FFMP Must be working!!!

[Big_Spinner]

Hi guys,

FFMP must be doing something right, it has been almost a year since I have been vilified for FFMP!!!! That must be a record!!!

As always, I will answer any questions that are posed in a respectful manner.

The last couple of days were bad on the river system. The temeratures were much too warm for most of the rivers.

Hey Greenie - I can only respond by letting you know that FFMP is better than where we were, but not as good as what we want. Here is the letter we sent to the decree parties concerning the present situation.

May 28, 2010

To the Decree Parties:

The current situation in the upper Delaware is exactly what we have been warning about since implementation of the FFMP.

While the FFMP is an improvement over previous release regimes, we might well have had a release today of only 150 cfs under Revision 7 and under Revision 1 the release could have been 45 cfs, the FFMP scheduled releases in the late spring and early summer are clearly inadequate to protect the fishery when air temperatures in the region are high.

Our extensive research has shown that by taking into account the actual or forecasted New York City diversions versus the worst case entitlement, it is possible to devise a release policy that protects the fishery without exposing the City to unacceptable water availability risk. The current situation is a perfect example of this.

Actual New York City diversions are now about 550 mgd, while the release schedule is calculated, far too conservatively, as if diversions were actually 765 mgd. This biases all risk calculations at the expense of the environment. The difference of 215 mgd is essentially available for the environment. It is being held back and thereby potentially wasted. With the reservoirs standing at 99% capacity and with Cannonsville having been spilling only days ago, the policy of releasing only about 275 cfs into the West Branch is far too conservative and is punishing the River entirely unnecessarily. With one heavy rainfall Cannonsville could soon be spilling again -- and spilling hot water.

We could all pray for rain to relieve the thermal stress or hope that the Montague Target will soon kick in , but why hope and pray when there is a better solution that has been thoroughly investigated. At a minimum, it is time to move immediately to the releases called for in the NYS and PA Fisheries White Paper, and to begin a serious consideration of the attached “Augmented Adaptive Release” proposal that we put before the DRBC in January 2008.

Peter Kolesar

James Serio

 

[TR]

Jim Serio writes:

"FFMP {Flexible Flow Management Plan} Must be working!!!"

-----

Jim,

"Working?"

Why don't you and Peter read the USGS data below - or better yet, dip your toe into the water.

Have a happy holiday,
TR

 

[Green Highlander]

Don't jump to conclusions Jim, I haven't posted in a while so that is the reason you haven't been given a hard time. Now is the time that the rumbles start because this is when the FFMP is most deficient during the months of June, July and early August, which turns the fishery into a spring fishery only. Most seasoned Delaware fishermen don't go up there with the higher water temps until the flows improve or the temperatures moderate. The conditions have definitely deteriorated since I started fishing there 15 years ago and there is no denying that. The FFMP is a failure and you endorsed it...sorry for being so direct.

Emmett

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hey Emmett,

"The conditions have definitely deteriorated since I started fishing there 15 years ago and there is no denying that."

I do deny that, not sure what you mean.

Do you mean that releases were better 15 years ago than they are now under FFMP? If so, please explain.

Or do you mean that there are less fish now than 15 years ago?

Or is it that there are ten times more people fishing than 15 years ago? Did you know that guides used to have an unwritten rule. Never anchor within sight of another fisherman!!! Now you could float to the Bay before being able to stop.

Jim

 

[hookjaw]

Just because the water levels under ffmp might be better now than under the previous programs does not neccesarily mean the the current plan is working. When myself and other fishermen( iam sure ) are sitting at home due to the current stream temps in MAY there is something very wrong. FFMP may be better than previous plans but i would stop short of saying it is working today. Will it ever be fully working or perfect i doubt it. These types of situations will always pop up every year and people will always look at the weakness of any current program that is not currently working . So , unless there is an environmentally friendly person with the ability to say open the valves and send more water down the branches the trout are frying then we outdoorsmen and women will have some kind of problem with any current plan. Bottom line is FFMP may be sending down more water than previous plans at certain times of the year ( thats a good thing ). Could it be better ? Yes. We all can agree on that . Is it working at the moment regardless of what past plans in the past would have been sending down the river at this time ? NO !

 

[Big_Spinner]

Good point hook!

Jim

 

[NJFred]

Without any thermal triggers.... (which I believe were in existence years ago... even in the Main)... any flow plan will be deficient. Too often, with or without FFMP, we have seen the conditions of this past week. What we need is a stable, decent release, with thermal triggers to protect the fishery. We have neither today.

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi Fred,

Thermal triggers were inadequate and usually too late to help.

Better stable releases are the best for the rivers. We are making progress in that direction.

There needs to be thought given to how much cold water is in the reservoir and manage that water as an inventory of cold water. In a dry year, we can run out of that cold water by mid August andthe river turns brown with warm water from above the thermocline. This actually now can happen in a wet year (2009) as the reservoir was still at 80%, but it was out of the really cold quality water. In wet years, we need to reduce spill mitigation releases in times of low flood risk. Those 1500 cfs releases in mid summer are a waste of cold water.

What releases and how much bank do you suggest?

What do you want to protect and is that goal realistic?

My doable, realistic goal is to protect the mainstem to at Least Lordville. I define protection as keeping the river below 75 degrees nearly always and below 70 most of the time. The other form of protection is to make sure that there is a higher minimum release year-round to protect the critters on the bottom.

The NY/PA white paper goes along way to accomplishing those goals.

I would place a maximum release of about 800 cfs on the West Branch for Montague and spill mitigation. That would save some of the good cold stuff for use when needed.

We are always open to ideas and suggestions.

I hope that all you NJ residnets are making sure that your representatives are aware that you want more water for the river and more consistant releases.

Jim

 

[Ausable]

Jim,

I would like to know why 1,500 cfs was not released during parts of May when their was some spillage? Also, what is next milestone for FFMP? When does it expire, are the powers that be considering the "white paper" that had very reasonable releases?


Thanks

Chris Z

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi,

In order to make sure there is a full reservoir to start the water year on June 1st, there are no large spill mitigation releases in May or the first two weeks of June.

The current version of FFMP expires September 30, 2011.

The RFAC meeting held earlier this month in West Trenton was interesting. Most of the meeting involved discussion of the joint paper and other FFMP related items.

There was a short discussion on this summers release numbers. FFMP is proving to be somewhat flexible. That is a good thing. The discussion involved using some the IERQ Water to enhance the minimum summer releases. We were just emailed the other day that the summer releases have been somewhat enhanced.

The minimum summer WB release under FFMP is 260 cfs. Water taken from the IERQ bank will increase this to 325 cfs. There will also be some water added from the tunnel shutdown program. The minimum release will be about 365 cfs on the WB. This is more water than "the good old days" releases of 45 cfs until June 15 and then 325 from June 15th to August 15th.

This is not as much water as the new document from PA and NY. The "white paper" calls for a minimum release of 500 or 525 during the summer on the WB. This also calls for a minimum winter release of 150 cfs on the WB.

There is still alot of work to do and a very short time to invesitgate and work to get these better releases aproved for the next generation of FFMP.

Jim

 

[NJFred]

Hi Fred,

Thermal triggers were inadequate and usually too late to help.

Better stable releases are the best for the rivers. We are making progress in that direction.

There needs to be thought given to how much cold water is in the reservoir and manage that water as an inventory of cold water. In a dry year, we can run out of that cold water by mid August andthe river turns brown with warm water from above the thermocline. This actually now can happen in a wet year (2009) as the reservoir was still at 80%, but it was out of the really cold quality water. In wet years, we need to reduce spill mitigation releases in times of low flood risk. Those 1500 cfs releases in mid summer are a waste of cold water.

What releases and how much bank do you suggest?

What do you want to protect and is that goal realistic?

My doable, realistic goal is to protect the mainstem to at Least Lordville. I define protection as keeping the river below 75 degrees nearly always and below 70 most of the time. The other form of protection is to make sure that there is a higher minimum release year-round to protect the critters on the bottom.

The NY/PA white paper goes along way to accomplishing those goals.

I would place a maximum release of about 800 cfs on the West Branch for Montague and spill mitigation. That would save some of the good cold stuff for use when needed.

We are always open to ideas and suggestions.

