we started to think about removing the low water dam? The design kills people who are unlucky enough or unknowing enough to get caught in its undertow. It is an attractive nuisance that apparently we aren't going to be able to repair or replace for many years. It attracts fishermen, young people with little experience around rivers and impounds (probably the largest group of users of the river, not not just those who bike or run near it) and then kills them.
Sand Springs cut their losses and blew their low water dam up back in the 80's after a dozen or so of their citizens were swept away. How many will we tolerate just to have a shallow pond to look at?
I would vote to get rid of it...but only if there is a covenant or state constitutional amendment to never build another one. This is a cycle we have gone through a couple times now. Stop building them at all.
It might force us to be more creative in managing water in rivers like ours. Rather than trying to control nature, we would have to work with nature. Dams are a blunt force instrument in river management.
Understand, this didn't have to be such a cluster muck. We, in effect, built a defective swimming pool with a whirlpool on one end that can suck you into oblivion, but then opted not to provide on water rescue, lifeguards, boathouses and security because we (a.) couldn't afford it (b.) didn't think it was justified and (c) didn't want to attract that demographic anyway. I know we had a dredger to keep the water boatable, and at one time a boathouse near the skate park that got washed away in the 84' flood, but then we just sort of gave up and made it mostly off limits other than to upper demographic rowing clubs and occasional kayakers.
I agree with you H. If we can't afford to buy gas for the Cadillac, let someone else have it. Blow it up, dismember the RPA and make the paths a parks obligation and use the savings to landscape the banks. If we later decide to seriously make the river usable for water activities we can progress with some knowledge of what its going to entail.
Who can make the decision and take action?
Of those, who are willing to make that decision?
I guess I will have to go to the other extreme:
Why take away the enjoyment of responsible citizens for the sake of a few idiots who lack common sense?
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 01:42:01 PM
It might force us to be more creative in managing water in rivers like ours. Rather than trying to control nature, we would have to work with nature. Dams are a blunt force instrument in river management.
Understand, this didn't have to be such a cluster muck. We, in effect, built a defective swimming pool with a whirlpool on one end that can suck you into oblivion, but then opted not to provide on water rescue, lifeguards, boathouses and security because we (a.) couldn't afford it (b.) didn't think it was justified and (c) didn't want to attract that demographic anyway. I know we had a dredger to keep the water boatable, and at one time a boathouse near the skate park that got washed away in the 84' flood, but then we just sort of gave up and made it mostly off limits other than to upper demographic rowing clubs and occasional kayakers.
I agree with you H. If we can't afford to buy gas for the Cadillac, let someone else have it. Blow it up, dismember the RPA and make the paths a parks obligation and use the savings to landscape the banks. If we later decide to seriously make the river usable for water activities we can progress with some knowledge of what its going to entail.
There is nothing natural about the river with or without the dam.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 01, 2013, 03:31:37 PM
I guess I will have to go to the other extreme:
Why take away the enjoyment of responsible citizens for the sake of a few idiots who lack common sense?
The enjoyment is a visible one only. Those idiots are the children of a different culture than yours. Someone's brother, son, boyfriend. Maybe less educated than you but here visiting and learning a trade (welding school) and enjoying doing what they've seen on TV. They are not stupid they are just young and inexperienced. I see them walking on the low water dam and fishing waist deep in the turbulence below it all the time as I cross the pedestrian bridge. There is no sign around saying,
"Beware. Poorly designed dam that will suck you under. Dozens have died doing what you're doing." And one or two security guys for the entire path system to enforce rules.
But its nice to not have to see the sand. Some trade off.
Quote from: swake on August 01, 2013, 03:37:30 PM
There is nothing natural about the river with or without the dam.
I know what you're saying. I would say there are varying degrees of natural. I am not advocating tearing down the flood control system and returning to binge/purge flooding. Keystone and the other big dams serve their purpose. But these low water dams that attempt to hold back water for recreational purposes come with a price. If we aren't willing to pay the price of maintenance, repair, safety, security and usefulness, then we should tear it out and let it return to a more natural state than it is now.
Growing grass and mowing my lawn is not a natural thing either. I'm considering dropping that activity too.
Quote from: Townsend on August 01, 2013, 02:27:32 PM
Who can make the decision and take action?
Of those, who are willing to make that decision?
Inhofe pushed the thing through. Our current mayor could destroy it. The office has the power to lead.
However, as we all know, once authorities are created, they rarely dissolve even when no longer necessary. This one will fight its demise along with those who hold out hope that it can once again be meaningful. The citizens (mostly the burbs) have repeatedly scoffed at one plan after another and Tulsa won't go it alone because frankly, we're not a water community like Gulf shore cities or Mississippi River cities. We want something pretty to look at but we want it cheap.
I've been listening to a little of the Borgia's on Netflix. Sure seems timely.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 03:46:36 PM
The enjoyment is a visible one only. Those idiots are the children of a different culture than yours. Someone's brother, son, boyfriend. Maybe less educated than you but here visiting and learning a trade (welding school) and enjoying doing what they've seen on TV. They are not stupid they are just young and inexperienced. I see them walking on the low water dam and fishing waist deep in the turbulence below it all the time as I cross the pedestrian bridge. There is no sign around saying, "Beware. Poorly designed dam that will suck you under. Dozens have died doing what you're doing." And one or two security guys for the entire path system to enforce rules.
But its nice to not have to see the sand. Some trade off.
Did someone take the obvious warning signs down underneath the bridge? I've known since I was first told at four or five years old near a dam isn't a safe place to be in the water. I also know you NEVER go in the water to attempt a rescue unless you have the proper equipment for the situation. Something else most people are well-aware of. I suspect most people know this as well but some choose to ignore the obvious danger and go ahead and put themselves and their would be rescuers at risk.
Some people ignore and exploit an obvious risk and I'm supposed to feel guilty because of it?
Note sign at 12 seconds in the clip:
http://player.vimeo.com/video/71508065
"No wading or boating within 150 feet of dam"
"Swimming prohibited in all areas"
I'm not in favor of tearing it down. I doubt many people are.
H mentioned it before in another post. This forum is not very representative of the many classes, education and income in the city. We do what used to be called some serious "cross culturalization" around here eg. we're smart and experienced, logical, well employed and consistent...isn't everyone? Let them eat cake I say!
The reality is that in exchange for a slow moving, sediment filled, often nasty little pond whose dam leaks and has been noted by engineers in development meetings as a flawed design that we wouldn't build today because it has terrible undertow, we get sand covered with water, boats that can't operate (including TU rowing club most of the time) and deaths by drowning as a yearly occurrence. That's alright its their fault for being dumb eh? Didn't read the sign? You die and decrease the excess population. Save a friend? What you got a death wish? Driving without a helmet, seat belt, or cars with no airbags? Darwinism will get you! Just don't mess with my pretty little pond.
I supported the last river plan that would have re-created some natural rhythms of the river. That doesn't mean I want the river to revert to an un-improved state. We tear down buildings and bridges as dangerous and obsolete that aren't as useless as this dam. I was following "the rescue" this morning and they noted that rescue boats were en route to the area....and that was an hour after the original 911 call. What, you can't keep a rescue boat on or near the only population accessible part of the river surrounded by paths, fishermen and swimmers (well they should have read the sign).
My point is this: If we aren't going to modernize the dam, truly regulate it, secure it and afford the same chance of rescue as folks have at other attractive nuisances like Brady, Turkey Mtn etc. then for heavens sake tear the thing down and wait til we can afford to do so. Actually have town hall meetings to ask the population whether, when faced with facts, they really want to keep taxes allocated to this post card pond. You might be surprised. It might just wake up some people as to how really stupid it is to keep acting like there really is something unique and important in paying for a 35 year old dream that never really materialized. Maybe they'll even decide to fix it.
Build a real dam around 101st. Sure, Jenks might be underwater but you could make sure there was always water in the river.
Knowing those clever Native Americans, they would change Riverwalk into a floating casino.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 03:59:52 PM
Inhofe pushed the thing through. Our current mayor could destroy it. The office has the power to lead.
That is why in the past I have referred to that as the "Jim Inhofe Memorial Sewage Lagoon".
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 06:25:03 PM
H mentioned it before in another post. This forum is not very representative of the many classes, education and income in the city. We do what used to be called some serious "cross culturalization" around here eg. we're smart and experienced, logical, well employed and consistent...isn't everyone? Let them eat cake I say!
The reality is that in exchange for a slow moving, sediment filled, often nasty little pond whose dam leaks and has been noted by engineers in development meetings as a flawed design that we wouldn't build today because it has terrible undertow, we get sand covered with water, boats that can't operate (including TU rowing club most of the time) and deaths by drowning as a yearly occurrence. That's alright its their fault for being dumb eh? Didn't read the sign? You die and decrease the excess population. Save a friend? What you got a death wish? Driving without a helmet, seat belt, or cars with no airbags? Darwinism will get you! Just don't mess with my pretty little pond.
I supported the last river plan that would have re-created some natural rhythms of the river. That doesn't mean I want the river to revert to an un-improved state. We tear down buildings and bridges as dangerous and obsolete that aren't as useless as this dam. I was following "the rescue" this morning and they noted that rescue boats were en route to the area....and that was an hour after the original 911 call. What, you can't keep a rescue boat on or near the only population accessible part of the river surrounded by paths, fishermen and swimmers (well they should have read the sign).
My point is this: If we aren't going to modernize the dam, truly regulate it, secure it and afford the same chance of rescue as folks have at other attractive nuisances like Brady, Turkey Mtn etc. then for heavens sake tear the thing down and wait til we can afford to do so. Actually have town hall meetings to ask the population whether, when faced with facts, they really want to keep taxes allocated to this post card pond. You might be surprised. It might just wake up some people as to how really stupid it is to keep acting like there really is something unique and important in paying for a 35 year old dream that never really materialized. Maybe they'll even decide to fix it.
TU relocated the women's NCAA team to the navigation channel in Catoosa 7-8 years ago. The low water dam isn't the most limiting factor for the Tulsa Rowing Club other than when the gates are broken at the LWD and the Corps isn't releasing from upstream. Even in low flow conditions, there's enough water to row around 5am to 6am most mornings.
I'm quite familiar with the term "drowning machine" being applied to the LWD at Zink Lake. Certainly there are better designs and at some point there will be improvements to the dam. However, there is no such thing as a "safe" dam when it's got high quantities of water going through or over it. Please show me an example of a dam in this area which is NOT a drowning machine when there is water spilling over at a high rate or going through the flood gates.
Your notion that it's some sort of cultural snobbery on my part that keeps me from showing a whole lot of empathy for this incident and others before who clearly ignored any shred of common sense is laughable. If this young man was an outdoorsman, he, even more than myself should have grown up with a serious respect for fast rushing water and why you don't do these sorts of things around dams when there is a release over or through the dam. I see several problems with what happened which defy many rules of safety: hand-fishing after dark, hand fishing adjacent to a dam at a high flow rate, entering rushing water with no life preservers, and I'd be curious to know if alcohol played a part in this tragedy.
I don't see the point in tearing down something because a small percentage of the population doesn't appreciate the inherent dangers regardless of the configuration of the dam. As CF points out, it's like tearing out the BA or I-44 because several times a year people ignore the obvious danger and even hop fences and barriers to attempt a highway crossing only to be killed. By your logic, we should have crossing guards and flashing "idiot pedestrian may jump in front of your car" signs on the highways.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 01, 2013, 08:58:35 PM
TU relocated the women's NCAA team to the navigation channel in Catoosa 7-8 years ago. The low water dam isn't the most limiting factor for the Tulsa Rowing Club other than when the gates are broken at the LWD and the Corps isn't releasing from upstream. Even in low flow conditions, there's enough water to row around 5am to 6am most mornings.
I'm quite familiar with the term "drowning machine" being applied to the LWD at Zink Lake. Certainly there are better designs and at some point there will be improvements to the dam. However, there is no such thing as a "safe" dam when it's got high quantities of water going through or over it. Please show me an example of a dam in this area which is NOT a drowning machine when there is water spilling over at a high rate or going through the flood gates.
Your notion that it's some sort of cultural snobbery on my part that keeps me from showing a whole lot of empathy for this incident and others before who clearly ignored any shred of common sense is laughable. If this young man was an outdoorsman, he, even more than myself should have grown up with a serious respect for fast rushing water and why you don't do these sorts of things around dams when there is a release over or through the dam. I see several problems with what happened which defy many rules of safety: hand-fishing after dark, hand fishing adjacent to a dam at a high flow rate, entering rushing water with no life preservers, and I'd be curious to know if alcohol played a part in this tragedy.
I don't see the point in tearing down something because a small percentage of the population doesn't appreciate the inherent dangers regardless of the configuration of the dam. As CF points out, it's like tearing out the BA or I-44 because several times a year people ignore the obvious danger and even hop fences and barriers to attempt a highway crossing only to be killed. By your logic, we should have crossing guards and flashing "idiot pedestrian may jump in front of your car" signs on the highways.
It's not the Dam's fault that Darwin has a way of catching up with a certain part of the population.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 01, 2013, 08:58:35 PM
TU relocated the women's NCAA team to the navigation channel in Catoosa 7-8 years ago. The low water dam isn't the most limiting factor for the Tulsa Rowing Club other than when the gates are broken at the LWD and the Corps isn't releasing from upstream. Even in low flow conditions, there's enough water to row around 5am to 6am most mornings.
I kayak on Zink lake. If I can't float a 9 ft kayak on there with one person I doubt many shells are on there. I know at 5 am there is more water but my job has me cross the 23rd street bridge each weekday morning at 5:30am. Rare to see any on the lake in recent months. They aren't there in the evening when I run either.
I'm quite familiar with the term "drowning machine" being applied to the LWD at Zink Lake. Certainly there are better designs and at some point there will be improvements to the dam. However, there is no such thing as a "safe" dam when it's got high quantities of water going through or over it. Please show me an example of a dam in this area which is NOT a drowning machine when there is water spilling over at a high rate or going through the flood gates.
Really? There is only one and people drown there even when water is not high. The other one was blown up because as a hydraulic engineer informed me, it was a poor design as well. They just didn't tolerate losing their teenagers upstream. The dams proposed in the last two issues were safer than this one. But you're dwelling on single points instead of seeing the whole picture. Without some enforcement of existing rules, without maintenance, without repairs and without rescue effectiveness the whole thing is about as safe as the bridge they're tearing down and replacing upstream. At what point are there going to be improvements? The last I read it may be 10-12 years. Its not part of either the county or city vote coming up.
Your notion that it's some sort of cultural snobbery on my part that keeps me from showing a whole lot of empathy for this incident and others before who clearly ignored any shred of common sense is laughable. If this young man was an outdoorsman, he, even more than myself should have grown up with a serious respect for fast rushing water and why you don't do these sorts of things around dams when there is a release over or through the dam. I see several problems with what happened which defy many rules of safety: hand-fishing after dark, hand fishing adjacent to a dam at a high flow rate, entering rushing water with no life preservers, and I'd be curious to know if alcohol played a part in this tragedy.
You're laughing betrays you. I don't think you have anything to feel guilty about. Nor do I think you're snobby or without empathy. I do think you're like a lot of people in Tulsa who are doing pretty well but are compassion damaged, culturally separated from others less educated and privileged and single visioned. It doesn't bother you that a rowing craft plies the water in the dark with no life jackets and no fore/aft lighting but a noodler at 5am is not behaving safely. Drinking at 5 am is pure conjecture on your part. Obviously the young men didn't respect the river. They paid for it. The dam's condition, the lakes condition and the failure to adequately fund enforcement and rescue efforts is indefensible.
I don't see the point in tearing down something because a small percentage of the population doesn't appreciate the inherent dangers regardless of the configuration of the dam. As CF points out, it's like tearing out the BA or I-44 because several times a year people ignore the obvious danger and even hop fences and barriers to attempt a highway crossing only to be killed. By your logic, we should have crossing guards and flashing "idiot pedestrian may jump in front of your car" signs on the highways.
Actually no its not. Its like not tearing out or replacing BA or I-44 even though they are woefully inadequate for the traffic load, poorly maintained and require longer than average response times for accidents. You would have us still driving on a 2 lane I-44 with signs that say, "just slow down and deal with it".
Quote from: swake on August 01, 2013, 09:07:06 PM
It's not the Dam's fault that Darwin has a way of catching up with a certain part of the population.
Dang, Swake. That's the same post some flat liner used after the story on "newson6". Was that you? Very classless remark.
Here's the rub. Darwin is often misunderstood, even by smart guys. He never said or described that only the smartest, strongest, fastest would survive in the scheme of life. His argument was that it is those species most adaptable to change that survive and even then nature is chaotic in deciding who lives or disappears from the planet. Adaptability and chaos rule. We get to share space on the globe with cockroaches, whom we arguably outrank in brains and brawn.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 09:40:49 PM
We get to share space on the globe with cockroaches, whom we arguably outrank in brains and brawn.
I'm not so sure about the brains.
;D
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 09:40:49 PM
Dang, Swake. That's the same post some flat liner used after the story on "newson6". Was that you? Very classless remark.
Here's the rub. Darwin is often misunderstood, even by smart guys. He never said or described that only the smartest, strongest, fastest would survive in the scheme of life. His argument was that it is those species most adaptable to change that survive and even then nature is chaotic in deciding who lives or disappears from the planet. Adaptability and chaos rule. We get to share space on the globe with cockroaches, whom we arguably outrank in brains and brawn.
Your personal animus against RPA is coloring you thought here.
QuoteYou're laughing betrays you. I don't think you have anything to feel guilty about. Nor do I think you're snobby or without empathy. I do think you're like a lot of people in Tulsa who are doing pretty well but are compassion damaged, culturally separated from others less educated and privileged and single visioned. It doesn't bother you that a rowing craft plies the water in the dark with no life jackets and no fore/aft lighting but a noodler at 5am is not behaving safely. Drinking at 5 am is pure conjecture on your part. Obviously the young men didn't respect the river. They paid for it. The dam's condition, the lakes condition and the failure to adequately fund enforcement and rescue efforts is indefensible.
