Welcome to NEFF

Sign up for a new account today, or log on with your old account!

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!

Interim Flood/Release Plan Program Announced

Big_Spinner

Trout Hunter
Hi guys,

The meeting after the meeting was very productive at West Branch angler on Tuesday. They seem to have reached agreement on a short term flood mitigation plan.

My only concern is that it needs to take into consideration the rivers below the dams. Hopefully they have considered the more sustained releases over a longer period of time and not just a quick dump, just before the reseroirs are going to spill.

We will certainly stay on top of this. Details to follow.

Jim

FYI – From the 9/20/2006 Philadelphia Inquirer/Associated Press.

Posted on Wed, Sep. 20, 2006

Officials working on reservoir reduction plan to lessen flooding

WILLIAM KATES
Associated Press

DEPOSIT, N.Y. - New York City officials said Tuesday they were optimistic they will soon have a short-term management plan to reduce the amount of water the city stores in its three Delaware River reservoirs in the Catskills.

The measure has been sought by flood-stricken residents downriver in neighboring states.

A plan may be worked out by Sept. 27 and can be presented at the next meeting of the Delaware River Basin Commission, the multistate agency that manages water resources in the Delaware Basin, said Michael Principe, a former deputy commissioner and now senior adviser for the New York City Bureau of Water Supply.

"I heard people here looking for a year-round program. We'll take it up with our technical group ... but I just don't think we're going to be able to make everyone happy," Principe said at the conclusion of a public hearing held by the commission's Regulated Flow Advisory Committee, held at an angler's resort on the West Branch of the Delaware.

"We've pretty much agreed that conceptually, this is the way we need to go. We need to work out the details," said William Gast, the committee's chairman.

Historically, New York has kept its reservoirs as full as possible to guard against drought. Built in the 1950s and '60s to supply drinking water to the city and suburbs, the Neversink, Pepacton and Cannonsville reservoirs are located in the Catskills, at the headwaters of the Delaware River. Together, they supply water to about 9 million people.

However, the reservoirs were at near 100 percent capacity during the devastating floods that occurred in September 2004, April 2005 and June of this year. Unable to store water from torrential rains, the reservoirs spilled, sending billions of gallons cascading down the Delaware and into homes and businesses in September 2004, April 2005 and June 2006.

Residents and experts believe that had the reservoirs not been so full, they could have stored some of that water and reduced the severity of the flooding downriver.

About 50 people attended the 2 1/2 hour hearing, which also focused on developing a new, long-range multi-objective reservoir management program as well as immediate flood mitigation. Most of the attendees were local elected leaders and residents.

The commission is considering a dramatic change in its management approach, shifting away from a system based on target levels to one that relies on a seasonally fixed release schedule, said Robert Tudor, deputy executive director of the Delaware River Basin Commission. The agency manages the river on behalf of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Delaware and the federal government.

Any flood reduction plan also needs to protect the city's water supply and have a negligible impact on the river's fishery.

During the meeting engineer Paul Rush said the city's Department of Environmental Protection was considering options that included lowering capacity by 5 percent or more, but not during the months of April, May and June. He noted the DEP started a "spill reduction" program two years ago that lowers the reservoirs during winter to accept snow melt.

"We need to be at 100 percent capacity by June 1 so we can meet summer demand," he said.

Peder Hansen, a Deposit resident, questioned the effectiveness of such a proposal, noting that it would not have provided any relief in two of the last three floods.

David Jones said he sustained more than $1 million in damages to his canoe sales and rental business. He said he had heard enough discussion of the problem.

"What happened to common sense. You can't wait for another flood. We lucked out with the last storm. It's still hurricane season. Something needs to be done now," Jones said.



N E W S R E L E A S E COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA


COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Office of the Governor
Governor’s Press Office
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
9/21/2006

CONTACT:
Kate Philips
Phone: 717-783-1116
Kurt M. Knaus, DEP
Phone: 717-787-1323

GOVERNOR RENDELL ANNOUNCES INTERIM PLAN TO LOWER NYC RESERVOIRS

Basin States to Share $500,000 Cost of Flood Mitigation Study for Delaware River

HARRISBURG – Governor Edward G. Rendell today announced an interim spill mitigation program for managing releases from New York City’s reservoirs, with the four states along the Delaware River agreeing to share the cost of a $500,000 study to examine the effects of operational changes at major reservoirs throughout the entire basin.

A task force also will be established by the states through the Delaware River Basin Commission to examine broader flood mitigation issues along the 330-mile river and its 216 tributaries.

"These reservoirs are just one piece of a very large and complex flood protection plan for the basin as a whole," Governor Rendell said. "Lowering reservoir levels is by no means a silver bullet for addressing flooding along the Delaware River, but it may provide an added measure of protection for downstream communities until a more comprehensive program can be developed and adopted."

Under the spill mitigation program, New York City will increase releases to the Delaware River from its Neversink, Pepacton and Cannonsville reservoirs between July 1 and March 31, during periods of above-normal hydrologic conditions. The plan provides for greater reserve capacity in the reservoirs during the Atlantic hurricane season.

With a storage void the reservoirs can capture more runoff in the upper reaches of the Delaware River. The spill reduction will not eliminate flooding – the New York City reservoirs control only about one-fifth of the watershed – but flood crests may be reduced immediately below the reservoirs. The plan likely will have little flood mitigation effect farther downstream in Pennsylvania, especially after periods of heavy rains.

Operations under the interim spill mitigation program, which still requires formal approval by the parties to the 1954 Supreme Court Decree as well as adoption by the DRBC, will be in effect through March 31. DRBC will vote on adoption of the plan Sept. 27. The spill mitigation program is moving forward simultaneously with development of a comprehensive flood mitigation plan.

Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York each will contribute $150,000 toward a study that more broadly and thoroughly examines the potential effects of managing reservoirs throughout the basin to reduce flooding on the Delaware River and its tributaries. Delaware will provide $50,000.

The Delaware River has flooded three times in two years – September 2004, April 2005 and June 2006 – after a period of nearly 50 years without any widespread main stem flooding.

More than a dozen other reservoirs in the basin, built for purposes other than flood control, may offer opportunities to provide limited additional flood mitigation. A new model is needed to understand what flood mitigation benefits may be derived from altering the operations at those reservoirs.

In addition to addressing reservoir operations, the states will form a task force through the DRBC to look at stormwater management, land-use patterns, open space and farmland preservation, floodplain regulations, and other potential non-structural flood mitigation measures in the basin, which is home to nearly 7.8 million residents, including 5.2 million Pennsylvanians.

Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York are affected the most by Delaware River flooding. All four states also have a stake in ensuring adequate water supplies to New York City, and maintaining adequate flows downstream to protect fisheries and other in-stream uses and water supplies in Trenton and Philadelphia. Delaware’s contribution reflects its concern about how the added freshwater flow from increased reservoir releases may affect the Delaware Bay.

All four states are members of the Delaware River Basin Commission, which was created in 1961 as a regional body to manage the river system for multiple purposes, including water supply, pollution control, flood control, watershed management, fish and wildlife management, recreation, power generation and water allocation. These states and New York City also are among those subject to the 1954 Supreme Court decree.

The 330-mile Delaware River is the longest undammed river east of the Mississippi, running from Hancock, N.Y., to the mouth of the Delaware Bay where it meets the Atlantic Ocean. Fifteen million people draw water from the Delaware River and its 216 tributaries.

For more information on flood-related issues in Pennsylvania, visit DEP’s Web site at PA Department of Environmental Protection, Keyword: “Flood/Flood Recovery.”

###

The Rendell Administration is committed to creating a first-rate public education system, protecting our most vulnerable citizens and continuing economic investment to support our communities and businesses. To find out more about Governor Rendell's initiatives and to sign up for his weekly newsletter, visit his Web site at: Edward G. Rendell, Governor.
 
This is just a "Letter to the Editor" in today's Daily Star out of Oneonta. It seems some of the "local folk" have some issues with NYC. huh...

"12-13-2006
DEP misleads on releases

Have you ever been duped, misled, deluded, deceived, hoodwinked or given the wrong impression? The New York City Department of Environmental Protection has done it to the residents below its reservoirs. This conclusion was reached after attending a meeting in Hancock on Nov. 16. Present at that meeting was the Delaware River Basin Commission’s Carol Collier.

In the Q&A session, she was asked about DRBC Resolution 18. It deals with flood mitigation.

However, since it was enacted, our reservoirs climbed past 100 percent. When asked about lack of voids and the release figures, Collier said that no voids were promised and releases were per agreement. Questioned as to how the figures were determined, she was adamant that DEP authored them, not DRBC. Collier added that changes to the situation would only come via "people pressure." It’s apparent that DEP’s new "flood mitigation" is not doing the job. Figures show that more could be released than had been.

If you read the resolution, you will get some sense of DEP arrogance. Amazingly, it has changed the seasons, as we know them. The DEP chart has winter going from Oct. 1 through April 30. By redefining nature, it can release less water, which is always its goal. Not only are the release volumes it set too small to have any meaningful effect, but by changing the definition of the seasons, it can get away with giving us very little flood mitigation. Or, the way it’s working out, none at all.

In press releases about Resolution 18, lowered reservoirs levels are mentioned. Hasn’t happened! I’ve called it smoke and mirrors _ it’s more like speaking out of both sides of your mouth. We are not only being misled, we are being endangered! It is an outrage! It is an outrage to be this misled!

Joan Homovich
Downsville"
 
John,
This quote is totally incorrect and this is where people are being misinformed.
"It deals with flood mitigation." It is NOT flood mitigation, it is "spill" mitigation and technically it is doing what it was intended to do. Decrease Spill.

If you look at the charts and graphs someone can easily interpret this as a flood mitigation however if you really look at the dates in those graphs, understand how quick these reservoirs refill and know more than the average citizzen about their operations, you can see that as is, will not do much. In order to have any real impoact on lower reserviors and a possible "void", water should be continuosly released throughout the summer (which inturn helps the fishery) and brought to a level in september that has no real appreciable risk to anyone. The downbasin states and NYC must re-evaluate risk assesment since they feel that if the reservoirs are at 99.9%, you are closer to going into drough.
Just because there is a release of 1000 CFS it doesnt mean "spill Mitigation" Reservoirs at 100% and 1001CFS coming in, the reservoirs are filling yet, you are decreasing spill. Huh!
 
FT,
I understand your point. I really do. BUT, I think what this letter illustrates is the PERCEPTION of reality that many people sitting in the shadows of these dams have. I believe that "voids" were tossed around for Cannonsville and another reservoir(but NOT Pepacton) I think these people assumed or were led to believe that the same idea was being pitched for Pepacton. True or false, I'm afraid that anything less than a void will be perceived as not enough.
 
FF,
You are rigtht on. NYC will not create a void. Its too risky, so they think.
woid was coined by those who heard a presentation by DRBC/NYC. NYC didnt confirm or deny. I brought this out at a public meeting a few months back. Crickets.... Glad to see some are starting to clear the smoke.

In order to create a true void, you have to dump water as quickly as you can and keep dumping it to stay at a level acceptable to NYC and the Downbasin states. This, I dont think will happen in my lifetime. If it did, then you have true flood control. However, this can be very bad for the fishery. But, if you have higher releases from the spring through fall, more consistant over a longer period of time, you are doing the job of creating a void (not all at once and can adjust as weather conditions change) and, that by default, puts more water down the river during the critical months.

More to come....
 
It will be interesting to see what happens here. The volume of Cannonsville (and Peapacton for that matter) is already small realtive to needs (drinking water and Montague mins). The fishery is an after thought. Doubt that they will do much. It looked to me that Cannonsville would have had to be down significantly to aviod the peaks of the last two floods. Was this point discussed?
 
They are really not too small. THey are just a small fraction of the reservoirs and the water resources in the system. There is enough water to do quite a bit if managed differently and if they assess risk with some reality.
Everyone is very aware that Cannonsville refills much faster than all the other reservoirs. The drainage area is very large. With this in mind and really assessing risk, they can bring cannonsville down quite a bit and it will almost always refil,(more than 9 out of 10 years) regardless of the level in Oct. What they are afraid of is that 10th year it doesnt refil and then the first (or following year) it doesnt refil. What they are not looking at close enough is what real risk does that have? Certainly no risk of anyone running out of water. They are playing it very cautiously and in reality could draw cannonsville down.
Pepacton is another story for another time as well as Neversink.
 
Fly Tier... They are small relative to similar reseviors like those on the Missouri out west and on other river systems. Small relative to the needs. That's why Cannonsville was drained one year to meet the Montague minimum. A release of 1000 CFS a day is close to 1% of the capacity of Cannonsville (.6 of a percent or so). Three months of 1000 CFS release will use up 50% to 60% of the water as it pretty much did in that year.

I do agree with you that the levels can be carefully managed lower. All that water that typcially spills in the spring is essentially wasted from any of the uses (drinking water, the fishery, the montague minimum). However, the protein content (alewives) that comes over in those spills is probably imporant to the fishery typically at a time when the fish are hungry (spring) so it may not be a good thing for the fishery to stop the spills.
 
Spills are wasted water. Stopping spills creates a void. in order to get water from such small reservoirs compared to the west, you need to turn spills into managed releases.
A few alewifes that come over in the spills does not do better for the river than what continuous releases will do with nutrients into the water. Reason such prolific hatches on the Missouri are the managed continuous releases and the nutrients from water basically being filtered(not really filtered) from those releases, dam to dam. They dont need spills out west to grow big fish and create healthy hatches. Western reservoirs are obviously larger and used a lot for farming, moreso than drinking.
 
So what is going on at this time? Neither Cannonsville nor Pepacton are spilling but Harvard (800+ CFS) and Hale Eddy (1100+ CFS) are running much higher than usual. Are they creating voids in both reservoirs at this time?

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Hi Bruce,

The spill mitigation program is in place.

This looks at the total of the three reservoirs on a given day. Right now if what is in the reservoirs is above 75% of total capacity, the releases are increased according to a schedule. Each reservoir is then evaluated on an individual basis.

So, if total is above 75%

and Reservoir X is above 95%

then

Release for Cannonsville is 1000 cfs
Release for Pepacton is 700 cfs
Release for Neversink is 190 cfs

There is a sliding scale as the reservoirs go down.

Simple and easy to determine, this is the first step to an Adaptive Policy!!!

Jim
 
So what is going on at this time? Neither Cannonsville nor Pepacton are spilling but Harvard (800+ CFS) and Hale Eddy (1100+ CFS) are running much higher than usual. Are they creating voids in both reservoirs at this time?

Bruce

Bruce...long time! FYI 4 trips to Florida - i've been running down on Sundays, fishing monday and coming back Tuesday, 1 big cow - 38 1/4". Not a sail to be caught on fly but loads around.

Anyway, to kind of answer your question. They are in reality creating a void but as far as they are concerned and how its written, they are lessening the chance the reservoirs will spill. Only problem is if they continue this program after may, as is, the dates they use the scale jim mentions below are, in my opinion, not really doing much except puffing on a cigar.
 
I have decided to keep this thread current in order to stimulate some discussion on the current threat of flooding on the Delware river. I would encourage you to read the news release from Governor Rendell which I posted 4 hours ago. I sent the article to a friend who lives on the river near Callicoon, NY and who has has suffered flooding on his property.

Here are his comments which I received today:

"This baby has been born. Should it continue to rain several inches, this river will flood. Like most politicians, Rendell is late. It takes time to draw down a reservoir to the point that it can prevent flooding. Two years ago the Cannonsville reservoir was at 102.1%, right where it is now. 8 inches of rain fell, resulting in damage throughout the entire watershed. Should the rain continue now...........................?"

Let us all hope and pray that the rain stops soon!

Bob K.
 
Last edited:
Bob,
I realize your concern here, but, until one of the decree parties to the 1954 Supreme Court decision forces NYC back to court, not much is going to happen here.
 
This is all relative.

I think that FFMP deserves some credit so far this year.

Record precipitation in February and no flooding.

Very high precipitation in March and no flooding.

Absolutely perfect conditions for all the rivers right through the winter.

West Branch has had 1500 cfs release almost all winter. No anchor ice or low water conditions to expose river bottom, bugs and brown trout redds. None. Extremely stable conditions, great for the rivers.

Reduced flows at critical times this winter and spring. The peak flows were reduced as roughly 40 billion gallons of water has been released in a controlled way, instead of uncontrolled spills.

FFMP is a great way to manage the river in the winter. Some minor tweaks are needed to make it better. There was some minor flooding on the East Branch in early March. This can be reduced by being somewhat more aggressively releasing water. The release on the East Branch is already at or near the maximum capacity of the dam. (700 -750 cfs depending on how much is in the dam) Releasing more earlier, before 95% level is achieved would be one way to do this.

We (fishermen and river recreationists), would suggest that more water be released in the previous summer to allow for better flows and temperatures in the summer. This of course would lead to reduced volumes as we enter September. This would yield some additional protection as we enter hurricane season and it does not create additional risk to water supply.

Getting back to flood risk for a minute. This too is relative.

How far do you move in the direction of protection. There are some people who have been flooded multiple times that feel the reservoir should stay empty and then catch all of the spring runoff. A bit extreme. If you want no flood risk, move to the top of a mountain. OF course, then lightning strike risk increases!

The old NYC is at the other end of the spectrum. Hold back everything and don't worry about how much spills or if there is anything in the river in the summer. Also a bit extreme. If you want to insure your water supply, build desalinization plants.

Now some might argue that NYC is still there, but they have softened their position somewhat. Hence, a release of 1500 cfs on the West Branch this winter, as compared to the old winter release regime of 45 cfs.

The question becomes, where do we land in the middle of all this? And how do we get there? Not everyone will be completely happy, but there is a point where the system will work for most. I think that FFMP is an important step in the direction of solving that problem.

Most all fishing groups agree that FFMP is sound in concept. There is still work to be done to determine the best and sustainable amount of water you put into the matrix cells and at what time of year? Most all fishemen agree that there needs to be more release in the Spring and Summer.

There could be an increase in the flexibility of the matrix by adding more seasons and levels.

There are some other minor fixes outside of the matrix that would help river health. Addressing the Montague Target in several different ways, Establishing a Callicoon Target, Determining how to handle PPL and Mongaup power releases, as well as some others.

IT looks as though FFMP will continue on an interim basis for awhile. This will allow us to continue to improve its operation before final adoption.

IT is also important to make sure that when FFMP is adopted in to the code that it remains flexible and adaptable.

How great will it be in 50 years, when we have desalinization for NYC and the people in the upper delaware control their rivers for flood protection and recreation!!

Jim
 
Last edited:
Jim,

Nice report. I agree, spawning habitat was greatly increased and protected this winter. Now, if only all of these newly hatched fish could have a place to live this summer things would be good.

Like many, I would like to see the "minor tweaks" put in place, but that's probably going to be a major undertaking. Addressing the Montague Target, establishing a Callicoon Target, and determining how to handle PPL and Mongaup power releases are more than just minor fixes. If they are minor why haven't we seen them tweaked?

Joe
 
Hi Joe,

All those "minor tweaks" are minor in relation to moving from Rev1-7 to FFMP.

Getting FFMP in place and operating was the "MAJOR TWEAK".

We are currently hard at work to get those other minor tweaks implemented as soon as possible. There is a good chance for some of them to be adopted in July or October.

We are currently working to increase the important summer releases in FFMP so as you so adroitly point out "those newly hatched fish will have a place to live this summer".

Keep in mind that under the old regime the minimum release was 45 or 60 cfs. Under FFMP the minimum release will be 260 cfs during the summer. (West Branch) This is a minimum, so we can expect much higher flows.

Temperature is the biggest concern as we move into the summer. The higher minimums will be a help for the upper sections of the rivers, but there will be no thermal bank to help with temperatures. The rivers will need to rely on Montague releases, as they have in the past. The other part of FFMP may also help here. Spill mitigation releases will come into play when the reservoirs are high in the summer. This would also help.

So, the way I see it, we still have a problem during a dry summer for a short period of time. LAst year was a perfect example. The spring flows decreased and reservoir levels went down. We did not have high enough reservoir levels to make the spill mitigation releases kick in and we did not have dry enough conditions to make the Montague release kick in. There is always a lag that we still need to make sure is covered in future versions of release propocols. The worst part, from a fishermans perspective, is that this troublesome period usually occurs when the hatching is at its best and the fishing should be great. The end of May until sometime in late June or July is typically the problem time period. If it occurs earlier, it is not so much of a problem as we usually do not get the really hot days and nights.

We are still hopeful that we can get the rest of CP2 releases adopted for the West Branch for this summer. All of the suggested releases in CP2 have been adopted, except for, in my opinion, the most critical, which is L2 release in the summer (June 1 - August 31). That would be another step forward. This would increase the minimum release on the West Branch from 260 to 350 cfs. Any increase here would be beneficial and eventually we want to make this number even higher to provide more protection for the mainstem.

Jim
 
Jim,

Thanks for your reply. We all know we need better releases through the summer and hopefully we'll get them. What do you see as the probability of the summer releases being upped to 350 and at what time line?

This was probably covered before, but if you take the last 40 years of records and plug those numbers into FFMP and the L numbers as they currently stand, what would have the releases looked like for that 6/1 through 10/1 period?

Joe
 
Hi Joe,

I am probably being optimisitic, but I see a better than 50% chance of getting at least 300 for this summer (Starting June 1) and probably about a 25% chance of getting the full 350.

Your second question is a bit difficult to answer.

While I have done exactly what you suggest, it is still difficult to interpret the results. If you take the real data from the USGS gauges and the Rivermaster reports, you can get a pretty close look at real life. Then, you need to make an interpretation of those numbers. For instance, is it better to have a constant 260 release (which will be a flow at Hale Eddy of 350 - 400 under most June conditions) from June 1 to June 30th under FFMP or is a minimum release of 60 (Rev 7) (which is a flow of 225 to 500 at Hale Eddy) okay, knowing that there are thermal releases that can be made? The answer is, it probably depends on temperatures during the period. The mainstem is pretty much on its own at this time. IT is my hope that we can eventually get a high enough constant release from the West Branch to maintain a cool plume of water nearly all the time down into the mainstem. The more cold water the farther down the mainstem the cold plume. This will provide a consistant thermal refuge for all those mainstem rainbows we all love so much.

The second way to make an evaluation is by utilizing the modeling tools that we have available. OASIS and the DSS are the two tools that are accepted by the Parties to the decree as tools to help make decisions. IF you compare OASIS runs of Rev 7 and FFMP and then additionally run them through the Habitat DSS model, you find that FFMP is better during that time period by providing more adult trout habitat. OASIS and DSS both have temperature components in them, but the temperature modeling is only as good as weather forecasting, so it can be improved upon.

Models in science are always undergoing improvement. You learn to work with what you have. As knowledge and techniques improve, you need to be able to incorporate that into the decision making process. That is what an adaptable framework is all about.

Temperature becomes more of an issue as we move into July and August. Right now we have to depend on Montague release or spill mitigation release for help at that time. There is still something wrong with the system when we have to hope for a drought to get good water releases in the summer!?!?!? We are making progress though.

Jim
 
Jim,

Thanks again for your reply. I guess what my second question really is, is what if the current FFMP was in effect since the beginning, can the computer models show what the flow would have been from then to the present? I

Instead of flow records for that time period I guess you would have to use reservoir storage capacity historical data to see what it would have turned the releases into. No easy task for a pencil and paper, but I would think the right program and some microchips could figure it out.