I hope that all you NJ residnets are making sure that your representatives are aware that you want more water for the river and more consistant releases.

Jim

Jim... with due respect.... the problem is that there is not enough water to go around. The whole point of thermal triggers is to spare water when it's not needed. Not sure what you mean by a thermal trigger is too late??? A trigger at Hancock, with the objective of cooling down the upper main (to Buck or Lordville as you suggest. I personally think anything beyond this is unrealistic. We agree with the objective) might be set at 66 or 67 degrees (or whatever a study would indicate). If that were to happen automatically... it would definitely NOT be TOO Late.

Now before you chastise me for yo yo releases.... I too am an advocate of constant releases... minimum ones which would be sufficient say.... 80% of the time to keep the upper mainstem cool. But the whole approach of thermal triggers is to avoid the temp spikes which keep occurring in the system and to preserve water when it's needed. Now I do like to tie those minimal release to resevior capacity and time of year which is the flexible management strategy.

However the bottom line is without an automatic thermal trigger... we will continue to cook the fish and bugs as we are seeing at the moment as there is simply not enough water in Cannonsville for all needs. The whole idea of a thermal trigger is to preserve water.

Now without the thermal trigger.... how would you protect the river from the current situation?

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi Fred,

You bring up many good points. These are questions we have worked on and tried to model.

FFMP was initially designed to best utilize the water that was made available for fishery use. FFMP allows for the framework to remain the same and the numbers within the matrix to change as more water is made available for the fishery.

As you have stated, there are many balancing acts that need to be met and some of them oppose each other.

The white paper from NY and PA is an attempt by those agencies to answer the question, "what is best for the fishery?" without regard to the political constraints.

We have tested so many different possible regimes, that if you think of a release scheme, we have probably modeled it and see what the habitat model shows for trout habitat.

How much do you allocate for the EB and Neversink?

How much do you reserve as a bank, if any?

How much ......etc. You get the idea.

While I agree that a combination of release and thermal bank sounds best on paper, it may not be in reality. I do not know the answer, but here is something to consider,

Adopt the NY/PA white paper releases with no thermal target.

or

Adopt somewhat less as the minimum release and bank that extra water for thermal stress.

We can pick any amount of water and ask the same question.

You can also then pose similar "what ifs" like what are you willing to give up in the summer to keep the river bottom covered the rest of the year?

The problem is that in some years, you may not need the "thermal bank " at all. Now that water could have been used to increase the minimum releases which would have given us more overall habitat for the year.

Some of the biologists feel that the pulses of cold water could be worse than just a higher minimum.

The amount of water is the limiting factor. IF you say "I not want to ever go above 66 degrees at Lordville, then you might need a constant release of no less that 800 cfs from Cannonsville. This guarantees there will be water if conditions suddenly turned hot. Or you might say, "lets keep Lordville below 66 at least have the time, but never above 70.

The more convoluted you get, the harder it is logistically to meet the goal. A constant release uses more water, but does not make mistakes. The banks, can be difficult to time properly or may not be used at all.

It is still not possible to accurately predict what the thermal release should be because the wweahter is too variable. If a partly cloudy day turns out to be all sunny, by the time you see that happening, it is too late to increase the release to get the cold water downstream in time.

I also want to minimize the times we run out of the cold stuff and dump the cloudy mess into the river later in the summer. Here is where, if you base releases based on the inventory of cold water, you may be able to do even better for the river. Here is the question that I do not know the answer to; (okay, i have admitted it, there is a question I do not know the answer to!!!!) ....How much muck can you live with in late summer? If the answer is none, then you need to be more conservative with the cold water in inventory.

It is not an easy system to control and as Future keeps remiding us, "mother nature always makes up new rules" or sometihng like that.

Jim

 

[NJFred]

Jim,

I really beg to differ. What would be so convoluted about opening the Cannonsville valve based upon a temperature trigger in either Hancock or Lordville? The flexible plan is convoluted if anything. Having said that, it's rationale to peg releases to reservoir levels and time of year. So far you have not provided a satisfactory reason why a temp trigger would not be the best for meeting the diverse needs of the system.