I, like every other member of TRC, underwent training and there were different rules for rowing after sundown or before sun-up in relation to keeping a safe distance from the dam. As well, you do NOT row without blinking marker lights on your shell. There are also long-established rules on how close to the dam and who may even get on the water in a shell and who may and may not row solo. in over 30 years of rowing on Zink Lake, there have been a couple of shells manage to go over the dam, but the rowing club has never lost a rower. A rowing shell is, in itself, a flotation device. Granted, it's no substitute for wearing a personal flotation device but apparently, it's been a long-standing assumption that if someone comes out of a shell they will be conscious and able to get to shore. There's also the difference that apparently one of the guys wandered into the "fountain" which is far different than turning a rowing craft around several hundred yards from the dam. There's also conflicting information that these guys went out at 11:30, 3:30, or 5am. There seems little dispute that 911 was summoned 5-5:30.
If destroying that dam meant the "river" would be something all of Tulsa could enjoy, rather than that lake, then let the blasting begin!!!
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 03:53:13 PM
Growing grass and mowing my lawn is not a natural thing either. I'm considering dropping that activity too.
Read the cautions that came with my new lawnmower, one was... "Do not use to cut hair."
I am not kidding, it actually said that.
Quote from: swake on August 01, 2013, 10:13:27 PM
Your personal animus against RPA is coloring you thought here.
Nonsense. There is one person there who lied and deceived others eventually costing me dearly. It didn't keep me from supporting the last two river development issues nor has it kept me from speaking to that person when we cross paths.
I give them credit when its due and criticism when its deserved. Authorities in general suck and don't earn their keep as downtown supporters found out.
Address the issues I've raised if you can. No one denies the condition of the lake and the dam. Its not entirely the RPA's fault that funding isn't adequate. Yes, they still deceive the public, the press and their donors, but its the city that needs to decide just how much river they want. So far not much.
Must...resist..urge...Okay, I cannot. AM is right. Also, I cannot stand looking at a damned sand bar where, I thought, the Arkansas "river" is supposed to be. It looks like crap down this way.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 01, 2013, 10:31:52 PM
I, like every other member of TRC, underwent training and there were different rules for rowing after sundown or before sun-up in relation to keeping a safe distance from the dam. As well, you do NOT row without blinking marker lights on your shell. There are also long-established rules on how close to the dam and who may even get on the water in a shell and who may and may not row solo. in over 30 years of rowing on Zink Lake, there have been a couple of shells manage to go over the dam, but the rowing club has never lost a rower. A rowing shell is, in itself, a flotation device. Granted, it's no substitute for wearing a personal flotation device but apparently, it's been a long-standing assumption that if someone comes out of a shell they will be conscious and able to get to shore. There's also the difference that apparently one of the guys wandered into the "fountain" which is far different than turning a rowing craft around several hundred yards from the dam. There's also conflicting information that these guys went out at 11:30, 3:30, or 5am. There seems little dispute that 911 was summoned 5-5:30.
Not all TRC members follow the rules then. Just like the countless fishermen and swimmers who break the rules daily around the lake. I've seen them out there without lights in the dark am. People tend to think the signs are not important when they see so many others ignoring them. Human nature. BTW, my kayak floats too but I wear a life vest just in case. I don't make assumptions as to my condition should I roll over.
My points have little to do with these guys other than to feel profound heartache over life lost at such a young age and anger at those who would call them names like idiots or Darwin candidates. You are looking at the symptoms not the disease. Consider this lake as a bridge. One whose design and construction is suspect, that occasionally drops a car through its roadbase in spite of the fact that signs warn of a hole in the bridge in the right lane ahead. A bridge that creaks when you drive over it and has been judged to be structurally deficient...but the state doesn't close. Would you drive over it? Think the Hendrix, Ok bridge over the Red River. Most of us do because we have a faith in our government that its still safe to do so. As long as we hold on to that blind faith instead of holding the state accountable we will get nothing better.
Do you think we should just let the structure and the lake continue to deteriorate like the out of state owners did with their buildings downtown because we don't want to spend the money? Put up more signs instead? I don't. Fix it or tear it down.
Quote from: guido911 on August 01, 2013, 11:41:35 PM
Must...resist..urge...Okay, I cannot. AM is right. Also, I cannot stand looking at a damned sand bar where, I thought, the Arkansas "river" is supposed to be. It looks like crap down this way.