Joe
 
I commend all the work that has been done to try and get NYC to see the forest through the trees but the fact remains that NYC does what NYC wants.

If you have the Cannonsville at 107% which it was and they release 1500cfs they are not doing anyone a favor. They are releasing excess water, 100% is full 107% is trouble.

The only way you are going to make NYC address this is to take them back to the supreme court and get a ruling they must adhere to. Otherwise, I think the release proposals are an exercise in futility.
 
Last edited:
Hi Joe,

What you have suggested is exactly what OASIS does.

The data set for inflows into the system goes back to 1928.

You manually set the reservoir levels for Jan 1, 1928.

You also set the rules for how OASIS will operate:

set minimum release for Cannonsville to 400
set flow target at Montague at 1750
etc.

OASIS then takes the set of initial conditions and applies the rules to January 1st, 1928.

The resulting output is stored in a massive file.

Then we go to January 2, 1928 and everything is recalculated based on the results of January 1, 1928.

etc. etc. etc. until we end up with this massive file of 26570 days of data.

One then goes back and changes whatever you want to change for initial conditions or rules and you can run OASIS again for the 73 year period.

Now you have two files that can be compared. Just as you suggested, OASIS can print a graph that would show just about anythnig you would like to see.

You can compare Rev 7 against FFMP showing Hale Eddy flows day by day or Cannonsville Reservoir Levels or the effect on NYC reservoir storage or just about anything you would like to see.

By the way, it takes about 12 minutes for my dual core processor computer to do all the calculations for a single OASIS run.

You can then take the output data from OASIS and run it through the Habitat model.

The habitat model works in a similar way. You take two different OASIS output runs and it will compare the habitat changes between those runs.

Then you can look at the output that compares adult trout habitat or spawning habitat or a variety of other things.

I am attaching a sample of output from an OASIS run of CP2. This has a release of 350 in June from Cannonsville when reservoirs are in normal operation.

I find it interesting to compare the releases from the dams to the flows down river.

The sample file is a text file that anyone should be able to open.

Jim
 

Attachments

  • June OASIS data sample txt.txt
    4 KB · Views: 152
Hi,

One thing to keep in mind as we get closer to May.

The reservoir releases in April will continue to be high (1500 cfs at Cannonsville and 700 at Pepacton) as long as the reservoirs are spilling. They are both still spilling as of today (April 7).

When they stop spilling the release in April will be ramped down over three days to 110 cfs on the West Branch and 85 cfs on the East Branch. This will be a shocking change.

This is of course the minimum release and flows should be much higher from small stream inflow. Still so, it will be a drastic change.

Of course, this is still better than previous revisions (45 cfs release on the West Branch and East Branch in April and May.), but still, it would be better to have more.

One question I often get is; Why don't they hold some of that back and release only 800 or 1000 instead of 1500? Save some for later. Unfortunately, it does not work that way. If the release is not 1500 when they get close to spilling, the excess will just spill in an uncontrolled way. Not good for anybody. Just think of it as a gallon jug that has a spigot on the bottom. Hold the jug under the sink faucet and turn the water on slow. The jug slowly fills and will start spilling out the top. Now open the spigot and the spill will be reduced or even eliminated. Of course our floods have been like turning the faucet on full blast!!!

Looks like things are going to warm up a bit this week!!!

Jim
 
Last edited:
Hi guys,

I just noticed that the txt file I posted previously did not convert properly from an excel file. Many of the headings are messed up.

If you open it in excel, it works just fine.

IF you would like a copy of the excel file (not an allowed format to download here - any chance of making it allowed Dennis), just pm or email me.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Hi Jeff,

The current FFMP is still a work in progress. I suspect some tinkering will happen before adoption sometime this year. (Probably July or September)

There will then be a 3 year time frame to evaluate and make changes again.

Jim
 
Back
Top