Jim... there is no way we are ever going to get 800 CFS day in and out. And in fact at times that would waste water. Even 600 CFS constant release would waste water at times. Once again back to a temp trigger. For example....If we could get at least 450 CFS and then bump up over the spring summer and fall based upon a temperature trigger to meet an average of 600CFS per year... that would probably do it. Not ideal... but all we could expect. I would be happy to raise and maybe lower the 450 CFS based upon reservoir levels

BTW...the East branch and the Neversink should be secondary objectives. They should just get minimum flows for decent support. The number one objective in my mind for the whole system is to keep the upper main cool say to Buck or perhaps Lordville.

 

[NJFred]

BTW... Believe those two days of 25 degree C water at Lordville, if I recall correctly is close to the record over the last ten years. And sadly... it wasn't even summer yet.

I had to leave the lower middle west branch on those days. Too warm to fish.

It's clear. The new plan is no better than the old plans. And now with all the downstream water coming in to meet the Montague min. We can't even pray for droughts anymore.

 

[TR]

Warm water + Hot sunny days + Low levels + NYC reservoirs at 98+% =


http://twitpic.com/1su486


><}}}x>

 

[Kilgour Farms]

Not to mention using the PPL releases to augment the flows required for the Montague target.. Leaves the upper reaches without adaquate flows and the reservoirs full.

The big problem is they have to compromise with NYC and any compromise with the city is to the cities advantage, Until this changes it doesn't matter what proposals are put forth they will ultimately have their cake and eat it too..

 

[Ryan R]

Not to mention using the PPL releases to augment the flows required for the Montague target.. Leaves the upper reaches without adaquate flows and the reservoirs full.

The big problem is they have to compromise with NYC and any compromise with the city is to the cities advantage, Until this changes it doesn't matter what proposals are put forth they will ultimately have their cake and eat it too..

I don't think PPL uses the releases from Wallenpaupack to augment the flows at Montague at all, its not much of their concern. Rather, isn't it NYCDEP that uses what PPL releases as a means to release less water from their own reservoirs on the East and West Branches and still meet the Montague target. After all, PPL doesn't really have to be concerned with meeting the target while NYC does, correct?

 

[TR]

I don't think PPL uses the releases from Wallenpaupack to augment the flows at Montague at all, its not much of their concern.

Rather, isn't it NYCDEP that uses what PPL releases as a means to release less water from their own reservoirs on the East and West Branches and still meet the Montague target.

After all, PPL doesn't really have to be concerned with meeting the target while NYC does, correct?

-------

That is correct.

Water releases out of Lake Wallenpaupack and into the Lackawaxen River are for power generation from PPL.

The byproduct is that if there is more water coming into the main stem at the confluence of the Lackawaxen River and the Delaware River from power generation releases from PPL - the cfs target at Montague will probably be met - thus, leaving NYC DEP off the hook and they can hoard more water in their reservoirs leaving the main stem UDR from Zane Grey north to Hancock without any water releases and consequently warming the water into the mid 70's to low 80's.

TR

 

[brachycentrus]

-------

That is correct.

Water releases out of Lake Wallenpaupack and into the Lackawaxen River are for power generation from PPL.

The byproduct is that if there is more water coming into the main stem at the confluence of the Lackawaxen River and the Delaware River from power generation releases from PPL - the cfs target at Montague will probably be met - thus, leaving NYC DEP off the hook and they can hoard more water in their reservoirs leaving the main stem UDR from Zane Grey north to Hancock without any water releases and consequently warming the water into the mid 70's to low 80's.

TR

Read this:
http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/Reservoir_NYC/Res2002-33.pdf
and thhis:
http://www.state.nj.us/drbc/Reservoir_NYC/Res2003-26.pdf

There were at one time directives to release water from Cannonsville to mitigate any adverse effects from PPL releases to the tailwaters.
This was eliminated from Revision 7.

 

[TR]

What's your point?

You've listed two .pdf files.

FACT:
New York City's reservoirs are currently over 98% capacity for the past month. May through June 2010.

FACT:
PPL releases water for power gerneration for their customers.

