My Letter

[_ritter_]

[Data below letter]

To the editor:
On Friday September 17th - the day leading up to the flood of 2004, the main stem gauge at Barryville, New York stood at 3.3 feet and the West Branch Delaware River gauge was recorded at 3.0 feet via the USGS. Both of these levels are considered normal.

During the late afternoon of Saturday September 18th, the main stem Upper Delaware River at the USGS at the Barryville gauge crested at 24 feet - an increase of over 20 feet over a 24 hour period!

Sullivan and Delaware Counties received over six inches of heavy rain in a short time during the night of September 17th

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, in charge of both reservoirs on the East and West Branches of the Delaware River, should be accountable for not releasing more water throughout the late summer months of 2004.

It is possible that if the NYC DEP had released more water from the bottom of their reservoirs in anticipation of additional rainfall, it might have prevented some of the flooding that we witnessed last weekend due to spillage over the top of the reservoir.

Our region had experienced over 15 inches of rainfall prior to this storm from mid July through early September. The ground was waterlogged with no cushion for additional water to go. Additionally, New York City's water capacity was 20% above their normal reserve before the 2004 flood in early September.

Even with those facts, the West Branch Delaware River water levels were running at or below normal for July and August 2004 - from 2.2 feet to 3.2 feet -since very little water was being released from Cannonsville Reservoir by New York City authorities.

It is my hope that our township officials, Upper Delaware Council delegates, commercial businesses and residents throughout the river valley will question these facts and the aftermath of this flood through an organized forum to raise questions about NYC DEP's water management.

My question is: Why wasn't more water released by the NYC DEP from their reservoirs during this past summer as a precaution to what has now happened to many within the tailwater river towns of the Upper Delaware River system this past weekend. And - more to the point - how can we prevent this tragedy from happening again in the future?

Sincerely,
Anthony Ritter
NYS Licensed Guide #1998
Gone Fishing Guide Service
Narrowsburg, NY
-------------------------------------------
Average Precipitation in Inches [Source: NYC DEP]

July 2004 - Actual 6.6 inches / Historical 4.1 inches
August 2004 - Actual 5.8 inches / Historical 4.0 inches
September 2004* - Actual 7.2 inches / Historical 3.9 inches

*To date [September 20 2004]

**Note: Narrowsburg received more than 7 inches of rain on September from September 17-18 2004 [Source: wunderground.com / Monticello, NY]

Total to Date for the past three months of Summer 2004:

Actual:
19.6 inches

Historical:
12.0 inches
---------------------------------------


NYC Reservoirs - Current Storage
100.2%

NYC Reservoirs - Normal Storage
77.0%
-----------------------------------------

As of September 21 2004:

Cannonsville Reservoir (West Branch Delaware River)
% of Capacity:
107.1%

Pepacton Reservoir (East Branch Delaware River)
% of Capacity:
102.2%


Precipitation from Friday 9/17 through Sunday 9/19 [72 hours] 2004 with regards to the flood of 2004.

North to South:

Deposit, NY
2.92
1.14
0.00
______
4.06"

Narrowsburg, NY
0.26
7.20
0.00
_______
7.46"

Milford, PA
0.30
3.05
0.00
_______
3.35"

Stroudsburg, PA
1.51
2.65
0.00
________
4.16"

Easton, PA
0.23
4.60
0.00
________
4.83"

Trenton, NJ
0.10
0.90
0.00
_______
1.00"

Source: Wunderground
--------------

USGS gauge data at Harvard (East Branch) [above confluence of the Beaverkill] and Hale Eddy (West Branch) - [5 miles from reservoir] for the time period of September 17 through 19 2004 - 7:00am readings - which are above secondary tribuatries to their respective rivers:

Hale Eddy:
2.88 feet / Friday
11.27 feet / Saturday
11.21 feet / Sunday

Harvard:
3.00 feet / Friday
9.57 feet / Saturday
14.13 feet / Sunday

Source: USGS

 

[oasis man]

You make some excellent points...I tried to do a few quick calculations, to see if reservoir management could have indeed made a difference: Lets take the West Branch, where on 9/18 the water flowing past the gauge at Hale Eddy was about 15,000cfs (the peak was around 18,000cfs) This is about 10 billion gallons, and if the reservoir had been managed to where the current level before the storm was about 88% of capacity, (well above average for this time of year) this would account for all of this water...and no flooding in Hancock at all. Of course, this ignores the water coming in from Butler Creek and Cayuga (sp?) Creek...but I think it is easily seen that the impact would have been greatly lessened had there been better management. The powers that be (and there are far too many: NYC, NYS, NJ, Delaware, Pa. Fed Govt.) need to manage the systm based on probablility of reservoir refill...maybe this is a point that the various fishing groups can get together and rally around...and come up with a single, supported proposal???

 

[Big_Spinner]

Good stuff guys,

Copied from another thread for your perusal,

Bruce,

You are absolutely correct in your assessment.

If NYC had reduced reservoirs to 90%, this still gives them a very high degree of "probability of refill by June 1st", the reservoirs would have helped even more than they did by delaying the water for a few days.

An example:

Beaverkill: Saturday crest 43,300 cfs now 1,400 cfs

West Branch: Saturday crest 16,600 cfs now 5,000 cfs

If there were no reservoirs, most of the towns would be gone. The reservoirs delayed much of the water. With no reservoir the West Branch would have crested higher than the Beaverkill!

The reservoirs could have been used to do an even better job had they been reduced to 90%

West Branch: Saturday crest about 13,000 cfs now about 2,000

I know this would have been enough to keep water out of our basement!!

I think that we can arrive at the best solution for all and even help the fisheries and the rivers. The only way to fix this is to allow the reservoirs to be at 90% (or whatever the number turns ut to be) full and when they get higher release the water in a controlled even manner. NYC proved this summer that they can prevent spill by releasing about 80% of the known inlfow, so the calculation can be made to release water to keep the reservoir at about 90%. The probability of refill would still be very high and the flood problem would be reduced. The added benefit would be better river habitat and better fisheries.

This needs to be done over a long time period as they cannot release large quantities at once. The release capacity on the EB is about 700 cfs and on the WB about 2500 cfs. In order to make significant changes in res height this needs to be released over long periods of time. It just takes better management!!!

The people on the main stem including the new stockport house had significant water in their basements.

Still cleaning up,

jim

 

[BEAMOC]

Tony,

Great letter, hopefully they will print it and the more of the public will understand the city's poor management of the water. Just a thought though, maybe you should have mentioned that they not only failed to release water to prevent the flood, but that by not releasing at certain times they were in violation of the new flow requirements. Overall, a very well written editorial.

Keith

 

[Future Fanatic]

Were the reservoirs built for flood control?
How many downstream floods over the years have been averted because of their being there? Anyone thank NYC for all those times? If NYC had not built the reservoirs, how much damage do you think all this water would have created? How about all of the floods over all these years? If flood control had been at the top of anyone's priority list, why was it not negotiated into the original agreement? Or after the original agreement? Or was it?

When mother nature helped our rivers this summer, many of you made sure that no credit would be given to NYC or "the plan". When mother nature threw a curve, it seems some of you look for ways to blame NYC...

Yeah, let's keep bashing them for not doing things that (as far as I know)they are not required to do... Jab that thorn in their side a little deeper...

John

 

[Big_Spinner]

Good stuff Future,

That is why I still maintain and strive to accomplish a working releationship with NYS and all the parties to the decree. That is the only way we can work out agreements where everyoen can agree and everyone can benefit.

This can and must be a win/win/win scenario, or it will never be improved.

Anyone who would like to call in on a conference call tomorrow to discuss these issues together, please call the office in the morning so I can set it up.

Jim

 

[Eagle Claw]

edited and deleted

 

[Mayfly]

One or two years ago NYC or whoever draws down the reservoirs and many people bi*ch, moan and complain about that situation and the effects on the fishery. Now NYC or whoever doesn't draw down the reservoirs and the same people bi*ch, moan and complain about the effect on the flood and that the flood itself could have been averted.

The argument about drawing down because of an imminent flood is based on the presumption of specific and accurate forecasting plus the idea that the reservoirs were built for flood control. Well, the latter is not the purpose of the reservoirs. As for the former, IF long distance forecasts were able to be so accurate, maybe some things would be different.

Here's another IF: If there were no reservoirs maybe the entire Delaware watershed would have been destroyed(?)

I know there's plenty of mud along the rivers but slinging it at NYC, Philly, Montague or some authority does not help anyone.

Allan Podell

 

[_ritter_]

Here's another IF: If there were no reservoirs maybe the entire Delaware watershed would have been destroyed(?)

I know there's plenty of mud along the rivers but slinging it at NYC, Philly, Montague or some authority does not help anyone.

...........