Well, you know...even a blind hog finds an acorn occasionally. ;)
You know, I've made too big a deal out of this already. I don't expect that anyone will agree with me that it needs to go. That would be a huge event that most politicians wouldn't want to touch. I would rather see it improved or fixed. Mostly I just wanted to make a stab at saying what others may be afraid to say and to stimulate some conversation about the irony of complaining about bad roads, bad bridges and bad government while a good example stares at us each day. We can do better.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 02, 2013, 12:10:08 AM
That would be a huge event that most politicians wouldn't want to touch.
My original point.
The more effective battle would be for improvement. Of course I say that with little hope that it will happen any time soon.
Quote from: guido911 on August 01, 2013, 11:41:35 PM
Must...resist..urge...Okay, I cannot. AM is right. Also, I cannot stand looking at a damned sand bar where, I thought, the Arkansas "river" is supposed to be. It looks like crap down this way.
I don't think the river would look much different down our way. It'd still drain away just as fast.
That's the reasoning behind the Southie Dam.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 01, 2013, 11:28:03 PM
Nonsense. There is one person there who lied and deceived others eventually costing me dearly. It didn't keep me from supporting the last two river development issues nor has it kept me from speaking to that person when we cross paths.
I give them credit when its due and criticism when its deserved. Authorities in general suck and don't earn their keep as downtown supporters found out.
Address the issues I've raised if you can. No one denies the condition of the lake and the dam. Its not entirely the RPA's fault that funding isn't adequate. Yes, they still deceive the public, the press and their donors, but its the city that needs to decide just how much river they want. So far not much.
So the idiots that cliff dive at Tenkiller where it's marked that it's not safe to. Some of them die. Do you think we should dynamite the cliffs to keep them from being able to hurt themselves?
Quote from: AquaMan on August 02, 2013, 12:10:08 AM
You know, I've made too big a deal out of this already. I don't expect that anyone will agree with me that it needs to go. That would be a huge event that most politicians wouldn't want to touch. I would rather see it improved or fixed. Mostly I just wanted to make a stab at saying what others may be afraid to say and to stimulate some conversation about the irony of complaining about bad roads, bad bridges and bad government while a good example stares at us each day. We can do better.
Take a deep breath and exhale Aqua. ;D
Regardless with what the LWD is replaced with, there are always going to be people who either believe they are above the laws of physics, who have too much belief in their own abilities, or who simply don't respect warning lights, warning signs, and obvious dangers taught them by their parents and or peers. The dam didn't force anyone into the water yesterday morning. Poor judgement led to this pure and simple.
Sorry to say, there will always be drownings in the Arkansas river along the Tulsa stretch with or without this LWD or a "safer" replacement.
Quote from: swake on August 02, 2013, 08:48:50 AM
So the idiots that cliff dive at Tenkiller where it's marked that it's not safe to. Some of them die. Do you think we should dynamite the cliffs to keep them from being able to hurt themselves?
Careful Swake, you are starting to sound like a heartless teabagger.
Maybe this is the ticket to getting the populous to fund the improvements? Safety! For the students!
This fact has been in the pitch the last two river development packages but maybe it should be a larger point next time.
Quote from: Red Arrow on August 01, 2013, 09:50:41 PM
I'm not so sure about the brains.
;D
Or proportionally, the brawn...
Quote from: guido911 on August 01, 2013, 11:41:35 PM
Must...resist..urge...Okay, I cannot. AM is right. Also, I cannot stand looking at a damned sand bar where, I thought, the Arkansas "river" is supposed to be. It looks like crap down this way.
You are the "poster child" for what I have said in the past about people moving to an area because of the perceived ambiance, and bringing their carp with them that messes it up. The Arkansas for at least hundreds of thousands of years has been exactly what you see - sand bars for the vast majority of the year. Just gotta wonder how you got to the point where the natural order of things "looks like crap down this way"...?? That is the mind set that made Las Vegas into the water wonderland it is today!
Yeah, I know....progress...jobs...economic activity...development...blah...blah...blah...
Keystone has made tremendous reductions in flood damage to Tulsa, 'cause we just couldn't bear the idea of NOT developing in a flood plain...and look at what a nice big mud-hole that has become. Needs to be dredged - soon! And we cast aspersions on New Orleans...yeah, right..!! At least they had the excuse that it began before the place was below sea level...and the river diversions and oil removal destroyed the delta protecting the area from inundation. What is our excuse again?
Quote from: swake on August 02, 2013, 08:48:50 AM
So the idiots that cliff dive at Tenkiller where it's marked that it's not safe to. Some of them die. Do you think we should dynamite the cliffs to keep them from being able to hurt themselves?