FACT:
Increased water flow on the Upper Delaware River at and downstream of the confluence of the Lackawaxen River and Delaware River does have an effect since more water is passing through at Montague to meet the minimum requirements of 1750cfs due to those Lake Wallenpaupack releases into the Lackawaxen River which eventually empties into the Delaware River at Zane Grey.

FACT:
Main Stem of the Delaware River from Zane Grey north to Hancock, New York becomes warmer due to less water being released from Cannonsville and Pepacton if there is NO precipitation / rainfall filling the freestone tribs (this has been the case in May 2010) AND water is released into the Lackawaxwen River by PPL thus meeting the Montague formula of 1750cfs.

TR

 

[brachycentrus]

My point is that we got screwed by Revision 7 then that was adopted in the current FFMP.
Even the Lakawaxen received a thermal release last weekend while we baked upriver, and of course, that counted towards the Montague target.

 

[TR]

 

[NJFred]

Yup Brachy... we got screwed in those revisions. I am very very concerned this year. Conditions this spring are as bad as they have been during the last few summers and summer just began today.

 

[Green Highlander]

Jim,

You gotta give me some of what you're smoking and I am not being fatitious....

We're in May and the water temps are higher than normal at this time of the year (prime time) and consistently so since the advent of FFMP which you endorsed....Don't use an average and factor in months that no one is up there fishing...

 

[Green Highlander]

Another observation, NJ Fred was blasting me a year ago and now he's chomping at your heals...

 

[NJFred]

Jim,

You gotta give me some of what you're smoking and I am not being fatitious....

We're in May and the water temps are higher than normal at this time of the year (prime time) and consistently so since the advent of FFMP which you endorsed....Don't use an average and factor in months that no one is up there fishing...

No Greenie..I want what you are smoking...:smokelots: Rangers in 7. Well we can continue dreaming! No Fishing... no Rangers what is a man to do?

 

[Kilgour Farms]

Sorry guys but you can come up with any plan and it won't work unless NYC wants it to work and they don't. They are concerned with hoarding as much water as possible.

If they wanted to help don't you think they would have. They do just enough to make it look like their doing something positive to all the parties and of course being NYC has a veto well you know the rest.The reality is they could care less about what happens down river.

How many revisions and what has it done for us? ZIP, notta, a waste of taxpayers money.

The DRBC is a waste of money as well. They do nothing for the people of the watershed.

At a meeting the DRBC went over the flood study and said it would have only made a difference of three or four feet in the flood of 06 if there was a 20% void. Well let me tell you that three or four feet was the difference between 10's of millions and 100's of million of dollars in damages.

The system is broke and needs to be fixed by competent professionals not bueaucrats collecting pay checks and awaiting retirement.

 

[brachycentrus]

Sorry guys but you can come up with any plan and it won't work unless NYC wants it to work and they don't. They are concerned with hoarding as much water as possible.

If they wanted to help don't you think they would have. They do just enough to make it look like their doing something positive to all the parties and of course being NYC has a veto well you know the rest.The reality is they could care less about what happens down river.

How many revisions and what has it done for us? ZIP, notta, a waste of taxpayers money.

The DRBC is a waste of money as well. They do nothing for the people of the watershed.

At a meeting the DRBC went over the flood study and said it would have only made a difference of three or four feet in the flood of 06 if there was a 20% void. Well let me tell you that three or four feet was the difference between 10's of millions and 100's of million of dollars in damages.

The system is broke and needs to be fixed by competent professionals not bueaucrats collecting pay checks and awaiting retirement.

Fred,
Absolutely agree !!!!!!!
Needs to get back to the court.
How are the DWM's doing down there. Their backs showing yet?

 

[Trouser Trout]

Jim,

You gotta give me some of what you're smoking and I am not being fatitious....

We're in May and the water temps are higher than normal at this time of the year (prime time) and consistently so since the advent of FFMP which you endorsed....Don't use an average and factor in months that no one is up there fishing...

I never play spelling police but this is a good one, you wrote "fatitious", the real spelling is "FACETIOUS" it along with "ABSTEMIOUS" are the only words in the english language that contain the vowels A-E-I-O-U, in order. BTW I am a horrible speller.

 

[cingras53]

But if you refrain from taking fish, are you abstencious? You missed one.