It does not remove the fact these homes are in risky areas.


----------



## the rapids (Nov 17, 2005)

bucko12pt said:


> Can you post your source for saying that the Brown Bridge dam was not built for flood control, because I think you're guessing and you're wrong?
> 
> Just a source article, or other other information source will do?



this link lists the original use as "hydropower generation" (and no mention of flood storage):

http://www.theboardman.org/boardman-river/history.html

this link shows in part 2.1.6 that the brown bridge dam was operated as a "run of river facility" meaning water in equals water out (and therefore not providing flood storage).

http://www.theboardman.org/docs/Brown Bridge Dam Final_EA-FONSI_6-28-12-ALL.pdf


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

NbyNW said:


> So John, your reference is from 29 years ago?
> 
> Also, referencing the properties above the dam and below the dam are not equals. It could be assumed the water above the dam would regularly flood, but land beneath the Dam may not.
> 
> ...



I'm not a dam expert of course but I would not assume anything with these particular dams given their age and technology used. I just know flooding is not anything new along the river. 


Ref the references....those are just the quick references I located when playing with different search terms. I did not go thru every return when I did the search. You can go to the Google News archives and play with the search terms and see what comes back. I suspect we can find articles on flooding, flood warnings and flood watches along the Boardman River valley fairly frequently, ie....maybe every spring thaw and every major rain event.


The National Weather Service, USGS and US Hydro bubbas may have some data that could aid in explaining the situation.


----------



## msfcarp (Jun 6, 2006)

NbyNW said:


> Carp, can you reference where it has been proven that a dam that is used for hydroelectric power does not effect the flood water levels of a river?
> 
> 
> Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire



????I never said anything about how a dam affects flood water levels. There is not much flood control in any dam that produces electricity, they are mandated to keep the level within certain parameters, also the property owners on the ponds howl if their water is low.


----------

