PDA

View Full Version : American River Flows?



Tony Buzolich
03-19-2005, 06:50 AM
Does anyone have a good answer for the high variable flows the American is having? I just looked at the flow of over 8000cfs and this just about washes out the upper river for wading.
I've never heard a good answer why they do this.
TONY

Adam Grace
03-19-2005, 08:55 AM
I'm not sue if you will consider this a good answer, for flood protection. Once Folsom Lake or Lake Natoma reach a certain level of water capacity and more run off/rain is forcasted to enter into either one of the lakes the powers that be release water to reduce the threat of another flood.

Why they ramp up the flows so high and do not gradually release water is past me but this is why I beleive that they perform these massive water releases.

David Lee
03-19-2005, 09:14 AM
The "powers- that -be" ramping up flows dosen't bother me as much as dropping the flows TOO FAST - if you get out there after the water drops , you WILL find puddles/braids full of Parr/Smolts ... cut off from any hope of survival . The 'coons and Herons and Egrets get most of them before the puddles dry .... David

Digger
03-19-2005, 10:37 AM
I've no doubt that run-off is a primary concern this time of year, but you would think they could release at some more reasonable flows.
It's been awhile since I lived in Sacramento, so I don't recall this type of flow management. I read somewhere that calcium carbonate builds up on the penstocks/pipes and need to be removed every couple/three years or so, maybe flushing it is how it's done(?)

I was wondering what it must have been like before the dams were in place.
Salmon going upstream maybe to Auburn or Placerville? Or farther? How cool would that have been. OK, I gotta go have some coffee and wake up.

nightgoat
03-19-2005, 10:46 AM
I was told by a DFG friend that part of the reason for the high flows is the health of the river. High flows are needed to move sediment, gravel, etc. I was also told that the optimal flow to achieve this on the A was about 11 or 12000 :shock: I make no claims to the validity of this info. Just what I was told... :D

smokeater
03-19-2005, 11:41 AM
It's travesty, a sham, and a mockery. It's a travshamockery. Think back to the last few times that there have been massive flooding incidents in this area. The most catastrophic flooding occurred due to rain that actually fell on the spot and swelled local creeks and storm drains. Certainly it's possible that having the dam in place, and making huge releases may actually prevent even more catastrophic floods, but from a common sense point of view it does not seem like draining Folsom and Lake Natoma ever really affect the possibility of flooding downstream. The only reasonable exception would be a massive premature snow melt brought on by warmer more tropical type storms pushing through the region like what occurred less than ten years ago. But even then the impact of that snowmelt on the Sacramento area paled in comparison to the what actually fell on site. I just wish that I could have seen the American River prior to Folsom and Nimbus Dam. You know what I say, if you don't like flooding, don't build in the flood plain. Sorry, I know this was totally off the subject....I just have to vent now and again. :twisted:

Gregg Machel
03-19-2005, 11:57 AM
It's good to get things off your chest every once in a while. :) I especially liked your word "travshamockery", that was classic!

Darian
03-19-2005, 11:00 PM
I'm too was impressed with the "travshamockry" thing 8) 8) 8) I know, the devil made you do it :P :P

I'm not sure the DFG has much to do with the flows downstream from the dams in this state. It's more likely due to requirements between flood control agencies, Dep't of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation and water users. I know this doesn't help with the frustrations, but..... :roll: :roll:

To give you an example of this, take a look at the article titled, "Tulare Settlement Endangers Fish" on page 64 in the Mar/Apr issue of the California Fly Fisher mag. The gist of the article is that water diverted for fisheries that was originally allocated to water users must be reimbursed by the Fed's :shock: (spell that you and me :roll: ). This is the second suit of this nature to hit CA and Oregon. The first was the successfull suit by the water users in the Klamath Basin (after the fish kill in the Klamath).

So, Dams are built with tax dollars to capture water. Water users contract for the cheap water from BuRec/DWR and either elect to use it for irrigation/other use or sell it. If the allocation is diverted, the diverter (the feds, for EPA requirements) must reimburse the affected water user(s) with tax dollars for it. Now farmers don't have to farm, they're water purveyors....... :roll:

Moose
03-20-2005, 08:43 AM
From what I understand it's called pulse flows and was requested by fisheries groups to protect steelhead redds for the following reason:

If the flows are raised to, say, 4500 cfs in late winter and remain there like they have in the past, and then drop to say 2,000 cfs in April/May like in the past, the steelhead redds will be left high and dry because they would have used the shallower gravel that would be under water at 4500 cfs but exposed at 2,000 cfs. Short bursts of high water both lower the levels in the impoundments and prevent the wild steelhead from spawning in places where there will be no water when the eggs hatch. Apparently the bursts of high water are not in effect long enough to allow the fish to pair up, form redds and spawn as the water comes down before the fish can be aclimated to the high water and begin this process.

Sounds good and well, but as was stated above it strands the salmon and early season steelhead smolts in pools to be ravaged by the herons, etc..


Funny what man will do to counter the unnatural diversions they ravage a drainage with. If they would simply commit to a specific winter flow from late jan to late april based on early rainfall and snowpack and only raise the flows in case of serious storms (can't win em all, there will be torrential years) there would be a healthy breeding river running through the heart of the city. Of course, that may leave us with a slightly lower lake level in summer and perish the thought some water whores couldn't sell their maximum amount of $$ water down the canal!

On another note, nice job DWR!! Raise the flows from 3800 to 8200 in the middle of the day when guys are out on the river. Strand or kill anybody who was out fishing on an island unaware of the intended and unpublished raise in the river?

Idiots!

Tony Buzolich
03-20-2005, 10:17 AM
Moose ?

You commented about "leaving us with slightly lower water levels at the end of summer".
If I remember right, last year Folsom was almost dry around August/Sept. just when the salmon are about to make their showing in October. They were even telling boaters to pull their boats out of the marinas before they were stranded.
Do you think this water was sent downstream for the farmers or the delta's salt inclusion?
Seemed like poor planning as to when to drain the lake.
TONY

Darian
03-20-2005, 10:30 AM
According to everything I read, last summer water was sent to the delta from Folsom, Oroville and Shasta to protect the Sherman Isl area from salt water intrusion during levy repairs. :roll: :roll: