2.5 Inches of rain and the Beaverkill hits 7 feet high and the lower East Branch goes up to 12,000 cfs.It should not rise like that with this amount of rain. Is this the result of "cleaning up the tribs" ? What would happen if we get 4 or 5 inches of rain ? The result of the trib work is clear,faster river rises with increased velocity. A few weeks ago I was driving up Sands Creek road to go bowhunting after a 2 inch rain. The creek was raging.It looked a mini Colorado river. In some places the creek was almost up to the road. If the town of Hancock does not restore the tribs to a more natural state,the village of Hancock is going to get the worst flood they have ever seen when we get a big storm again.If recent history is any guide that storm will not be to long in coming. I have a house in the village and I'm scared. The trib work is a shortsighted reaction to the June flood and I believe will eventually devastate those (myself included) that the town thought they were protecting.
Give us a try!
Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!
Effects of channelization ?
- Thread starter EB WADER
- Start date
EB, part of yesterday may very well have been the channelization of the tribs but part of it was probably due to how quickly the 2.5 inches of rain fell. I also had 2.5 inches of water in my rain gage (I'm in the East edge of the Catskills) and it came down in about a 2 - 3 hour period, which is very quick. But your point is well taken as in previous rain storms, we've seen the rivers rise and fall more quickly than they used to before the June flood.
Bruce
Bruce
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
We've also had rain prior to the rain that fell yesterday. The ground was near the saturation point, therefore ANY rain that fell was runoff. The leaves are off the trees, and the other plants and grass have stopped growing, so they also were not a real mitigating force either. I'd love to see some science to back up EB Wader's thoughts. Does anyone have the ability to access graphs of the rise after a storm in the Novembers of previous years?
Kilgour Farms
I took the one less traveled by
According to the NWS just over 3" of rain fell in the Hancock area. This was in addition to the 2.5" of rain early in the week which saturated the gound to the point where 1" of rain would make it look like the flood of all floods. With the Hancock area approaching Historical records for rain for the month and year and ground satuation where is the water suppose to go?
The Delaware main stem is high but not to the point were you have to worry. The creek at Lydias ripped out the sluices to the temp bridge, 191 is closed. Roads to Honesdale (191)were flooded yesterday, water was running over the roads. These streams in Pa were not "Channelized" and are not in very good condition. They jump there banks because there is no channel for the water to run.
I have a dry brook which has run all year to the river. Have never seen this happen before!
If the creeks were not fixed the fishermen would have a hard time getting up here to fish.
The Delaware main stem is high but not to the point were you have to worry. The creek at Lydias ripped out the sluices to the temp bridge, 191 is closed. Roads to Honesdale (191)were flooded yesterday, water was running over the roads. These streams in Pa were not "Channelized" and are not in very good condition. They jump there banks because there is no channel for the water to run.
I have a dry brook which has run all year to the river. Have never seen this happen before!
If the creeks were not fixed the fishermen would have a hard time getting up here to fish.
Last edited:
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
I'm a bit confused about this: "2.5 Inches of rain and the Beaverkill hits 7 feet high and the lower East Branch goes up to 12,000 cfs.It should not rise like that with this amount of rain." Are you saying that these two rivers rose too fast due to channelization? I had no idea that the Beaverkill had it's tributaries messed with. Where was work done affecting the Beaverkill?
I took a look at the discharge graphs on USGS Real-Time Data for New York: Streamflow for a bunch of the rivers in the area. All of them seemed to have the same basic shape. A real steep rise (which one might expect if the stream was channelized OR if the ground was saturated OR both) with a decline that is steep but maybe not as steep as the incline. I checked the D at Lordville, the East branch and the Beaverkill and found this to be true at each.
But then I checked around at other rivers that weren't in the town of Hancock or Colchester or Callicoon. I looked at the Esopus, the East Branch in Margaretville, Oquaga, the Neversink, etc.,etc. They each had a very similar graph. I would have suspected that if it was actually the work done in the streams that caused the rapid rise which concerned EB Wader, then that rapid rise would be confined to rivers receiving water from such "Sam Rowe affected" streams. Not so, it seems. Look for yourselves.
Of course, it would be better to compare apples to apples. It would be great to have data from similar storms with similar saturated conditions without the vegetation, all things being equal as much as possible, etc.....
I know Mr. Miller mentioned the saturation issue, but he as well as four others "Thanked" the original post. I don't get it. There were small flooding issues ALL over the region due to the rain that fell yesterday. Not just in Hancock. Certainly we can't blame all of the issues around the region on the work done to creeks and rivers in Hancock. Just because we WANT to blame the work that was done, does not neccessarily make that true.
It has jack to do with channelization.
I couldnt get to Delhi on Friday because the peakes brook flowed over and pretty much reversed all the construction they have been doing for the last month and that is one mile directly downstream from almost 500 acres of DEP property. If you think the DEP let anything even remotely dangerous to the watershed happen in Delhi than your a dumbass.
I see lordville road held up pretty good this week, maybe channelization is not so bad after all.
Oh yea, and I stopped at Klingers Kawasaki on my way back Friday, and there were trees and debris all over the parking lot.
When I asked someone if that was left over from the last flood or if it came from this one, I was responded to with a not so friendly "AT LEAST WE SAVED THE STUPID FISH."
Nice to see the anti fish sentiment in other towns not just the ones getting sued.
At least Hancock got a lawyer pro-bono, maybe now they can go ahead with the lawsuit and suck up some of FUDR's money.
Lastly but not least important, check out petitionspot.com for a new petition concerning the west branch No-Kill section...
I couldnt get to Delhi on Friday because the peakes brook flowed over and pretty much reversed all the construction they have been doing for the last month and that is one mile directly downstream from almost 500 acres of DEP property. If you think the DEP let anything even remotely dangerous to the watershed happen in Delhi than your a dumbass.
I see lordville road held up pretty good this week, maybe channelization is not so bad after all.
Oh yea, and I stopped at Klingers Kawasaki on my way back Friday, and there were trees and debris all over the parking lot.
When I asked someone if that was left over from the last flood or if it came from this one, I was responded to with a not so friendly "AT LEAST WE SAVED THE STUPID FISH."
Nice to see the anti fish sentiment in other towns not just the ones getting sued.
At least Hancock got a lawyer pro-bono, maybe now they can go ahead with the lawsuit and suck up some of FUDR's money.
Lastly but not least important, check out petitionspot.com for a new petition concerning the west branch No-Kill section...
Oh yea, and WTF are you guys talking about sands creek.
They did not channelize the whole thing.
Obviously creeks need to be channelized around bridges etc.
Everyone talks about it like the town of Hancock channelized 20 miles of creek bed.
The only thing i have seen so far that even looks like channelization is Lordville road and I think that was justified.
What exactly should they have done with that road?
Go down to the mainstem and take back the thousands of tons of soil and rock that was washed downstream, truck it back up the road that was not there?
I really dont get it.
Who would foot the bill for such a massive reconstruction of a stream?
FUDR?
They did not channelize the whole thing.
Obviously creeks need to be channelized around bridges etc.
Everyone talks about it like the town of Hancock channelized 20 miles of creek bed.
The only thing i have seen so far that even looks like channelization is Lordville road and I think that was justified.
What exactly should they have done with that road?
Go down to the mainstem and take back the thousands of tons of soil and rock that was washed downstream, truck it back up the road that was not there?
I really dont get it.
Who would foot the bill for such a massive reconstruction of a stream?
FUDR?
EB, you are absolutely correct. It is a fact that channalization will increase the potential of flooding. The Town of Hancock did do the needed work to repair and protect roads and bridges, then they went well beyond the DEC Permits and needlessly channelized the Delaware River tributaries in direct violation of the DEC Permits. Every resident who was flooded out should be considering suing the Town for creating the potential of more flooding with less severe rainfalls in the future.
Last edited:
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
Well, yes, and no...er it depends on your perspective.
Channelization increases the velocity of water (but not always). If one is located in a place where that water is leaving at a quicker rate because of channelization, then channelization decreases the potential for flooding there.
Now, of course, downstream is another issue. If the water is coming to that location at a quicker pace, it also needs to leave there at a quicker pace or flooding may result. (So therefore, channelize ALL THE WAY TO THE RIVER)
A higher amplitude of the discharge(although for a shorter duration) is what should concern the Delaware River Valley. It's true. If all those streams are channelized, they would deliver peak flows quickly and add them to the main river. This could make the river peak higher(although for a shorter period of time, but if the house floods, 1 hour or 5 hours, who cares).
BUT, have no fear, since NYC is going to provide a void so that the reservoirs can postpone peak flow rates, any channelization that may have been done, should make little difference in the flooding of the Delaware in the future. The dams will still be filling and not spilling, until after these tribs would have delivered their peak flow. Of course, in a Noahesque flood event, all bets are off.
Last edited by a moderator:
The village of Hancock is on two main rivers,the East and West branches of the D. I have noticed that the rivers in the village rise much faster and higher with a moderate or heavy rain than they did before the Town of Hancock did the trib work. Many of these tribs are upstream of the village.It is a fact of hydrology that channelized streams dump water faster into main rivers than a natural coursed stream,resulting in faster and higher water in main rivers. My question is; what is going to happen when we get one of these epic rainstorms that seem to happen with alarming frequency? The last 3 floods were awful.I witnessed all 3 of them.The lastest one always worse than the previous one.The June flood missed my house by 5 feet. If trib water is going into the main rivers at a faster rate,that means the main rivers will also rise at a faster rate.There is a possibilty that the work that the Town of Hancock did put the Village of Hancock in the cross hairs of the next flood. It is because of scenarios like this that channelizing streams is illegal in the United States.You solve the problem for yourself but create a potential devastating event for your neighbor downstream.
You are absolutely correct, again. The NY State DEC provided the permits that allowed the Town of Hancock to channelize the tributaries beyond what was needed to protect/repair the roads and bridges, it is the State DEC who is responsible to address the problem with the Town of Hancock and to correct the problem. The situation is all about the people, the channelized tributaries need to be repaired/re-establish a flood plain so the heavy rains can flood out into flood plains and slowly release water into the main rivers which will minimize flooding.
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
You're killin' me. A few months ago, it was "all about" something else, remember?
"The above named water bodies are all known rainbow and brown trout spawning streams for the Upper Delaware River, which is one if the best native rainbow and brown trout waters in the Eastern United States. Destruction of these streams by dredging, channelizing and filling, by those listed above, is a major disaster not only to the tributary streams but to the Upper Delaware River. All life in the streams has been destroyed by the actions of dredging and filling. The physical, chemical and biological integrity of these streams has been destroyed. In effect, naturally flowing, environmentally critical tributaries have been turned into storm drains. "
Also, to ignore peak flows and when they may occur in relation to peak flows in the river itself reeks of choosing the "science" that backs one's agenda, rather than letting science shape the agenda. But that wouldn't happen, would it? Hey, what ever happened with that research with... ah forget it...
I realize that nobody wants to talk to me, but here it is anyway.
I do not think the problem of flooding is the result of channelization by the town of Hancock. I think the problem now is channelization done by the first two floods. It is not just hancock, there was flooding last week in pretty much every town in Delaware county.
I think it is something that everyone is going to have to live with.
Because if we keep having freak rainstorms then there is going to be flooding, and no amount of channelization or lack of, is going to help.
Oh yea, and i noticed the river did go up a bit faster this time. But all the flooding and damage was mostly limited to the trib's. If there was any rapid increase in the river level, I would be more inclined to blame that on the DEP.
How do you think the trout are spawning in all this mud?
I do not think the problem of flooding is the result of channelization by the town of Hancock. I think the problem now is channelization done by the first two floods. It is not just hancock, there was flooding last week in pretty much every town in Delaware county.
I think it is something that everyone is going to have to live with.
Because if we keep having freak rainstorms then there is going to be flooding, and no amount of channelization or lack of, is going to help.
Oh yea, and i noticed the river did go up a bit faster this time. But all the flooding and damage was mostly limited to the trib's. If there was any rapid increase in the river level, I would be more inclined to blame that on the DEP.
How do you think the trout are spawning in all this mud?
dcabarle
Administrator
Perhaps if you came off as someone with a level head and an open mind, people would take what you had to say a bit more seriously. Instead, you came here, threatened to burn down homes, talk down to people, etc... without even taking the time out to see that it's possible not everyone here is your enemy. Not everyone here is an FUDR supporter. As a matter of fact, I think you'll find that they are far and few around here.
NJFred
Trout Hunter
In reality there are relatively few feeder streams in the WBD between the Cannonsville Dam and Hancock (most of the flow comes from the watershed above the Dam). I highly suspect that in all the floods the bulk of the water laying in and around Hancock came over the Cannonsville Dam. The best theorectical chance for flood control in Hancock and downsteam would be to keep less water in the resevoirs (Cannonsville and Pepacton) so upstream water would fill the dam at peak flows rather than simply coming right over the top.
This actually should and might be a shared objective of the Town of Hancock and the fishery. However, less water in the resevoirs is not consistant with the storage of drinking water and therefore the powers that be will likely only pay lip service to this idea.
This actually should and might be a shared objective of the Town of Hancock and the fishery. However, less water in the resevoirs is not consistant with the storage of drinking water and therefore the powers that be will likely only pay lip service to this idea.
Last edited:
NJFred,
There are more than a few feeder streams between the Pepacton and Hancock. The village is a 2 river village. I'm all for keeping a void for storm runoff in the reservoirs,but I do not think that that is a complete answer. It is very possible that we can get 2 storms within a short period of time.The first one fills the void,the second spills over the dam and floods us. There must be a multi faceted approach. One part is a resi. void. The second part is natural tribs and adequate flood plain areas that can absorb and slowly release flood waters. Another aspect that needs to be considered is development of historical flood plain areas. Grass and vegetation and wetlands slow water down. Asphalt,concrete and gravel speed water along. Also,nature always tries to balance itself out. Warm weather gets eventually balanced by colder weather. At the end of a year we are almost always within one degree of the previous year,no matter what kind of heat waves or cold snaps we had. Precipitation is the same way. Some years we get lots of water,other years less. Over the long term it balances out. Right now we are in a very wet year.Rainfall this year will most likely set an all time record. We get somthing like 48 inches a year.This year we might get close to 70 inches. My point is what happens when nature balances this out by the driest year on record and we started out with a 10 to 15 % reservoir void. Remember that not to long ago,during a dry but not record making drought,the Cannonsville was run down to 3 % of capacity. If we get a drier year than that we could run the Cannonsville dry. I think we need to be careful with voids in the reservoirs. There are no easy answers.
There are more than a few feeder streams between the Pepacton and Hancock. The village is a 2 river village. I'm all for keeping a void for storm runoff in the reservoirs,but I do not think that that is a complete answer. It is very possible that we can get 2 storms within a short period of time.The first one fills the void,the second spills over the dam and floods us. There must be a multi faceted approach. One part is a resi. void. The second part is natural tribs and adequate flood plain areas that can absorb and slowly release flood waters. Another aspect that needs to be considered is development of historical flood plain areas. Grass and vegetation and wetlands slow water down. Asphalt,concrete and gravel speed water along. Also,nature always tries to balance itself out. Warm weather gets eventually balanced by colder weather. At the end of a year we are almost always within one degree of the previous year,no matter what kind of heat waves or cold snaps we had. Precipitation is the same way. Some years we get lots of water,other years less. Over the long term it balances out. Right now we are in a very wet year.Rainfall this year will most likely set an all time record. We get somthing like 48 inches a year.This year we might get close to 70 inches. My point is what happens when nature balances this out by the driest year on record and we started out with a 10 to 15 % reservoir void. Remember that not to long ago,during a dry but not record making drought,the Cannonsville was run down to 3 % of capacity. If we get a drier year than that we could run the Cannonsville dry. I think we need to be careful with voids in the reservoirs. There are no easy answers.
NJFred
Trout Hunter
EB... Certainly agree with your comment regarding a multifaceted approach. Did not mean to imply that maintaining less water in the resevoirs would solve all issues. It won't.
Cannonsiville and Peapacton are realtively small resevoirs compared to the need for storage for other uses beyond drinking water... e.g. the newest one Flood Control, the Montague minimum (which is what drained Cannonsville that year you mentioned) and releases to maintain a healthy fishery.
Cannonsiville and Peapacton are realtively small resevoirs compared to the need for storage for other uses beyond drinking water... e.g. the newest one Flood Control, the Montague minimum (which is what drained Cannonsville that year you mentioned) and releases to maintain a healthy fishery.
saltshaker
New member
The Town of Hancock didn't channelize any streams. They removed debris and gravel that had them completely plugged. Channelizing is a word used to create sensationalism and fire people up. The residents of the Town of Hancock and Village of Hancock have seen the effects of doing nothing, that certainly doesn't work.
As far as discharging at a higher rate into the EB, WB, and mainstem. The last 3 events the tribs couldn't discharge because the rivers were in moderate flood stage before the tribs crested. This resulted was tribs hitting a wall of water and depositing all the discharge at the mouths of the tribs. This resulted in no access to spawning streams for the last 22 months. The current program that DRBC came up with to create voids didn't work, Nov. 16th we had another flood and cannonsville and pepaction were spilling. When they discharged from the cannonsville after the new agreement was reached they dumped all the silt from the June event into the West Branch for a month. FUDR didn't sue them for pollution.
What I don't understand is why the Town got singled out. In the intent to sue, FUDR blamed the Town of Hancock for working on streams that weren't even in the Town of Hancock. FUDR named 10 streams in the intent to sue 1. Fish Creek (Town did work on) 2. Campbell Brook (not in the Town of Hancock) 3. City Brook (NYSDOT worked on) 4. Tar Hollow (Town didn't work on) 5. Cadosia Creek (Town did work on) 6. Bouchioux Creek (Town did work on) 7. Rood Creek (not in the Town of Hancock) 8. Sands Creek (NYSDOT worked on) Humphries and Abe Lord ( Town did work on). I don't see them suing NYSDOT for doing the same thing the Town did.
Something had to be done. The Town of Hancock is currently working with TU and DRF to GPS, survey, and inventory the damage that was done to the streams. They have budgeted money to invest in the long term solution to the problems.
Did you know that 100 years ago there wasn't a standing tree in the Town of Hancock? All the trees were cut for charcoal and acid factories. Now the Town of Hancock and Delaware County are the hardwood capital of New York State. The problem is the softwoods are left standing and they creating a canopy year round over our streams in the mountains. No undergrowth, erosive soil, and ground water levels at record highs create erosion and land slides. Add 2 100 year floods and 1 500 year flood in 22 months and you have huge problems. The cleaning that was done was removing the discharge from the mountains from our floodplains, making room for the next event until something can be done long term. Remember Congressmen Hinchey stated it will be 2 years before funding is available from the Feds. The state has offered no funding for stream work, and FEMA will only pay for the public infrastructure. The Town went out on a limb trying to correct an issue that has been ignored for years.
Did you know that Delaware County has a compost facility? Yeah, our municipal waste is taken to this facility and 70% of it is turned into compost. The fourth poorest county in NYS built their own compost facility because they didn't want to bury the waste anymore. A 25 million dollar facility, with the County Bridge crew doing most the work. It's also true that the Town of Hancock has first priority on this material for stream restoration, where it can be used. The Town also has a mountain of mulch. The mulch is all the trees that were plugged in the tribs. That stuff is being saved so it can be utilized for restoration.
2.5 million dollars was spent on debris removal. Maybe they should of just curled up in the fetal position and quit, and let all that crap float down river.
Did you know that 18 homes opted for the floodplain buyout program that was offered after the April 2005 event? People are sick of getting flooded, they want to move. They are poor and need some sort of money to start over. The grant was denied by NYS. The same houses and 6 more are included in the buyout program for the Sept. event. To bad Delaware County only has 50,000 voters.
Did you know that the Town of Hancock is not a NYC watershed town? Only 2 towns in Delaware County are not in the watershed. What this means is NYC funds water quality issues for the watershed towns. 17 of the towns get all kind of funding to help them. Nothing for the Town of Hancock.
Did you know that 40% of the prime farming land in Delaware County was destroyed by this last event? True story. Farmers are purchasing hay from all over the country in order to feed their stock. Those who can't afford it, sold the cows and lost farms that were in their families for generations.
At the County level the Supervisor of the Town of Hancock has been pushing for 2 years to have a portion of the sales tax go back to the towns. He wanted to use the portion for stream restoration.
The picture has been painted that the Town of Hancock is a bunch of ignorant rednecks. Nothing can be further from the truth. Go on the the Towns website and read the minutes over the last 22 months. The Town Board has been trying to solve the condition of the streams for years. They have also been a good partner with the Delaware River Foundation. The Town applied for the grant for the junction pool access. The Town laid out the cash to buy the gravel and picnic tables. The Delaware River Foundation wrote the grant and helped the Town get reimbursed.
There's 2 sides to every story, and there are people out there that will never accept the Town of Hancock's version. Those people probably never had to manage or recover from and event like this.
Bottom line, the most tragic thing to come from all this is the actions by FUDR. FUDR's actions have created such antimosity between Flyfishers and locals it will take years to correct. Drive along the river and look at all the posted signs that weren't there before FUDR filed the intent to sue.
The president of FUDR' major background is in running campaigns. They are treating this situation like a campaign..........a nasty campaign. They are painting the worst picture possible. 90% of the people are listening to their side which is hearsay and speculation. It's to bad they couldn't have stayed on the sidelines while the Town of Hancock, Trout Unlimited, and the Delaware River Foundation work this out. I honestly believe they're biggest concern is the Delaware River Foundation getting credit for helping to resolve this issues. Oh no..........no award from Field and streams for you FUDR. :crap:
Sorry it's so long of a story.
As far as discharging at a higher rate into the EB, WB, and mainstem. The last 3 events the tribs couldn't discharge because the rivers were in moderate flood stage before the tribs crested. This resulted was tribs hitting a wall of water and depositing all the discharge at the mouths of the tribs. This resulted in no access to spawning streams for the last 22 months. The current program that DRBC came up with to create voids didn't work, Nov. 16th we had another flood and cannonsville and pepaction were spilling. When they discharged from the cannonsville after the new agreement was reached they dumped all the silt from the June event into the West Branch for a month. FUDR didn't sue them for pollution.
What I don't understand is why the Town got singled out. In the intent to sue, FUDR blamed the Town of Hancock for working on streams that weren't even in the Town of Hancock. FUDR named 10 streams in the intent to sue 1. Fish Creek (Town did work on) 2. Campbell Brook (not in the Town of Hancock) 3. City Brook (NYSDOT worked on) 4. Tar Hollow (Town didn't work on) 5. Cadosia Creek (Town did work on) 6. Bouchioux Creek (Town did work on) 7. Rood Creek (not in the Town of Hancock) 8. Sands Creek (NYSDOT worked on) Humphries and Abe Lord ( Town did work on). I don't see them suing NYSDOT for doing the same thing the Town did.
Something had to be done. The Town of Hancock is currently working with TU and DRF to GPS, survey, and inventory the damage that was done to the streams. They have budgeted money to invest in the long term solution to the problems.
Did you know that 100 years ago there wasn't a standing tree in the Town of Hancock? All the trees were cut for charcoal and acid factories. Now the Town of Hancock and Delaware County are the hardwood capital of New York State. The problem is the softwoods are left standing and they creating a canopy year round over our streams in the mountains. No undergrowth, erosive soil, and ground water levels at record highs create erosion and land slides. Add 2 100 year floods and 1 500 year flood in 22 months and you have huge problems. The cleaning that was done was removing the discharge from the mountains from our floodplains, making room for the next event until something can be done long term. Remember Congressmen Hinchey stated it will be 2 years before funding is available from the Feds. The state has offered no funding for stream work, and FEMA will only pay for the public infrastructure. The Town went out on a limb trying to correct an issue that has been ignored for years.
Did you know that Delaware County has a compost facility? Yeah, our municipal waste is taken to this facility and 70% of it is turned into compost. The fourth poorest county in NYS built their own compost facility because they didn't want to bury the waste anymore. A 25 million dollar facility, with the County Bridge crew doing most the work. It's also true that the Town of Hancock has first priority on this material for stream restoration, where it can be used. The Town also has a mountain of mulch. The mulch is all the trees that were plugged in the tribs. That stuff is being saved so it can be utilized for restoration.
2.5 million dollars was spent on debris removal. Maybe they should of just curled up in the fetal position and quit, and let all that crap float down river.
Did you know that 18 homes opted for the floodplain buyout program that was offered after the April 2005 event? People are sick of getting flooded, they want to move. They are poor and need some sort of money to start over. The grant was denied by NYS. The same houses and 6 more are included in the buyout program for the Sept. event. To bad Delaware County only has 50,000 voters.
Did you know that the Town of Hancock is not a NYC watershed town? Only 2 towns in Delaware County are not in the watershed. What this means is NYC funds water quality issues for the watershed towns. 17 of the towns get all kind of funding to help them. Nothing for the Town of Hancock.
Did you know that 40% of the prime farming land in Delaware County was destroyed by this last event? True story. Farmers are purchasing hay from all over the country in order to feed their stock. Those who can't afford it, sold the cows and lost farms that were in their families for generations.
At the County level the Supervisor of the Town of Hancock has been pushing for 2 years to have a portion of the sales tax go back to the towns. He wanted to use the portion for stream restoration.
The picture has been painted that the Town of Hancock is a bunch of ignorant rednecks. Nothing can be further from the truth. Go on the the Towns website and read the minutes over the last 22 months. The Town Board has been trying to solve the condition of the streams for years. They have also been a good partner with the Delaware River Foundation. The Town applied for the grant for the junction pool access. The Town laid out the cash to buy the gravel and picnic tables. The Delaware River Foundation wrote the grant and helped the Town get reimbursed.
There's 2 sides to every story, and there are people out there that will never accept the Town of Hancock's version. Those people probably never had to manage or recover from and event like this.
Bottom line, the most tragic thing to come from all this is the actions by FUDR. FUDR's actions have created such antimosity between Flyfishers and locals it will take years to correct. Drive along the river and look at all the posted signs that weren't there before FUDR filed the intent to sue.
The president of FUDR' major background is in running campaigns. They are treating this situation like a campaign..........a nasty campaign. They are painting the worst picture possible. 90% of the people are listening to their side which is hearsay and speculation. It's to bad they couldn't have stayed on the sidelines while the Town of Hancock, Trout Unlimited, and the Delaware River Foundation work this out. I honestly believe they're biggest concern is the Delaware River Foundation getting credit for helping to resolve this issues. Oh no..........no award from Field and streams for you FUDR. :crap:
Sorry it's so long of a story.
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
So is that the official stance of your organization or just the tactic it's most comfortable with?
Ratty llamas my ass.
