I just heard, by way of a riverparks authority employee, that the reason the river is so low is because the damn is broken. Anyone else hear anything on this?
It ain't Keystone dam, it is the low-water dam at 31st and Riverside
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 12, 2011, 09:03:27 PM
It ain't Keystone dam, it is the low-water dam at 31st and Riverside
More info, please.
I can't copt the link on my phone, but they are having to repair the gates and hydraulics on the dam at Zink Lake that control the flow amd level of water in Zink Lake.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=61&articleid=20110611_11_A22_Ifther975560&archive=yes
Work on Tulsa's low-water dam is necessary
By World's Editorial Writers
Published: 6/11/2011 If there is going to be a lake, it will need water.
Zink Lake is dangerously close to becoming a partial lake. With the lack of rain in the watershed and the deterioration of the low dam, what once was water bank-to-bank is now often half full with exposed sandbars. Some critics of dams and development along the Arkansas River will say that the low-water dams alter what should be a prairie river. What those critics fail to realize or choose to ignore is that the Arkansas River was altered decades ago when the Keystone Dam was built.
If those same critics would prefer the Keystone Dam not be there, then they don't recall or haven't studied their Tulsa history to know that before the Keystone Dam and lake were built, Riverside Drive and Peoria Avenue were subject to frequent floods from an unaltered river. Now, the River Parks Authority will spend as much as $102,140 to repair or replace six gate cylinders in Zink Dam near 31st Street and Riverside Drive.
The repairs are expected to return 85 percent to 90 percent of the lake's water. That is important for a city that is promoting more riverfront development. It also is good news for a newly renovated park system that runs from Sand Springs to Jenks. Philanthropic Tulsans have improved the River Parks in the last few years, and a river or lake with water in it certainly makes for a better view for those using the park.
The problems with the low-water dam are causing the low lake levels. Bill Smith of Hydropower International Services works with the River Parks on the project. "What we're getting for the money is as much of a lake as we can with a little bit of a leak, compared to having the gates down and not operational," he said.
The repairs will be paid for with a $50,000 donation from American Electric Power-Public Service Company of Oklahoma. The city has designated $50,000 for the repairs in its proposed 2012 budget. The remaining $2,140 will come from River Parks' contingency fund.
Tulsa needs to capitalize on its river. Future dam work will benefit the entire county.
If Tulsa is going to have a river and a lake and if the city wants private development along both, then both will need water.
This is money well spent.
that'll teach me not to clarify, or to get info second hand. I was just told that it was the dam, and I didn't even think of the low water.
No biggie.Should have seen the video from when the dam broke at Tempe Town lake and it drained in about 6 hours. Although the 'odor' from what was left behind was,um, strong.
They should clean out some of the sand and debris that has accumulated around the LWD while the water is low/gone.
What ever became of the 2 low water dams we voted for in the Vision 2025 plan?? Will we have to vote no them again in a few years?? ;)
I used to drink Keystone when I was damn broke... ;D
Thanks for the info. Anything that can rationally explain why the river has become a muddy trench is good research.
Still not the whole story. World editors might want to look at historical releases of water for the last few months and when they occurred. The Keystone dam has been hovering at around 723 ft for a long time and they haven't been releasing very much water. Drought conditions upstream are the real problem. The little bit they do release is late afternoon to midnight and drains out of Zink lake pretty quickly.
I also take issue with their belief that people who want to eliminate these huge dams are not aware of history. They are. Building in flood plains is a Tulsa tradition. They should ask the Corps why they stopped building these things shortly after Keystone was finished.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 13, 2011, 11:44:46 AM
Still not the whole story. World editors might want to look at historical releases of water for the last few months and when they occurred. The Keystone dam has been hovering at around 723 ft for a long time and they haven't been releasing very much water. Drought conditions upstream are the real problem. The little bit they do release is late afternoon to midnight and drains out of Zink lake pretty quickly.
I also take issue with their belief that people who want to eliminate these huge dams are not aware of history. They are. Building in flood plains is a Tulsa tradition. They should ask the Corps why they stopped building these things shortly after Keystone was finished.
Conan posted some picks of the headwaters coming this way, so we might have an increased flow soon.
Quote from: we vs us on July 13, 2011, 11:43:51 AM
Thanks for the info. Anything that can rationally explain why the river has become a muddy trench is good research.
Most know I am not a native Tulsan. But the "river" never seems to be a "river" for those in South Tulsa. It looks like a piece of crap giant sand bar.
Quote from: guido911 on July 13, 2011, 06:58:05 PM
Most know I am not a native Tulsan. But the "river" never seems to be a "river" for those in South Tulsa. It looks like a piece of crap giant sand bar.
I've seen it full on more than a few occasions in the past five years. Almost never in the summer, of course. It all depends on flow upstream, as our hydraulic avenger states.
1986 was the fullest I can remember, all the way from the dam to well beyond Bixby.
I don't mean to be tough on the river's appearance, but am I correct that Tulsa is called "river city"? I am being completely serious. If it is, then why can't we have a real river (I know, mother nature plays a significant part). And what is the point of all this talk about "river development"? Branson Landing was developed where its at because there was a legitimate water source (not a river, but a very thin lake) and there is a real feel of being near a river. I go to Riverwalk in Jenks, and I get the feeling I am up against the crappiest beach on the planet.
I am not venting, just needing to know why the river is the way it is and what could be done to fix it.
This is the best description of water releases on this river I have seen. It is for those kayakers who want to float the wave below the PSO jettie just south of the pedestrian bridge. The Arkansas in Oklahoma/Kansas is now a "hydraulic" river which means its flow is not natural but controlled for reasons unrelated to what we would like to see or do with the river.
http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/uv?site_no=07164500
Or this one: http://www.swt-wc.usace.army.mil/KEYS.lakepage.html
[Go to the gauge above, Tulsa Wave (TW) is all about the release from Keystone Dam. There is no good way to predict releases or times. Normally, on the Keystone Lake gauge, the level has to be above 723 feet for regular releases. Most often, if it gets around 728 to 730 - they will release a lot and for an extended period. But, you never know. Some times no releases for months, then suddenly releases every day. The new hole comes alive a little below 12,000 cfs. There are no specs yet like they had for the old Tulsa Wave/hole, but time will give them. The action starts around 6k and gets better the more flow until it washes out at high flows.]
That link will also give you access to historical graphs of water levels. Last time I analyzed those historical graphs I was pretty surprised. Turns out that the river has been full (> than 2ft deep at the 21st street bridge) at least part of the day for about 80% of the time for the last 30 years or so. But the releases are not at peak drive times when you may be observing your patch of river.
Today's median water flow historically should be around 6850 cfs. Enough to float the twin engine 18ft v-hull police boat easily. It sits at 120 cfs right now.
edit: I should add that there are more sand bars and less water near Bixby and Jenks because the river widens, slows down and meanders in that area. The upshot is that the river slows down and drops sand out of suspension. The flat land in that area may be great for building homes, but the combination of these elements makes it flood easier when water flows are high.
-Hydraulic Avenger
Technically you can call Phoenix, Dallas, Ft. Worth, OKC, and others 'river cities' because they do have water ways designated as rivers. (Yes the Salt River is dry most of the year) I think what you are refering to guido, is more common with eastern cities where the rivers are part of a waterway navigation system that has actual shipping traffic on them. Most of the rivers west of the Mississippi are not shipping lanes, but a part of water distribution systems, especialy in the southwest, and to an extent most of the western US. Out here the rivers are a different lifeblood then the north east.
Quote from: dbacks fan on July 13, 2011, 09:27:03 PM
I think what you are refering to guido, is more common with eastern cities where the rivers are part of a waterway navigation system that has actual shipping traffic on them.
Yeah, you're right. And I really am being unfair here. Being from the St. Louis area, I am way biased given how the river area has been developed there.
Since I moved here 13 years ago and before I moved here there has been an outcry to have the Glen Canyon dam in Parker, AZ removed from the Colorado River because of enviromental concerns. The dam on average generates 1million kilowatts of electricty. Next to the dam in Page is a coal fired plant that uses coal mined from NE Arizona on Indian land, so it is a hot topic. JMO if they were to removeve the dam, the loss of tourism dollars from Lake Powell would affect AZ, UT, and Colorado, not to mention the electricity provided, and areas of the Grand Canyon would be affected as well. Places that people pay to go to now would be gone, and what would they want next, eliminate Hoover? That would forever change the southwest. To lose Powell, and if they pushed hard enough Mead, it would crush the southwest.
I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 13, 2011, 11:06:12 AM
What ever became of the 2 low water dams we voted for in the Vision 2025 plan?? Will we have to vote no them again in a few years?? ;)
The proposed low water dams were not funded in the V2025 plan, the money we approved in V2025 was to study viability
See Linky: http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams (http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams)
Funding for a dam in Sand Springs to regulate flow and a dam near Jenks to create a new lake (for the casino, riverwalk, aquarium) and a "living river" concept (51st to 71st) was brought and defeated as a county wide item championed by then contraversial wannabe mayor county commissioner Randi Miller (who was photographed standing in the river with her thigh highs in hand and quoted as calling the Arkansas a "masterful jewel").
Since the defeat of the county wide vote, once mayor (who strong armed the creation of Zink lake) now esteemed Senator Inhofe found some pork to help to fund the dams, but in our current austere federal form I doubt that funding will ever materialize.
Kirby or RM will correct me if I've made any egregious errors above.
Quote from: dbacks fan on July 13, 2011, 10:59:20 PM
I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.
As Aquaman pointed out, the Keystone dam allows our buildings in the Arkansas river flood plain to remain fairly safe and stable against flooding except in the case of dam failure or major catastrophic release.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 14, 2011, 07:12:18 AM
The proposed low water dams were not funded in the V2025 plan, the money we approved in V2025 was to study viability
See Linky: http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams (http://www.vision2025.info/category.php?mode=&category=lowwaterdams)
Funding for a dam in Sand Springs to regulate flow and a dam near Jenks to create a new lake (for the casino, riverwalk, aquarium) and a "living river" concept (51st to 71st) was brought and defeated as a county wide item championed by then contraversial wannabe mayor county commissioner Randi Miller (who was photographed standing in the river with her thigh highs in hand and quoted as calling the Arkansas a "masterful jewel").
Since the defeat of the county wide vote, once mayor (who strong armed the creation of Zink lake) now esteemed Senator Inhofe found some pork to help to fund the dams, but in our current austere federal form I doubt that funding will ever materialize.
Kirby or RM will correct me if I've made any egregious errors above.
From that link:
Background:
Vision 2025 funds will be utilized to construct two low water dams, which along with Zink Lake, will provide a series of lakes in the Arkansas River corridor. These low water dams will enhance the Tulsa area's most visible physical asset by creating a series of urban lakes within the river channel.
Sounds like we should have low water dams by now.
From the original verbage the we voted for...
http://www.vision2025.info/includes/pages/aboutvision2025/uploads/03/file.pdf
(from page 5 of the pdf)
Construct two low water dams on Arkansas River the
locations of which will be determined in the Arkansas
River Corridor Plan. $5,600,000
Again, these dam dams should be constructed by now.
$5.6 million is not enough to cover the cost of building the low water dams
Here is a Tulsa world piece on the subject from yesterday: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110713_11_0_WASHIN187457&rss_lnk=1 (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110713_11_0_WASHIN187457&rss_lnk=1)
Arkansas River study a loser with no earmarks, Inhofe says
By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
Published: 7/13/2011 11:19 PM
Last Modified: 7/13/2011 11:19 PM
WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe revealed Wednesday that a federal agency has turned down a request to fund its share of an Arkansas River study, prompting the Oklahoma Republican again to warn that the project could go dormant.
Inhofe said the development is exactly what he predicted would happen when his fellow Republicans insisted on giving up earmarks on local projects.
"I hate to say it," he said, but "when Republicans decided they weren't going to be doing earmarks, we just shifted all that to the president, and the president decided he didn't want to do this."
Inhofe said the amount requested came to only $1.65 million, and he pointed out that the project, the Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan, already had been authorized by Congress in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
"I don't feel optimistic" about the project's prospects, he said.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110713_11_0_WASHIN187457&rss_lnk=1
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 08:31:41 AM
From the original verbage the we voted for...
http://www.vision2025.info/includes/pages/aboutvision2025/uploads/03/file.pdf
(from page 5 of the pdf)
Construct two low water dams on Arkansas River the
locations of which will be determined in the Arkansas
River Corridor Plan. $5,600,000
Again, these dam dams should be constructed by now.
That was just partial funding, very partial. We also have $25 million from a state bond issue and a commitment (though no money yet) from the feds for another $75 million. And we are likely going to need millions more than that. I think there's some 3rd penny money for the river too.
Until the federal money comes in we are no where close to building the dams, and in light of the current federal budget, that could be a long wait.
Quote from: dbacks fan on July 13, 2011, 10:59:20 PM
I guess what I am saying is to those that want to remove the dam at Keystone, you will change things forever, and the change along the area from the dam downstream would cause an economic impact that Tulsa, Sand Springs, Jenks, Bixby, and those further downstream would probably never recover from.
I lived here for 13 years before the dam was built. We weren't economically underpriveledged or in constant fear from floods. Since the other upstream dams had been built the flooding was decreasing. When they built the dam we thought things were going to change forever but forever turns out to be about 40-50 years for this dam. What then? Huge expenditures to rebuild or rehab this dam. Eventually has to be done.
That said I am no champion for destroying it or other large dams without some tremendous planning for the consequences. I just don't think its even plausible to turn lake front property into "former" lakefront property. Most of the movement for removing dams is centered on the poorly built and ecologically destructive smaller dams built from the late 19th to mid 20th century built for industrial/commercial purposes. They are unsafe, create pollution problems and need to be destroyed.
THe one you speak of on the Colorado is a complicated mess. I hope clear minds prevail. As far as no more low water dams on this river, I won't lose any sleep. They were designed for commercial purposes and in my estimation in the wrong places. THey will create more problems than economic returns can exceed.
Good article here explaining what Swake brings up...
http://glenpoolpost.com/news/article_2f5627ad-feef-5f65-a095-e7c47035ea6d.html
My overall point was/is, we were essentially lied to during the V2025 voting. Wonder how much of the $5.6M is left after the terrazzo flooring upgrade at the bok?? ;)
Ah, good 'ol Tulsa.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 10:12:44 AM
Good article here explaining what Swake brings up...
http://glenpoolpost.com/news/article_2f5627ad-feef-5f65-a095-e7c47035ea6d.html
My overall point was/is, we were essentially lied to during the V2025 voting. Wonder how much of the $5.6M is left after the terrazzo flooring upgrade at the bok?? ;)
Ah, good 'ol Tulsa.
Salukipokie, welcome to the forum. I can tell you have a healthy distrust of local government and elected officials. Glad you are here to join us in our lively debates. I have to ask that you fact check just a little before you make some of these assertions.
The floors in the BOK arena were paid for by branding the arena as "the BOK Arena". Bank Of Oklahoma paid for the upgrades and we let them put their name on our building.
The $5.6 million that we voted for in V2025 for low water dams must be spent for that purpose. Repurposing voter approved tax funds without consent o the voters is illegal and it is covered in the language of the proposition that we approved:
The people of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, by their approval of the
proposition set forth in Section 1 of this Resolution at the election hereinabove provided,
hereby authorize the Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, by
Resolutions duly enacted to make such administrative and technical changes or additions in the
method and manner of administration and enforcing this Resolution as may be necessary or
proper for efficiency and fairness
except that neither the rate of the tax herein provided, nor
the term, nor the purpose of the tax herein provided, shall be changed without approval of the
qualified electors of the County as provided by law
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 10:12:44 AM
Good article here explaining what Swake brings up...
http://glenpoolpost.com/news/article_2f5627ad-feef-5f65-a095-e7c47035ea6d.html
My overall point was/is, we were essentially lied to during the V2025 voting. Wonder how much of the $5.6M is left after the terrazzo flooring upgrade at the bok?? ;)
Ah, good 'ol Tulsa.
How were we lied to? It was to be the local matching funds for federal money. It still is.
It's the failure of our congressional delegation to get the promised money that you should be upset over. The federal funding is even approved, it's just never been appropriated.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 08:14:56 AM
From that link:
Background:
Vision 2025 funds will be utilized to construct two low water dams, which along with Zink Lake, will provide a series of lakes in the Arkansas River corridor. These low water dams will enhance the Tulsa area's most visible physical asset by creating a series of urban lakes within the river channel.
Sounds like we should have low water dams by now.
A lot of people thought that the dams were going to be built with the funds from V2025.
IIRC the funds were only enough to fund impact studies and construction plans, not the funding to actually build them. That was going to require federal funds to complement what was locally available.
At best it was miscommunication. At worst it was misleading. I don't think you can see it as fraud.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 14, 2011, 11:24:55 AM
A lot of people thought that the dams were going to be built with the funds from V2025.
A lot of people think a lot of things that are completely bogus. Go look at the number of commenters on the TW site that don't read anything more than a headline. I actually think it's most of those knotheads.
TW reports that they are now discussing raising the low water damn by 3 feet, and doing some other changes to it at a cost of $22.7 million. $29 million has been secured for the project.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110714_11_0_AnArka343981
QuoteBy KEVIN CANFIELD World Staff Writer
Published: 7/14/2011 8:01 AM
Last Modified: 7/14/2011 11:39 AM
The River Parks Authority on Tuesday morning expressed its support for raising the height of the Zink Dam by 3 feet and removing the fountain to provide more recreational space.
The $22.7 million project was the least expensive of four dam modification proposals presented to the River Parks' board.
It includes replacing existing gates of the dam, adding new ones and reconfiguring the downstream face of the dam to remove the dangerous roller effect. The deeper water would provide for more recreational opportunities.
Nearly $4 million in Vision 2025 and $25 million in state bond money has been secured for the project.
Other, more expensive options were not endorsed by the board, which expressed concern about maintenance and operation costs.
Board member Chet Cadieux said the River Parks is hard press to pay for the repairs to the existing dam.
"We have committed to the fact that we are going to do a better job on these kind of projects to figuring out up front how we are going to come up with money to keep them up," Cadieux said.
The estimated cost of doing all four projects is $36.8 million.
The other projects include:
Adding an 80-foot-wide, controllable flume. This public water space downstream from the dam would provide safe access to the water and create opportunities for fishing, kayaking, rafting and other water activities. It also would provide fresh water to the Crow Creek delta and create a public island that would be submerged during high flow. Cost: $10.4 million
Adding a 100-foot-wide, controllable standing wave for kayaking. The standing wave would be the largest of its kind in the country. Project would be similar to the old Tulsa Wave but much larger. Cost: $1.7 million
Adding park space and water access. This project would include removing the fountain upstream of the pedestrian bridge to provide more park space. Cost: $2 million
The overall intent of the project is to make the dam and the lake it creates safer and to provide better access for state officials who harvest striper eggs in the river.
The proposal's cost includes a 25 percent contingency fee and is not set in stone. The size of the flume and standing wave can be scaled back, for example.
Tulsa County and communities up and down the river have been working together for years to implement the Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan.
In 2007, county voters rejected a $282 million sales-tax initiative to fund major parts of the plan, including improvements to Zink Dam and the construction of low-water dams in Sand Springs and south Tulsa.
County commissioners later agreed to proceed with dams. The proposal presented Thursday marks a significant step toward that goal.
If officials decide to move forward with the project, construction could begin in two years.
(http://www.tulsaworld.com/articleimages/2011/20110714_powerpointzinc070707070707.jpg)
That is cool, I had no idea that anyone was working on building a wave on the east bank.
This could be interesting if any kind of water craft is allowed on Crow Creek once Kaiser finishes his work on the land he owns along the creek to Peoria.
Time to open a kayak shop. :P
Right now there wouldn't be enough water most of the year to kayak on Crow Creek. I like the idea of a whitewater park beneath the dam. It already is one in a way but is not as developed as it could be.
Quote from: swake on July 14, 2011, 11:47:47 AM
A lot of people think a lot of things that are completely bogus. Go look at the number of commenters on the TW site that don't read anything more than a headline. I actually think it's most of those knotheads.
Oh, I agree.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 14, 2011, 12:37:31 PM
That is cool, I had no idea that anyone was working on building a wave on the east bank.
Yeah, I have a water color of the idea rolled up somewhere in my basement. Presented it for comment to this board about 6 years ago. Those guys are geniuses.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 08:14:56 AM
From that link:
Background:
Vision 2025 funds will be utilized to construct two low water dams, which along with Zink Lake, will provide a series of lakes in the Arkansas River corridor. These low water dams will enhance the Tulsa area's most visible physical asset by creating a series of urban lakes within the river channel.
Sounds like we should have low water dams by now.
From what I understood at the time, the money was to be used to build the dams, and still will be,,,, but that sum was only a partial amount and was never portrayed as going to be able to do it all by itself. We were going to have to get other funds on top of that, whether state or federal or whatever to build them. Regardless, no way anyone could think that a measly 5 or 6 mill alone could be expected to build a single dam, let alone the several that were being thought about, lol thats crazy.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 14, 2011, 10:32:44 AM
Salukipokie, welcome to the forum. I can tell you have a healthy distrust of local government and elected officials. [/b]
I could bring up several reasons why I've grown distrustful of tulsa government and the tight knit group of individuals who run this city (non-elected individuals), but I'll just continue to point out the verbage on the ballot. I know the money allotted wasn't anywhere near enough to construct the dams, but how many people walking off the street to vote knew or researched that before they voted? Some prolly walked in, read the ballot, saw the verbage, saw "construct" and said "heck, ya!"
I'm not very bright and even I know the word "construct" should never have been on that ballot. But that just goes with how things are done around here; legal or not. And just to be open; I didn't vote for any of the props on Vision 2025, but did vote for Mayor Savages plan(s) when they would have put Tulsa out in front of OKC... now we're just chasing them. It's too bad; the people of Tulsa are great, Tulsa's in a great location/climate, just poor leadership and no dam dams! ;)
Oh, and I also knew $141M was no where near enough to pay for an arena that looked identicle to the one in Miami.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 15, 2011, 11:36:38 AM
Oh, and I also knew $141M was no where near enough to pay for an arena that looked identicle to the one in Miami.
A, so you are a refugee from the TW site, nice
(http://www.urban-photos.com/gallery/albums/city_galleries/tulsa/thumb_tulsa_18_9385.jpg)
=/=
(http://0.tqn.com/d/miami/1/0/J/3/American_Airlines_Are-8979.gif)
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 15, 2011, 11:36:38 AM
Oh, and I also knew $141M was no where near enough to pay for an arena that looked identicle to the one in Miami.
I hope there is something you like about Tulsa and perhaps you can expound on that while you are posting here. Most of us are huge fans of our town and that is what brings us together.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 15, 2011, 11:36:38 AM
Oh, and I also knew $141M was no where near enough to pay for an arena that looked identicle to the one in Miami.
Identical? Not really. Some of the same elements? Sure, if you're talking about the prevalent use of glass pane for large areas.
Totally different buildings.
Quote from: carltonplace on July 15, 2011, 12:51:00 PM
I hope there is something you like about Tulsa and perhaps you can expound on that while you are posting here. Most of us are huge fans of our town and that is what brings us together.
Maybe he needs to go back to Southern Illinois. Sheesh.
All square buildings look alike to me.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 15, 2011, 11:16:06 AM
Yes they are
Well, good luck with that one. I'm sure you're capable.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 15, 2011, 10:53:07 AM
I could bring up several reasons why I've grown distrustful of tulsa government and the tight knit group of individuals who run this city (non-elected individuals), but I'll just continue to point out the verbage on the ballot. I know the money allotted wasn't anywhere near enough to construct the dams, but how many people walking off the street to vote knew or researched that before they voted? Some prolly walked in, read the ballot, saw the verbage, saw "construct" and said "heck, ya!"
I'm not very bright and even I know the word "construct" should never have been on that ballot. But that just goes with how things are done around here; legal or not. And just to be open; I didn't vote for any of the props on Vision 2025, but did vote for Mayor Savages plan(s) when they would have put Tulsa out in front of OKC... now we're just chasing them. It's too bad; the people of Tulsa are great, Tulsa's in a great location/climate, just poor leadership and no dam dams! ;)
You voted for the same plan that included a soccer stadium? A natatorium? And you're complaining about V2025? Wow.
While at the time I knew we needed a new arena, that stuff was just pie-in-the-sky. I'm sure JeffP will disagree as far as the soccer stadium goes, but come on! A giant swimming pool? We didn't have the infrastructure for that. We were trying to do too much too quickly.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 14, 2011, 10:12:44 AM
Good article here explaining what Swake brings up...
http://glenpoolpost.com/news/article_2f5627ad-feef-5f65-a095-e7c47035ea6d.html
My overall point was/is, we were essentially lied to during the V2025 voting. Wonder how much of the $5.6M is left after the terrazzo flooring upgrade at the bok?? ;)
Ah, good 'ol Tulsa.
The terrazzo flooring was paid for by private donors. It was an upgrade to what was originally proposed.
Quote
BOK Center announces 2 new sponsors
By Brian Barber Tulsa World, Okla.
Saturday, November 17 2007
Nov. 17--Cherokee Nation Enterprises and Cox Communications were revealed Friday as two new founding sponsors of Tulsa's BOK Center.
Their contributions total $4.84 million and bring the total in private money for the arena to $31.8 million.
"One of the most exciting aspects of this project has been the public-private partnership," Mayor Kathy Taylor said as the names were added to a giant sign at one corner of the construction site.
"These businesses are investing in Tulsa's future."
The Tulsa County Vision 2025 sales-tax program is providing $178 million to build the venue, which will open in September.
But the private money will allow for enhancements, including terrazzo flooring and upgrades to the lighting and landscaping, that otherwise could not be afforded.
"This facility is going to be recognized nationally as a first-class destination for high-profile events," the mayor said.
Cherokee Nation Enterprises' 10-year agreement, worth $2,256,821, includes a founders suite and being the BOK Center's exclusive casino and destination resort.
It will receive title sponsorship of an area
on the venue's main concourse that will be known as the Cherokee Casino Gaming Zone.
Quote from: Patrick on July 15, 2011, 09:56:31 PM
The terrazzo flooring was paid for by private donors. It was an upgrade to what was originally proposed.
Dem darn facts, always gettin' in the way.
Somewhat inside story, when Pheonix was trying to lure an expansion MLB team in 1994 the county passed a 1/4 cent sales tax without a public vote. It was so contreversial that county commisioner Mary Rose Wilcox was shot by a homeless person as a result of the vote. The people of the county were against the decision, especially after being burned by Bernie Eccelstone with the US F1 Grand Prix of Phoenix in the early 90's at the cost of millions. With 20/20 hindsight the Diamondbacks are one of the best things. The Cardinals Stadium (University Of Phoenix (insert joke here) was built on a tourist tax, (hotel and rental car). Both of these as well as US Airways and Jobbing.com arenas are sponsored like race cars. Actually they all are. You have an entity that ponies up the start up, then you get a primary sponsor, and the you get associate sponsors. Most have nothing to do with the team per say, but with the venue. It doesen't matter who is driving, can you consistenly finish in the top five.
One more comment off topic. They held a Formula One race in Dallas in 1984 that saw the drivers taken down by the heat and humidity of a race there in July, whats Austin like in July? As much as I love motorsport a race in July in Austin has potential disaster written all over it. I hope that it suceeds, I just have my doubts. Now back to the original topic.
IIRC There has been a low water dam in Sand Springs, I remember that this was the launching point for KRMG'S Great Raft Race, and the first year of the event, the winners were dragging their rafts acoss the sand bars at the pedestrian bridge. I think that it would be great to have a series of low water dams that create a lake affect all the way to Bixby, but it should have started years ago, when Zink Lake was thought of, and should have been planned then. The potential has been there since the mid to late 70's. unfortunately we know where the direction of Tulsa was moving. Now Tulsa is trying to reverse that trend, and I hope that it is sucessful. It seems that there is life in downtown.
Quote from: dbacks fan on July 16, 2011, 02:34:54 AM
IIRC There has been a low water dam in Sand Springs, I remember that this was the launching point for KRMG'S Great Raft Race, and the first year of the event, the winners were dragging their rafts acoss the sand bars at the pedestrian bridge. I think that it would be great to have a series of low water dams that create a lake affect all the way to Bixby, but it should have started years ago, when Zink Lake was thought of, and should have been planned then. The potential has been there since the mid to late 70's. unfortunately we know where the direction of Tulsa was moving. Now Tulsa is trying to reverse that trend, and I hope that it is sucessful. It seems that there is life in downtown.
The series of low water dams concept was pushed as far back as the 1940's but the Corps decided a string of larger dams was more to their liking. They actually had been studying the river for navigation purposes since the late 1800's. Since flood control was the main issue in the Tulsa area, once they committed to the big dam plan the smaller multiple dams plan became irrelevant.
The low water dams themselves are expensive to build, require vigilant maintenance because of the sandy river and have never seemed to work well here. We gave up on dredging which was a necessity to keep it operating correctly. Sand Springs blew up theirs in the 80's because of multiple deaths. Added to the mix was the Southward movement of the city. There was no real appreciation of the river west of downtown.
I have postulated here in the past that a simpler, more manageable plan is to use a series of natural barriers of rock jetties (I think the Corps calls them "Wing Dams") that extend partially into the river and direct flow into narrow rapids to scour a 14 mile channel between Keystone Dam and Bixby. The resulting small lakes and jetties would be overflowed during high water yet could be planned to sequentially drain by varying the lengths of the jetties. It would create numerous opportunities for recreation areas and a seamless kayak/canoe path tying river communities together. The real impediment to the system is that it takes a commitment and mental orientation that I don't think Tulsa has. We live next to a river, we are not a river community.
This latest proposal for a white water rafting area with a flume is an example of the concept. The jetty concept is also currently on display by the PSO power plant below the proposed white water park where it creates a huge wave at its opening. PSO built it I believe.
About twenty years ago my mother wrote a history book on the 50 year history of the Tulsa Corps of Engineers. It has great pictures of the Arkansas river and how Keystone Dam was built.
AquaMan... next time we see each other I will bring it to show you.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 16, 2011, 09:41:30 AM
About twenty years ago my mother wrote a history book on the 50 year history of the Tulsa Corps of Engineers. It has great pictures of the Arkansas river and how Keystone Dam was built.
AquaMan... next time we see each other I will bring it to show you.
Thanks. Hopefully that won't be too long. I'm expecting water to fill the river soon. Am working on getting my fleet river-worthy and mobile. Did your mom work for them?
My mother was only a Corps of Engineers employee for a few years. She now works for a FEMA contractor on disaster mitigation projects.
The opportunity to create a world-class whitewater venue is on the table for Tulsa. This is possible with the modifications of Zink Dam. What is a whitewater venue and what makes it world class? Find out more info at:
www.tulsawhitewaterpark.com
I like it. But beware- this ain't Maryland and RPA is not your friend. Three things come to mind:
1. You got some guts to bring this out in the midst of one of Oklahoma's worst droughts since the depression! I like that.
2. You can expect that most of the usage will be from outside of the local area. Locals will scoff at the thought of flipping a kayak in this river. They think they might dissolve from the perceived pollution. And that is one of the favorite areas for fishermen.
3. You may have difficulty getting it insured. Fast water, big boulders and light weight kayaks with kids in them means huge premiums.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 16, 2011, 05:04:45 PM
2. You can expect that most of the usage will be from outside of the local area. Locals will scoff at the thought of flipping a kayak in this river. They think they might dissolve from the perceived pollution. And that is one of the favorite areas for fishermen.
The two points in this section seem oddly counter to one another.
Quote from: custosnox on July 16, 2011, 05:11:50 PM
The two points in this section seem oddly counter to one another.
Not really. Locals aren't going to be the biggest part of a white water kayak operation. They just don't trust the water quality. Fishermen know the water is not in bad condition there, or they are willing to endure it to catch fish!
What I see is that a white water kayaker is not the same demographic as a low water dam fishermen. They could get in each others way. If they do RPA will just run them off by asking for their fishing license. They do that every so often. It makes for bad feelings.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 16, 2011, 06:27:36 PM
Not really. Locals aren't going to be the biggest part of a white water kayak operation. They just don't trust the water quality. Fishermen know the water is not in bad condition there, or they are willing to endure it to catch fish!
What I see is that a white water kayaker is not the same demographic as a low water dam fishermen. They could get in each others way. If they do RPA will just run them off by asking for their fishing license. They do that every so often. It makes for bad feelings.
I was being flippant since the fishermen are generally local, and they have gotten past the idea of the river being so polluted. But it is a pretty ingrained stigma to get past. I did actually have someone tell me that they thought that if you put your hand in the water it would melt off.
Once while looking thru old neighborhood files at the central library I came across a 60's era multi-use project that would be built along the west bank of the river just north of I-44. The story cracked me up because the verbiage was nearly word for word the 2007 river plan marketing. It's true that in Tulsa the more things change the more they stay the same.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 16, 2011, 06:27:36 PM
Not really. Locals aren't going to be the biggest part of a white water kayak operation. They just don't trust the water quality. Fishermen know the water is not in bad condition there, or they are willing to endure it to catch fish!
What I see is that a white water kayaker is not the same demographic as a low water dam fishermen. They could get in each others way. If they do RPA will just run them off by asking for their fishing license. They do that every so often. It makes for bad feelings.
Does the RPA even have authority to ask for someones fishing license......
Quote from: Breadburner on July 16, 2011, 08:04:32 PM
Does the RPA even have authority to ask for someones fishing license......
I doubt it, though they make people think so. That would be Fish and Game(?) or Okla Lake Shore Patrol if they're on the river. They could require that to fish off the part of the dam designed for fishing that they have a license. The RPA security tries to keep them off the bridge and away from the fountain area. What little policing power they have over the river starts at 11th street bridge and ends at the dam. However, they have authority over the paths that surround the river so they somewhat control access to the river by the fishermen.
When push comes to shove, RPA will contact the proper authority and limit their numbers. The fishermen are low on the influence level even though they are the biggest category of river users right now.
My big fear right now is the increase in bow fishermen around the low water dam area. They can't legally shoot off the bridge but there isn't enough enforcement to stop them. They can only legally shoot non-sporting fish (gar, carp etc.) but I haven't seen a gar in that part of the river all summer. They're probably going after catfish. Accident waiting to happen.
I have not been around any RPA folks in a long time....But when I was they all seemed rather strange....
Still are. Plenty o' good stories there.
Mostly they're just like any other untouchable authority. If they make it through this economic period unchanged it will be because of friends like the Kaisers and Warrens. Otherwise they would be history.
Had one from RPA tell one of my kids tuesday that there is quicksand in the sandbars
I've been told there is but have never seen any. In fact rumors of horses or cattle that sank in quick sand abound. But you're talking a couple thousand pounds concentrated on 4 small hooves.
I watched a Channel 6 cameraman sink to his knees on a wet sand bar getting out of my boat upstream of the refinery. He was pretty pissed when he dropped the camera but it was just wet sand.
Quote from: Breadburner on July 16, 2011, 08:04:32 PM
Does the RPA even have authority to ask for someones fishing license......
No, but they have the authority to regulate where one can or cannot fish from RPA facilities.
Quote from: Hoss on July 15, 2011, 01:03:36 PM
Maybe he needs to go back to Southern Illinois. Sheesh.
Reading for comprehension... re-read my post; I said I absolutely love the people of Tulsa (I married one), the city itself is in a great, centrally located part of the country, the climate for the most part is great, and there is a TON on the plus side for this city. Growing up outside Cook County however, it disgusted me how just a handful of people actually run Chicago; I see a lot of the same "corruption" and self serving leadership here. Additionally, I now see the city simply chasing (and copying) whatever OKC is doing. Tulsa used to be a leader, not a follower.
And yes, I voted for all the amateur athletic venues in Savage's proposals. It was a unique concept at the time and Tulsa, being centrally located, could have drawn big numbers to national events. There are quite a few cities making MILLIONS from amateur athletic venues and you don't have to look any further than Frisco, Texas to see results. Try getting a hotel room down there when there is a soccer tourney or hockey tourney in that town. Parents won't always spend money on themselves to go to concerts, but they'll spend BOATLOADS on their kids sports.
And back to the dam dams; why didn't the city simply allow one of the sand companies to set up a micro operation on the west bank of Zink Lake to pull sand on a more consistent basis? Guess nobody with a sand company was connected to the right people..........
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 18, 2011, 08:47:45 AM
Reading for comprehension... re-read my post; I said I absolutely love the people of Tulsa (I married one), the city itself is in a great, centrally located part of the country, the climate for the most part is great, and there is a TON on the plus side for this city. Growing up outside Cook County however, it disgusted me how just a handful of people actually run Chicago; I see a lot of the same "corruption" and self serving leadership here. Additionally, I now see the city simply chasing (and copying) whatever OKC is doing. Tulsa used to be a leader, not a follower.
And yes, I voted for all the amateur athletic venues in Savage's proposals. It was a unique concept at the time and Tulsa, being centrally located, could have drawn big numbers to national events. There are quite a few cities making MILLIONS from amateur athletic venues and you don't have to look any further than Frisco, Texas to see results. Try getting a hotel room down there when there is a soccer tourney or hockey tourney in that town. Parents won't always spend money on themselves to go to concerts, but they'll spend BOATLOADS on their kids sports.
And back to the dam dams; why didn't the city simply allow one of the sand companies to set up a micro operation on the west bank of Zink Lake to pull sand on a more consistent basis? Guess nobody with a sand company was connected to the right people..........
That's better. Much less flame.
QuoteAnd back to the dam dams; why didn't the city simply allow one of the sand companies to set up a micro operation on the west bank of Zink Lake to pull sand on a more consistent basis? Guess nobody with a sand company was connected to the right people..........
Saluki- They used to dredge just off the 21st St. bridge and just south of the Jenks bridge. The concrete plant was taken out in Jenks so that is self-explanitory, no idea why they quit dredging at 21st. I'm thinking they were still dredging after the Zink dam was constructed.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 18, 2011, 11:05:00 AM
Saluki- They used to dredge just off the 21st St. bridge and just south of the Jenks bridge. The concrete plant was taken out in Jenks so that is self-explanitory, no idea why they quit dredging at 21st. I'm thinking they were still dredging after the Zink dam was constructed.
According to Chandler Sand that operated around here for several generations, the quality and nature of the sand is the answer. The sand companies have moved farther and farther downstream since the nature of the sand changed when the Keystone Dam was built. The Zink lake sand has too many impurities due to metro runoff in that area. The last dredger there was a disastrous effort by RPA to keep a channel in the lake. Nobody would buy that sand anyway.
The sand plant at Sand Springs is marginal and has fewer users for its products (kind of like a paid for car that still runs but not very well).
Saluki, I understand your frustration and suspicions, honestly I do. The low water dam process was flawed IMO. But this was not a case of influence.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 18, 2011, 11:05:00 AM
Saluki- They used to dredge just off the 21st St. bridge and just south of the Jenks bridge. The concrete plant was taken out in Jenks so that is self-explanitory, no idea why they quit dredging at 21st. I'm thinking they were still dredging after the Zink dam was constructed.
The dredge purchased by RPA was damaged in a storm but that is not the true reason it did not work. Dredging at Zink was problematic from day one as the hard-pan botton prevented a deep dredging operation and the lack of access on the West bank limited any stockpile and processing options.
Today's bars in the river are not believed to be contaminated (sand is essentially impervious ground up rock) but are of such a poor gradation (the good stuff has already been harvested) to be of limited commercial use and again the same problem exists for access and processing facility locations and transport to anouther location for processing is not cost effective also the quantity in the lake is actually quite limited so the cost per yard or ton harvested would be well above any commercial rates.
The current plan utilizes the majority of these coarse sands as well as much of the rubble located downstream of the dam to construct the base of the flume and fill the fountain area.
Quote from: Salukipoke on July 18, 2011, 08:47:45 AM
And back to the dam dams; why didn't the city simply allow one of the sand companies to set up a micro operation on the west bank of Zink Lake to pull sand on a more consistent basis? Guess nobody with a sand company was connected to the right people..........
RPA has tried repeatedly, including this year. The sand that is present in the lake is not of a commercially viable quality nor quantity to provide for a self sustaining removal. However; if you wish to pay a sand company to remove it they will, gladly.
The current proposal utilizes this sand and rubble for necessary project fill, thus removing the problem so that the proposed new gates will be able to pass new accumulations during high flows without having to reduce the existing build up which would be problematic by flow management alone.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 16, 2011, 05:04:45 PM
I like it. But beware- this ain't Maryland and RPA is not your friend. Three things come to mind:
1. You got some guts to bring this out in the midst of one of Oklahoma's worst droughts since the depression! I like that.
2. You can expect that most of the usage will be from outside of the local area. Locals will scoff at the thought of flipping a kayak in this river. They think they might dissolve from the perceived pollution. And that is one of the favorite areas for fishermen.
3. You may have difficulty getting it insured. Fast water, big boulders and light weight kayaks with kids in them means huge premiums.
We and the consultant team fully understand this is not Maryland and that is a pumped facility, much like what OKC has in MAPS 3.
If there is never a boater to ever utilize the flume, that's fine because what it will provide is a safe place to be very near the water in a variety of flow conditions which studies and public comments have said to be a strongly desired feature.
1. We can't regulate the climate, when it became time for a decision the materials were presented... thanks for the support!
2. The usage study (privately funded and developed by an experienced consultant with no connection the project) indicated the majority of users would be from a 2 hour drive time.
3. Actually you are backwards on this one.
If there are ever commercial operations the insurance costs are less than you would expect because the venue is strictly flow controlled up untill the point that it is closed due to high flows in the river.
As we have previously discussed on river topics all direct river experience is valued. If you have not already seen the materials, please consider this an offer to coordinate a presentation/discussion.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 18, 2011, 07:00:25 PM
We and the consultant team fully understand this is not Maryland and that is a pumped facility, much like what OKC has in MAPS 3.
If there is never a boater to ever utilize the flume, that's fine because what it will provide is a safe place to be very near the water in a variety of flow conditions which studies and public comments have said to be a strongly desired feature.
1. We can't regulate the climate, when it became time for a decision the materials were presented... thanks for the support!
2. The usage study (privately funded and developed by an experienced consultant with no connection the project) indicated the majority of users would be from a 2 hour drive time.
3. Actually you are backwards on this one. If there are ever commercial operations the insurance costs are less than you would expect because the venue is strictly flow controlled up untill the point that it is closed due to high flows in the river.
As we have previously discussed on river topics all direct river experience is valued. If you have not already seen the materials, please consider this an offer to coordinate a presentation/discussion.
What I mean that "this is not Maryland" is more than the way that particular operation is set up. Truth is people in that area are more avid kayakers and watersport enthusiasts than in this part of the country. Just google kayak livery or rentals and note where they are. High usage in the upper midwest, north east and east coast also the near west. This is plains country. Hard sell.
1.I admire your chutzpa for bringing it out during a drought and no water in the river for months. Even if the decision making process demanded it PR wise this is questionable timing. Who is your PR firm? If you say RPA, well.....not surprised.
2.A second opinion on your usage study? They may have told you what they thought you wanted to hear. I'm talking from experience that the majority of your market is outside Tulsa at 1hr 45minutes away (OKC). Tulsans will be curious but a hard sell to get sizable numbers to participate. Actually, that is a good thing for Tulsa.
3.I'll hold tight on this as well. In Maryland or Minnesota there are lots of insureds to spread the risk to. One operation in OK directed towards young families in a state where the dreaded Blue/Green algae is everywhere and sits below the nastiest part of the river, may not be considered low risk.
However, not trying to be a crank. I hope I'm wrong on all counts and it is well received.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 18, 2011, 06:18:38 PM
The dredge purchased by RPA was damaged in a storm but that is not the true reason it did not work. Dredging at Zink was problematic from day one as the hard-pan botton prevented a deep dredging operation and the lack of access on the West bank limited any stockpile and processing options.
Today's bars in the river are not believed to be contaminated (sand is essentially impervious ground up rock) but are of such a poor gradation (the good stuff has already been harvested) to be of limited commercial use and again the same problem exists for access and processing facility locations and transport to anouther location for processing is not cost effective also the quantity in the lake is actually quite limited so the cost per yard or ton harvested would be well above any commercial rates.
Bob Chandler disagreed. His company mined here for decades and he investigated buying the dredged sand from Zink. He told me that because the river is now hydraulic, with regular releases, the sand is too sugary between SS and Tulsa. The sand in Zink is contaminated with the runoff from city streets, lawn fertilizer and animal feces (dogs/geese). Since the lake holds the water over time it settles down with the sand. It would require cleansing. That was confirmed with the only study I ever saw done on this part of the river in the mid nineties which showed high concentrations of fertilizer and animal feces mostly around the 15th street and 21st street drains.
There is always plenty of sand in Zink lake. There are lots of different types of dredgers as well. RPA was unsuited to choose the right operation from what I've read. Hey mistakes are made. But the reality of Zink can't be ignored. It holds sand, pollutants and trash.
When the water is up and fast its no big deal and disperses. When the water is low and slow its nasty.
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 18, 2011, 07:00:25 PM
As we have previously discussed on river topics all direct river experience is valued. If you have not already seen the materials, please consider this an offer to coordinate a presentation/discussion.
Yeah, well I support this effort but can't help but feel a bit betrayed by those involved with it. Even though RPA finds me persona non grata, I helped in trying to get the river issue passed that included a similar feature. Mr Smith and I discussed the flume idea particularly so that the river would be interconnected instead of separate lakes. That was so I could take kayaks/canoes through the dams.
I spent a lot of time learning this river, its history and its operation. Maybe not as much as you Kirby, but I have spent much time persuading others on this forum and elsewhere that we should be using the river rather than only developing around it. I spent a lot of my own money to do just that using first airboats, then pontoons and most recently have organized kayak and canoe trips. And now you welcome my experience?
No offense, and good luck. I might have to pass on promoting this one.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 18, 2011, 08:09:54 PM
What I mean that "this is not Maryland" is more than the way that particular operation is set up. Truth is people in that area are more avid kayakers and watersport enthusiasts than in this part of the country. Just google kayak livery or rentals and note where they are. High usage in the upper midwest, north east and east coast also the near west. This is plains country. Hard sell.
1.I admire your chutzpa for bringing it out during a drought and no water in the river for months. Even if the decision making process demanded it PR wise this is questionable timing. Who is your PR firm? If you say RPA, well.....not surprised.
2.A second opinion on your usage study? They may have told you what they thought you wanted to hear. I'm talking from experience that the majority of your market is outside Tulsa at 1hr 45minutes away (OKC). Tulsans will be curious but a hard sell to get sizable numbers to participate. Actually, that is a good thing for Tulsa.
3.I'll hold tight on this as well. In Maryland or Minnesota there are lots of insureds to spread the risk to. One operation in OK directed towards young families in a state where the dreaded Blue/Green algae is everywhere and sits below the nastiest part of the river, may not be considered low risk.
However, not trying to be a crank. I hope I'm wrong on all counts and it is well received.
Field of dreams applies here. Build it and they will come. I think if more people felt there was a somewhat safe and controlled way to use the river for kayaking, they would. As it is, all they know of river navigation is people drowning going over the LWD or seeing TRC members out for a morning or evening row. They don't think on the water recreation applies to them. Put a specific feature in and I believe you would be surprised at the usage and interest it will create.
Turkey Mountain, even a few years ago was no place I would have been caught dead hiking or biking. The image was it was a meeting place for clandestine gay affairs or hoodlums hiding out in the woods smoking pot and drinking malt liquor. Fast forward to today: The Turkey Mountain Urban Wilderness area is one of the more desirable and diverse "parks" in the area. I've personally seen an explosion in interest in hiking and mountain biking in the area. People wouldn't tend to think of NE Oklahoma as a mountain biking mecca, but Turkey has gained serious creds nationwide and is prized as being very technical terrain. It's created a lot more local interest as well as people coming up the pike quite frequently to ride here.
Finally, everyone appreciates your interest and effort in promoting uses of the river. Simply because RPA has not seen things your way in the past, remember you are but one person and they answer to several hundred thousand. The issue is far bigger than you and your personal craft, but I'd hate to see you NOT give your input now that they seem to be more keen than ever to hear it and to have your help. Give it some thought before you crap on the idea entirely. From our discussions in the past I can understand why you'd harbor some bitterness. But shrug off the curmudgeonly shell and get on board ;)
Agreed, this is something you should be involved in Aqua.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 18, 2011, 09:25:25 PM
No offense, and good luck. I might have to pass on promoting this one.
I was not asking you to promote anything, as I've stated before your river experience is of value. I offered to provide you with the information necessary to develop an informed opinion and in turn hopefully I'll gain from your knowledge as nothing as the details are not yet set in stone. The offer is still there, let me know some evenings you are available (this week or early next or even Saturday) to come downtown as we'll need the resources I have here and it takes a good hour and a half so I'm thinking Pizza.
Kirby
Quote from: Vision 2025 on July 19, 2011, 08:40:21 AM
I was not asking you to promote anything, as I've stated before your river experience is of value. I offered to provide you with the information necessary to develop an informed opinion and in turn hopefully I'll gain from your knowledge as nothing as the details are not yet set in stone. The offer is still there, let me know some evenings you are available (this week or early next or even Saturday) to come downtown as we'll need the resources I have here and it takes a good hour and a half so I'm thinking Pizza.
Kirby
I'll take you up on that. If I can help with a positive outlook and helpful insights I will. It has great potential and if handled well will be a springboard for more river use ventures. RPA can be a nurturing environment if they want to be. Pick a time or pm me, I suddenly have lots of time available.
Guys...If your going to have Pizza do your-selfs a favor and go to Minute Man in Prattville......
What's a Prattville? You mean South Sand Springs?
I've always heard they have good pizza.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 19, 2011, 09:39:44 AM
What's a Prattville? You mean South Sand Springs?
I've always heard they have good pizza.
Yup....West 41st and hwy 97.....west of 97 on the right after the lights....
Quote from: Breadburner on July 19, 2011, 09:33:23 AM
Guys...If your going to have Pizza do your-selfs a favor and go to Minute Man in Prattville......
My wife works nearby, that is pretty good pizza but I was thinking of a nearby downton pizza...
Quote from: AquaMan on July 19, 2011, 09:15:26 AM
I'll take you up on that. If I can help with a positive outlook and helpful insights I will. It has great potential and if handled well will be a springboard for more river use ventures. RPA can be a nurturing environment if they want to be. Pick a time or pm me, I suddenly have lots of time available.
PM sent
Drove Down Riverside and saw more water and less sand, so I am taking it that the problem has been fixed.
Quote from: custosnox on August 02, 2011, 01:45:20 PM
Drove Down Riverside and saw more water and less sand, so I am taking it that the problem has been fixed.
I noticed that yesterday.
Quote from: carltonplace on August 02, 2011, 04:09:08 PM
I noticed that yesterday.
yeah, I noticed the night before, but kept forgetting to mention it.
Quote from: custosnox on August 02, 2011, 01:45:20 PM
Drove Down Riverside and saw more water and less sand, so I am taking it that the problem has been fixed.
I said that to the Wife this morning as we were watching News on 6. Their sky cam showed the River and it looked pretty good water wise.
Quote from: custosnox on August 02, 2011, 01:45:20 PM
Drove Down Riverside and saw more water and less sand, so I am taking it that the problem has been fixed.
Not "fixed" however River Park's repair contractor has set the gates (manually) in the up position so that the hydraulic lift cylinders could be removed for repair and reinstallation. The lake is expected to remain full this month and into next. This is good news on several fronts. Short term = "been so long, I forgot what the lake looks like." Long term = there is water quality testing program scheduled to begin later this month... we are looking to sample for the worst likely conditions with HOT conditions and low flow, think we'll have that one covered (check).
Well, I plopped my little orange Pelican Burst kayak into the river around 5pm this evening over on the west bank. Actually, had to walk the little booger out about 50 ft to find deep enough water to float both the kayak and me. The water is warm and loaded with algae at this location. But I noted where the deeper channel is when the river was dry and managed to comfortably paddle all the way up to the 66 Bridge. Water is much cleaner and deeper up there.
It feels good to be on the water again. The heat was not a factor as it is much cooler on the water. The cloud formations were gorgeous and it soon began to rain. That made me laugh. The geese flew by in formation at a foot over the water honking like crazy. The least Terns were really active on the islands and making a lot of racket.
Bad news is the water is so warm and oxygen depleted that I didn't see any fish. Not even a turtle.
Saw you paddling about on my way home, sounds like a good relief. I need to toss my boat in and join you... remind me some evening in the fall!
High water temp WOW, yesterday evening the water was 93F (highest we've seen) and that is taken mid water column at the bridge. We still see a good spread with new water and mornings 87 F low yesterday (that delta is pretty common) but the range is going up each day so things are getting worse.
Low DO, we are seeing low spikes but not sustained low readings (at least yet) that appear to correspond with the leading edge of new flow releases as they arrive especially following significant periods between releases. Not all that surprising given the extreme conditions and you may have been in some of that 'challenged' water.
We have tried for a worst case for data collection and testing for the last 18 months, trying to match the 7Q2 flow (the EPA designated regulatory low flow condition which the stream permitting is based upon). Last year we tried to simulate it when the temperatures were summer normal but between some of ODWC's activities and an unscheduled SWAPA (oops) release the next time the conditions were right it never came to be so now the sampling will be done in what appears to be beyond regulatory extreme conditions.
Looks to me like you found a pretty good "worst case scenario". Any species (including us) that makes it through this heat wave is truly Oklahoma Tough and likely to flourish when it cools off. Let me know if you need any help.