That's kind of ridiculous. No, that's just plain silly. You are missing the points entirely.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 02, 2013, 08:54:27 AM
Take a deep breath and exhale Aqua. ;D
Regardless with what the LWD is replaced with, there are always going to be people who either believe they are above the laws of physics, who have too much belief in their own abilities, or who simply don't respect warning lights, warning signs, and obvious dangers taught them by their parents and or peers. The dam didn't force anyone into the water yesterday morning. Poor judgement led to this pure and simple.
Sorry to say, there will always be drownings in the Arkansas river along the Tulsa stretch with or without this LWD or a "safer" replacement.
It was very rare to hear of drownings on this river before the LWDs. They mostly occurred when the river flooded and kids tried to float on rafts and logs and stuff. 14 documented by TW since 83' but that doesn't include the upstream and downstream deaths or the bodies that mysteriously showed up with pre-existing wounds. I believe SS had nearly two dozen.
I am doomed to be out of synch, controversial and misunderstood by my peers. Yoga may in fact be the answer.
Quote from: rdj on August 02, 2013, 08:58:21 AM
Maybe this is the ticket to getting the populous to fund the improvements? Safety! For the students!
This fact has been in the pitch the last two river development packages but maybe it should be a larger point next time.
I hope that it raises awareness and spurs action of some sort. Either fix it, improve it or face facts that its an attractive nuisance we'll have to deal with for decades. The area these guys were noodling was scheduled (and may still be) for destruction had the white water park materialized. The dam proposed would have stair stepped on the downstream side to eliminate undertow.
Unlike cliffs at Tenkiller, we built this dam and are responsible for its operation. Swimming pools may have signs that say private property, danger, etc. but insurance companies will balk at covering them unless you make efforts to limit access by strangers.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 02, 2013, 10:06:03 AM
You are the "poster child" for what I have said in the past about people moving to an area because of the perceived ambiance, and bringing their carp with them that messes it up. The Arkansas for at least hundreds of thousands of years has been exactly what you see - sand bars for the vast majority of the year. Just gotta wonder how you got to the point where the natural order of things "looks like crap down this way"...?? That is the mind set that made Las Vegas into the water wonderland it is today!
Yeah, I know....progress...jobs...economic activity...development...blah...blah...blah...
Keystone has made tremendous reductions in flood damage to Tulsa, 'cause we just couldn't bear the idea of NOT developing in a flood plain...and look at what a nice big mud-hole that has become. Needs to be dredged - soon! And we cast aspersions on New Orleans...yeah, right..!! At least they had the excuse that it began before the place was below sea level...and the river diversions and oil removal destroyed the delta protecting the area from inundation. What is our excuse again?
Yeah, don't be too hard on him. My wife feels the same way. She's from the land of a thousand lakes, Minnesota, where rivers are rivers and men are named Olaf. She doesn't understand or appreciate Prairie Rivers. There has to be compromise.
Our big mistake was made back when they put the first bridge over the river. Immediately the land adjacent to the river was built upon instead of making a buffer of several hundred yards either side of it. That decision was economic plain and simple. Refineries needed a place to dump stuff, workers needed to live near the refineries and the population was exploding. Just go up on one of the surrounding hills and you see the whole area is a valley waiting to be filled with water. We filled it with housing.
Quote from: AquaMan on August 02, 2013, 10:56:47 AM
Unlike cliffs at Tenkiller, we built this dam and are responsible for its operation.
We didn't build the cliffs, but we certainly built the lake. In both cases people are taking stupid risks in a artificially created dangerous area against posted warnings. In one you want to remove dangerous but popular dams. In the other you find it silly to advocate to remove the dangerous but popular cliffs? Maybe we just remove the Tenkiller dam, would that make more sense? If the lake is drained no one will cliff dive into the water.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on August 02, 2013, 10:06:03 AM
You are the "poster child" for what I have said in the past about people moving to an area because of the perceived ambiance, and bringing their carp with them that messes it up.
I didn't include the whole quote above to keep things compact, but you seem to be making a much broader argument against even the Keystone dam, and/or dams in general, and by extension an argument against any improvements to the natural landscape that would make it more usable, easier, and/or more enjoyable by people. This broader argument won't be won, and there is too much history against it. To varying degrees, humans have been adapting the environment since the beginning of civilization.
Understand though, that I'm a member of Trout Unlimited and have supported demolishing dams in the Pacific NW that were no longer needed and disrupted Salmon runs. And I'm a past long-term member of Ducks Unlimited and contributed to rebuilding the wetlands back in the '70s and '80s. So while I get the whole "leave it as nature intended" argument, it's not feasible to apply the sentiment to the extreme. Is Keystone dam a net negative? I don't think so, and any talk against the dam will simply confuse the discussion.