Alan,
I have posted your name at the top of the thread since one should take some responsibility to what they say - or post.

I do.

And, since you have fished in the Catskills - Neversink, Beaverkill, etc. for many years and belong to certain angling organizations up here, I think others might want to know how callous you sound at times.

So, the next time somebody bumps into you at Somerset, CFFC&M, Stewart Avenue or astream - they can at least know who they are talking to if they have a specific question about a topic as important as what happened to many people over the weekend.

My point is - and was - that the flooding which took place over the weekend could have been lessened along the tailwater river towns if NYC DEP had taken precautions.

That was it.

I don't want to get into cyber-hypothetical bull$hit with you about if the reservoirs were or were not built.

They were built.

I hope you'll read today's article below.
TR
Narrowsburg, NY
--------------------------

http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2004/09/22/flood22.htm

$10M trail of destruction

By Victor Whitman
Times Herald-Record
vwhitman@th-record.com

Monticello – Sullivan County has suffered more than $10 million in damage from Hurricane Ivan, according to preliminary reports from town supervisors.
But that number is expected to rise as more residents and businesses report back to the towns this week, officials say.
"This is just unbelievable," said Highland Supervisor Allan Schadt.
"We're looking at $3 million for just the houses."
The worst hit areas were along the 65-mile stretch of the Delaware River corridor from Long Eddy to the Orange County line and the interior town of Rockland in northern Sullivan County.
The southern river town of Highland was particularly hard hit and is reporting $1.6 million in damage to roads, Schadt said.
But that's only the start of the town's problems.
Some 64 home owners have reported damage, which could top $1.8 million. The total of private property loss could swell to $3 million because another 90 home owners with damage to their homes have not yet reported to the town, Schadt said.
The Cedar Rapids Inn in Barryville has $500,000 in damage, and the Shohola bridge contractor, Fahs-Roston, lost about $500,000 in equipment. Kittatinny Campgrounds also has damage.
Rockland sustained $1.25 million in damage to roads and town property, and had widespread flooding in Roscoe and Livingston Manor, Supervisor Pat Pomeroy said.
The county may have to replace two bridges in Highland and two in Tusten at a cost of $250,000 to $750,000 per bridge, county Public Works Commissioner Pete Lilholt said.
In Livingston Manor, four homes were destroyed and a dozen were badly damaged. Four families are homeless, and the town is concentrating on finding long-term housing for one family, which can't rebuild, Pomeroy said.
The Roscoe Motel and Roscoe Campsite combined sustained roughly $400,000 in damage.
Other towns were hit hard.
Lumberland has $500,000 in road damage and roughly $1 million in private property damage, Supervisor John LiGreci said. The towns of Callicoon and Tusten also reported more than $1 million each in damage.
In Hankins in the Town of Fremont, 35 camper vans were swept into the Delaware River from the Red Barn Campgrounds and 20 others were damaged.
In Delaware, the town lost $40,000 pounds of sand at the town barn.
The towns of Bethel and Cochecton also reported damage.
Gov. George Pataki has not yet requested that President Bush issue a federal disaster declaration for the areas affected by Saturday's storm. The State Emergency Management Office expects to turn over the damage estimates to the governor's office on Friday.
A federal declaration would clear the way for municipalities and individuals to apply for FEMA loans and grants.

 

[Future Fanatic]

Tony,

I agree that all people should take responsibility for what they post. I wish ALL of your "brothers" in FUDR felt the same way as you. Any other names you'd like to share? Or is it OK for some to stay anonymous?

John

 

[Mayfly]

Tony,

Callous my ass. I was there. I know what the devastation was and also suffered some losses, minor compared to others, but losses just the same.

My response was to your ability to slant everything as if it's the fault of NYC, Philly, the reservoirs, etc. Hey, sometimes shit happens. One of my points, the major one, was that you and others were screaming bloody murder when the reservoirs were drawn down last year or the year before. IF, and this is the point, IF the area had a similar rainstorm back then you'd still find something to complain about. However, even after being drawn down to about 5%, there was such an exceedingly wet May and June that the reservoirs went up to capacity. If they (the reservoirs) hadn't been drawn down the area would have been flooded. That's not a hypothetical.

Yes, control of the reservoirs should be more responsive to the physical well being of the communities they serve and those communities which are effected by their function. However, throwing darts and mud slinging does more to alienate and solidify the opposition then it does to create a framework for cooperation.

As for signing my name to any post, I just inserted it to the one above.

A.P.