MACFLY
Too many streams too little time
Saltshaker
This is a very interesting and potentially informative post. I would like to make the following observation. You made a valid point that 90% of the people believe what FUDR has posted without hearing the other side of the story. I would state that many may have believed what was posted and reacted to it but in the past few months there have been numerous discussions on this board that are more balanced. I recently stated that FUDR should have gone to much greater lengths to resolve this prior to threatening to sue. This issue seems very easy to resolve to me. You have stated that none of the streams were channelized. FUDR has stated otherwise and they have stated that the township was responsible. Channelization of a stream is a fairly obvious action. After living downstream of one of the most notorious flood zones in the country growing up in NJ, I can tell you the effects of channelization are generally all bad. With that said, I would like to know who has visited these tribs and witnessed the channelization and can provide visual proof of what has occurred. It is now Nov 23rd. When was the intent to sue issued and have we passed that date? Is there a lawsuit or not? My personal wishes to the residents of Hancock for a Happy Thanksgiving and I hope they never have to go through another flood for the rest of their lives.
saltshaker
New member
MACFLY,
The 60 days have past since the intent to sue was issued. Information that I have heard is they can file within a reasonable time. I think they can still file the suit. In the Family Foundation Times (a local newspaper) Craig Findley was quoted as saying "I don't know what can be done to stop the lawsuit" also, " FUDR is not seeking money from the Town, just legal fees". Sounds like they are going forward with it.
I'm guilty of not knowing the true meaning of channelizing. The streams were cleaned of debris. If you look at the streams before and after they were cleaned they are all located where they were, none have been straightened or moved.
It was simply cleaning them out so the streams could go back where they should be, instead of the down the roads.
Hopefully with the help of TU, DRF and Town, the issues will be fixed in the mountains so the practice of debris removal in the flooplains can be remedied.
The 60 days have past since the intent to sue was issued. Information that I have heard is they can file within a reasonable time. I think they can still file the suit. In the Family Foundation Times (a local newspaper) Craig Findley was quoted as saying "I don't know what can be done to stop the lawsuit" also, " FUDR is not seeking money from the Town, just legal fees". Sounds like they are going forward with it.
I'm guilty of not knowing the true meaning of channelizing. The streams were cleaned of debris. If you look at the streams before and after they were cleaned they are all located where they were, none have been straightened or moved.
It was simply cleaning them out so the streams could go back where they should be, instead of the down the roads.
Hopefully with the help of TU, DRF and Town, the issues will be fixed in the mountains so the practice of debris removal in the flooplains can be remedied.
saltshaker
New member
What is the definition of channelization
Folks,
I'm guilty of not knowing the true definition of channelization or channelizing. Can someone define this booger for me? I would like to see a well balanced discussion of this subject. It gets discussed in threads but then gets dropped. Spellchecker says those words don't exist!:dizzy:
Thanks,
Saltshaker
Folks,
I'm guilty of not knowing the true definition of channelization or channelizing. Can someone define this booger for me? I would like to see a well balanced discussion of this subject. It gets discussed in threads but then gets dropped. Spellchecker says those words don't exist!:dizzy:
Thanks,
Saltshaker
Pete
Trout Hunter
Re: What is the definition of channelization
Each case has to be engineered to suit the water being channelized, so it's not always the same.
My home water was recently the victim of a flood control project implimented by the Corps of Engineers.
Part of our town was built on the Ramapo River flood plain. The residents are subject to flooding after extremely heavy rains.
Construction of the floodgates is not yet complete, so the final result hasn't been seen, but I'm glad I don't live downstream.
So far (from my observations):
I have no idea how this is going to affect downstream areas, but like I said, I'm glad I don't live there.
See: New York District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for CE propaganda.
I now do most of my fishing well upstream from this area.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EDIT:
For any errors or omissions, regarding construction, in my post, see the "fact sheet" provided at the CE website. I was just an observer not a participant.
However, I personally observed (and smelled) what it was like during various rates of flow after it was channelized.
Each case has to be engineered to suit the water being channelized, so it's not always the same.
My home water was recently the victim of a flood control project implimented by the Corps of Engineers.
Part of our town was built on the Ramapo River flood plain. The residents are subject to flooding after extremely heavy rains.
- The river in the vicinity of the flood prone area was widened, deepened, and obstructions to flow were removed. This was designed to send the water downstream more quickly before flooding can occur.
They didn't "straighten" the river much, but the banks on "outside" of each turn and some of the straight runs were covered with rip-rap to slow down erosion.
To make it "legal" they provided whay they called "wetlands mitigation". A defunct gravel pit (Potash Lake), and part of the surrounding area, were modified to provide a place for the water to go, so downstream areas wouldn't be affected as badly....
Below the "mitigation" the river was again chanelized until it entered a lake.
A bridge that was obstructing flow was replaced by a wider one (Doty Road).
The dam that forms the lake is being provided with floodgates that will open during flood events.
Construction of the floodgates is not yet complete, so the final result hasn't been seen, but I'm glad I don't live downstream.
So far (from my observations):
- The chanelized sections look OK during higher than normal flow but under normal or low conditions, it's a stagnant ditch.
During construction, flooding was worse. We had (in effect) three "100 year floods" during the same year. Since it's being done "legal", it's taking years to complete.
I have no idea how this is going to affect downstream areas, but like I said, I'm glad I don't live there.
See: New York District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for CE propaganda.
I now do most of my fishing well upstream from this area.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EDIT:
For any errors or omissions, regarding construction, in my post, see the "fact sheet" provided at the CE website. I was just an observer not a participant.
However, I personally observed (and smelled) what it was like during various rates of flow after it was channelized.
Last edited:
Kilgour Farms
I took the one less traveled by
Re: What is the definition of channelization
Has anyone adressed the Railroad for some of the damage to the area? I have seen culverts that have not been cleaned in probably 40 years. Most of the debris ended up at plugged culverts, unable to flow freely to the river. All Railroad culverts are on the New York side of the river.
I would like to know what "channelizing" means? I can't find it in the dictionary? I find channeled and channel.
v (past and past participle chan·neled, present participle chan·nel·ing, 3rd person present singular chan·nels)
Has anyone adressed the Railroad for some of the damage to the area? I have seen culverts that have not been cleaned in probably 40 years. Most of the debris ended up at plugged culverts, unable to flow freely to the river. All Railroad culverts are on the New York side of the river.
I would like to know what "channelizing" means? I can't find it in the dictionary? I find channeled and channel.
v (past and past participle chan·neled, present participle chan·nel·ing, 3rd person present singular chan·nels)
Future Fanatic
Nirvana
I'm sorry, Rich. I was under the impression that anyone that would recieve e-mail updates from FUDR, have a "secret source" on their Board or who calls Mr. Findley, "Craig" in his posts here, would be a FUDR supporter. Of course, you would be a better source on your stance than any homework I could do. Do you consider yourself a FUDR supporter?
In all seriousness, if my characterization of you as being a supporter of FUDR caused you any discomfort, I understand, and I'm sorry.
By the way, they're alpacas, not llamas. Brachy was wrong, and his information caused you to be wrong also. Seem familiar?
Enjoy the rest of the weekend!
I know the secret source, he hangs out on this other lame message board.
I made one obnoxious post and they terminated me!
You guys are pretty tolerant after all.
<table class="forumline" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="row2">From:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">JB</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">To:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">jsin607</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">Posted:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">Sat Nov 25, 2006 5:22 pm</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">Subject:</td> <td class="row2" width="100%">Account Termination</td> <td class="row2" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="row1" valign="top">Please be advised that your registration and board membership is in the process of termination. This is not North Eastern Fly Fishing, where you seem to able to get away with your shenanigans.
_________________
JB Martin
"PRESTON JENNINGS FOR THE HALL OF FAME"
"You Put the Rest In, So Now Its' Time for Preston"</td></tr></tbody></table>
LOL
Just cause I said Jaydub is Craigs bitch!!!!
I made one obnoxious post and they terminated me!
You guys are pretty tolerant after all.
<table class="forumline" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="row2">From:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">JB</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">To:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">jsin607</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">Posted:</td> <td class="row2" colspan="2" width="100%">Sat Nov 25, 2006 5:22 pm</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="row2">Subject:</td> <td class="row2" width="100%">Account Termination</td> <td class="row2" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="row1" valign="top">Please be advised that your registration and board membership is in the process of termination. This is not North Eastern Fly Fishing, where you seem to able to get away with your shenanigans._________________
JB Martin
"PRESTON JENNINGS FOR THE HALL OF FAME"
"You Put the Rest In, So Now Its' Time for Preston"</td></tr></tbody></table>
LOL
Just cause I said Jaydub is Craigs bitch!!!!
John, I don't know how FUDR got my e-mail address, that's a mystery to me. I don't belong.
John, to be honest, I don't think a lawsuit is the right thing to do. For some reason FUDR could not get the town to work together, and I don't know why that is. There was a dialogue between the 2 post flood and pre filing intent papers. What really happened there, I don't think we will really know, I would just be speculating. I guess my discomfort was obvious. No harm, no foul!
I thought they might be alpacas. There is a farm local to me that has them. I stopped and asked about the "llamas" and was quickly corrected. I think they are interesting creatures, and a source of tying material.
As for the "Troll", I'm not surprised that you didn't last long. Like Dennis mentioned, we just keep you around for entertainment.:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
John, to be honest, I don't think a lawsuit is the right thing to do. For some reason FUDR could not get the town to work together, and I don't know why that is. There was a dialogue between the 2 post flood and pre filing intent papers. What really happened there, I don't think we will really know, I would just be speculating. I guess my discomfort was obvious. No harm, no foul!
I thought they might be alpacas. There is a farm local to me that has them. I stopped and asked about the "llamas" and was quickly corrected. I think they are interesting creatures, and a source of tying material.
As for the "Troll", I'm not surprised that you didn't last long. Like Dennis mentioned, we just keep you around for entertainment.:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
