DR Flows a disgrace

[Ant]

Why.

Is there some supreme mode of thought that can make me understand why they shut the flow down AGAIN!!!! on the weekend.

I fished a pitiful 200 + last week, then they let loose during the week and then shut it down again yesterday.

Any answers...anybody? or am I better off trying to figure out quantum physics.


Ant

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi,

Releases are tied to targets at several locations. If the targets are being met by natural flow, releases go down.

The Montague target is also influenced by PPL Wallenpaupack Releases and Mongaup releases.

The new flow proposal, FFMP, takes the first step in getting away from these problems.

We still need to get the power releases mitigated in some way, either not counted toward Montague, or more likely the Montague target is averaged for the week and the releases stabilized.

Jim

 

[JW1970]

It doesn't appear to be due to scheduled activity from PPL. Mongaup??? The storms of this week???

By the way, I think someone mentioned rumors of flood mitigation releases beginning in July. Has there been any more talk of that?

• Present Operation
  
• PPL Generation Schedule
  
• Boating Release Schedule
  
• Montague
  
• Port Jervis

 

[Ant]

Guys thanks for the info. I have a loose understanding of the system, I'm simply aggravated with the constant change.

Ant

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi,

Releases on the West Branch are going to be mostly for the rivermaster to maintain the Montague Target.

Rivermaster computes what is known and then requests releases to meet the target.

Water needs to be released 2 days in advance to get to Montague on time. About 40 hours for releases from Cannonsville. That is why you often see the releases go up on the West Branch Thursday to meet requirements for the weekend, when PPL shuts down.

I also suspect, although unconfirmed, there was a temporary reduction to West Branch releases so the DEC could conduct shocking surveys on the river for a couple of days. As part of Rev 7, DEC needed to monitor fish and benthics in the rivers.

Jim

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi Ant,

The constant change is indeed annoying as well as not natural.

We have advocated for long term studies to determine the feasibility of removing the PPL releases from the Montague equation. This will be included in the scope of work over the next three year period.

We also have asked for short term help by averaging releases over a 7 day period. This would make the releases much more consistant and stable. As an example: Just take the PPL scheduled releases and average them over 7 days instead of 500 for 5 days and 0 for 2 days, make the PPL contribution be 360 for 7 days.

Jim

 

[ddawatson]

"I also suspect, although unconfirmed, there was a temporary reduction to West Branch releases so the DEC could conduct shocking surveys on the river for a couple of days. As part of Rev 7, DEC needed to monitor fish and benthics in the rivers."

Jim

The fish population of brown trout is strong due to the flooding flushing lake browns from Cannonsville Reservoir into the river. Do you see the same results as well. Thanks for the insight and comment Jim. It means a lot to use slave to the desk workers who wish we were fishing on the river.

Dennis Watson

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi,

According to the DEC:

This Spring about 18% of the fish caught in the upper stretch of the WB were reservoir fish.

That number diminished quickly the further downstream you traveled.

Jim

 

[Fly Tier]

The fish population of brown trout is strong due to the flooding flushing lake browns from Cannonsville Reservoir into the river. Do you see the same results as well. Thanks for the insight and comment Jim. It means a lot to use slave to the desk workers who wish we were fishing on the river.

Dennis Watson

In addition to the brown trout spill over, how many of the hundreds of fish stocked in oquaga do you think are sitting above the 17 bridge in the WB? Were the DEC folks doing "on river" creel surveys in the spring to come up with the 18% number? How do they make such a guestimate or was that just pulled out of a hat like other numbers they come up with?

 

[TightLoops]

In addition to the brown trout spill over, how many of the hundreds of fish stocked in oquaga do you think are sitting above the 17 bridge in the WB? Were the DEC folks doing "on river" creel surveys in the spring to come up with the 18% number? How do they make such a guestimate or was that just pulled out of a hat like other numbers they come up with?

Well I think that the color of this fish would be a strong indicator when they were doing the shocking this spring a pale silver looking brown would be marked as a rez fish. So I think they could actually come up with some pretty solid numbers from that.

 

[Fly Tier]

Well I think that the color of this fish would be a strong indicator when they were doing the shocking this spring a pale silver looking brown would be marked as a rez fish. So I think they could actually come up with some pretty solid numbers from that.

Sam.
JimsaidDEC reports 18% fish CAUGHT are reservoir fish. Thats why I asked if they did on stream creel surveys. He didnt say they shocked up 18%. plus, they just did shocking surveys last week. Dont think the reports are done yet.

 

[Scott]

We still need to get the power releases mitigated in some way, either not counted toward Montague, or more likely the Montague target is averaged for the week and the releases stabilized.

Jim

My theory: very hot weather = more air conditioners running = more demand for power = more water released through generation via hydroelectric systems.

It would seem to make sense from a "fish conservation" point of view to remove the power generation releases from the flow target, but maybe not so much from a "water management only" point of view.

Which would appear to be the issue here...

 

[Kilgour Farms]

Another fly in the ointment?

The second line would run about 130 miles from PPL Corp.'s Susquehanna nuclear power plant near Berwick in northeastern <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1:State w:st="on">Pennsylvania</st1:State> to the Roseland substation near <st1:City w:st="on">Newark</st1:City> in northern <st1lace w:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">New Jersey</st1:State></st1lace>. It would be built by Allentown-based PPL, FirstEnergy Corp. of <st1lace w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Akron</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">Ohio</st1:State></st1lace>, and Public Service Electric and Gas Co. of Newark.

How will this effect The PPL releases?

This line is wanted by PJM. May take a few years but the way things are looking with he feds, all these transmission lines will be built where ever and when ever these ENERGY BARONS want them.

 

[JeffK]

Not to be a bummer, but I have been talking with NJ water resources personnel in the Whippany R basin and those drinking water fights are only going to get tougher. A few main issues I am seeing with water supply issues (from the water supply manager side):
1. Much of NJ is using 80% to 100% of their water resources. I know, I know we could all be doing more to reduce the demand side, but the water supplies are under pressure.
2. Variability of weather is driving water supply managers nuts. Flood one month and drought the next is becoming a way of life and water supply people are finding it very hard to predict what they will have.

Hey, I'm a fisherman and all for more releases (and limited groundwater pumping too. NJ gets most of its water from the ground now and some streams are really suffering from lowered water tables). However, the water supply guys I met are stressing and are being extra conservative.