Having said that, the discussion around the LWD is valid, if (IMHO) misguided. Don't take it out, fix it or improve it. And I know this is a well-trodden discussion topic, but rather than retreat (destroy the dam), this type of issue should spur Tulsa to finally move to address getting a "real" dam in place that would - along with the Gathering Place and other recent improvements along the river - create an amazing setting for recreational activity and economic growth.
Again, it's an old topic, but just Google images for "Austin town lake" and see what we could easily have here in Tulsa...
Quote from: swake on August 02, 2013, 11:08:08 AM
We didn't build the cliffs, but we certainly built the lake. In both cases people are taking stupid risks in a artificially created dangerous area against posted warnings. In one you want to remove dangerous but popular dams. In the other you find it silly to advocate to remove the dangerous but popular cliffs? Maybe we just remove the Tenkiller dam, would that make more sense? If the lake is drained no one will cliff dive into the water.
That's weird thinking and certainly miles away from my points. But, if it gives you some inner balance....
Quote from: rebound on August 02, 2013, 11:09:54 AM
I didn't include the whole quote above to keep things compact, but you seem to be making a much broader argument against even the Keystone dam, and/or dams in general, and by extension an argument against any improvements to the natural landscape that would make it more usable, easier, and/or more enjoyable by people. This broader argument won't be won, and there is too much history against it. To varying degrees, humans have been adapting the environment since the beginning of civilization.
Understand though, that I'm a member of Trout Unlimited and have supported demolishing dams in the Pacific NW that were no longer needed and disrupted Salmon runs. And I'm a past long-term member of Ducks Unlimited and contributed to rebuilding the wetlands back in the '70s and '80s. So while I get the whole "leave it as nature intended" argument, it's not feasible to apply the sentiment to the extreme. Is Keystone dam a net negative? I don't think so, and any talk against the dam will simply confuse the discussion.
Having said that, the discussion around the LWD is valid, if (IMHO) misguided. Don't take it out, fix it or improve it. And I know this is a well-trodden discussion topic, but rather than retreat (destroy the dam), this type of issue should spur Tulsa to finally move to address getting a "real" dam in place that would - along with the Gathering Place and other recent improvements along the river - create an amazing setting for recreational activity and economic growth.
Again, it's an old topic, but just Google images for "Austin town lake" and see what we could easily have here in Tulsa...
Yet, sometimes you have to threaten a divorce just to get the other's attention. And, you have to mean it.
Quote from: rebound on August 02, 2013, 11:09:54 AM
I didn't include the whole quote above to keep things compact, but you seem to be making a much broader argument against even the Keystone dam, and/or dams in general, and by extension an argument against any improvements to the natural landscape that would make it more usable, easier, and/or more enjoyable by people. This broader argument won't be won, and there is too much history against it. To varying degrees, humans have been adapting the environment since the beginning of civilization.
Not against Keystone per se. I have lived in Brookside in the 50's when it was being made - before it was built, actually - and experienced the annual floods to Peoria and beyond. Keystone has done a very good job of fixing that issue. I would advocate that we continue to look at the net value of these things - and one point is the ongoing maintenance. Keystone has silted in dramatically since it was built (we would go out to the overlook and watch construction in the early 60's), and right now could use some dredging. As could ALL of our big lakes. No thought appears to have been given to conditions 50 years in the future - at that time - I think the design goal was about 50 years, so they are pretty much all end of life and should be scheduled for replacement.
The big lakes in northeast Oklahoma are fantastic! And while they don't really provide that much electrical power relative to their potential, they are amazing recreational venues. They has also raised the overall humidity of northeast Oklahoma, both directly and indirectly....we now water grass yards all the time, where they just went brown when I was a kid... we have lots of water to waste now.
Arkansas River could be turned into a river version of the Tallgrass Prairie. Something that is near natural, and appreciated for what it is rather than terra-formed to something it isn't. As for the old oil wells in the river bed to the south...well, that is just a historical artifact of our past. "Museum" pieces...
Quote from: AquaMan on August 02, 2013, 10:49:46 AM
It was very rare to hear of drownings on this river before the LWDs. They mostly occurred when the river flooded and kids tried to float on rafts and logs and stuff. 14 documented by TW since 83' but that doesn't include the upstream and downstream deaths or the bodies that mysteriously showed up with pre-existing wounds. I believe SS had nearly two dozen.
I am doomed to be out of synch, controversial and misunderstood by my peers. Yoga may in fact be the answer.
I heard of drownings when I was a kid in the 50's from time to time. Also, people would occasionally get caught in the quicksand....most got out.