Unleashing the Mississippi River.

  • Jon Jordan
    Keymaster
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 6019
    #1784534

    By BOB SHAW | [email protected] | Pioneer Press
    July 8, 2018 at 6:00 am

    It may be time to unleash the Mississippi River.

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is considering the possibility of three metro-area dams being removed — which would transform the slow-moving commercial waterway into a whitewater rapids.

    The Corps wants to sell or give away the Upper St. Anthony Lock but not the dam, which is owned by Xcel Energy Inc.; the Lower St. Anthony Lock and Dam near downtown Minneapolis; and Lock and Dam No. 1 by the Ford Parkway Bridge.

    Officials are hosting meetings this month to discuss what to do, but just talking about restoring the river to its natural state has fired up a public debate.

    “This change is coming very fast and very quietly,” said Kevin Chapdelaine, president of the Friends of Pool 2, the area of the Mississippi between St. Paul and Hastings. “I think this is a very under-thought idea.”

    John Anfinson says the time for the discussion is now. “This is the first time since the founding of the Twin Cities that we can have a conversation about what we want the river to be,” said Anfinson, superintendent of the Mississippi National River and Recreational Area.

    Removing the dams would restore the river to its original, wild state.

    In 1805, explorer Zebulon Pike provided the earliest known description of the river below St. Anthony Falls. “He said it was ‘one continuous falls’ for about four miles downstream,” said Anfinson.

    The river crashed around boulders to the present-day Lake Street bridge, and around smaller rocks to the present-day Ford Dam. The roughest areas tapered off where the Mississippi joined the Minnesota River past Fort Snelling.

    Anfinson said the rapids were so powerful that in 1858, steamboats visited St. Paul 1,000 times and Minneapolis only 50 times.

    The river was tamed by 1963, when the Corps finished a series of locks and dams.

    In 2015, the Corps permanently shut down the Upper St. Anthony Lock to stop the spread of the invasive Asian carp. But the closure also stopped barge traffic — ending the era of heavy commercial use.

    Corps officials immediately started to ask: Why should the locks remain open?

    They cost the Corps about $1.2 million a year to maintain, said Anfinson.

    The Corps began a formal “Disposition Study” in August 2017, which includes public meetings set for July 16 and 17. It is expected to make its recommendations by 2019, according to Corps spokesman George Stringham.

    The locks are now used only by a few excursion boats. “Is it in the best interests to keep them open?” said Stringham.

    Greg Genz, vice president of Friends of Pool 2, said the locks and dams would be offered to other federal agencies, but he doesn’t expect that they would want them.

    After that, he said, local and state units of government might bid on the dams. The new owner could keep the locks and dams open, or close them.

    “I don’t know if I have ever seen dam removal like this in a major metro area, especially dams with that much” vertical drop, said Genz.

    What would it cost?

    A comparable project removing or altering three dams in Penobscot, Maine, recently cost about $62 million, said spokeswoman Olivia Dorothy of American Rivers, a national advocacy group that works to protect and restore rivers. That group supports removing the Mississippi dams.

    CLEANER WATER
    Mississippi superintendent Anfinson said restoring the rapids that Pike saw would be healthier for fish and would clean the water.

    It would also be scenic. The fast-flowing waters through the maze of boulders would be a magnet for kayakers and canoe paddlers. Boaters going downstream from Minneapolis would experience a 75-foot drop, spread out over about six miles.

    And the personality of the river would change in late summer, as the water subsided.

    “You’d be able to wade across the river,” said Anfinson. “On a hot summer day, people would be inner-tubing by the thousands.”

    It is a unique opportunity, according to American Rivers’ Dorothy.

    The Mississippi originally had four sets of rapids along its 2,320-mile stretch — in St. Paul; Keokuk, Iowa; Rock Island, Ill.; and near St. Louis. The Minnesota rapids are the only ones with any hope of being restored, she said.

    Some groups question the wisdom of dumping the dams.

    Restoring the whitewater section would prevent power-boaters from using the river, or excursion boats using it for sightseeing, said Friends of Pool 2’s Chapdelaine.

    He said there could be another disadvantage — the 2 million cubic feet of silt backed up behind the dams. If that amount of crud washed downstream, said Chapdelaine, it would choke up the river from St. Paul to Lake Pepin.

    “You remove the dams and the river scours itself out. The silt is full of heavy metals and dioxins,” said Chapdelaine.

    But Anfinson said the silt was not a deal breaker. “It is a valid concern, but is it something that couldn’t be handled? No,” he said. “You’d be transforming the river from a lake back to a river.”

    The Friends of the Mississippi River is a group that gives the idea a cautious endorsement. Executive director Whitney Clark said the community needs to discuss all proposals carefully.

    “We stop short of saying, ‘Rip ’em out! Go for it!’ ” said Clark. “But this is a very exciting idea, and our organization is intrigued with it.”

    IF YOU GO
    Two public meetings have been scheduled to discuss the disposition of the three dams in the metro area.

    6 to 8 p.m. July 16 at Mill City Museum, 704 Second St. S., Minneapolis
    6 to 8 p.m. July 17 at Highland Park Senior High School, 1015 S. Snelling Ave., St. Paul

    pool2fool
    Inactive
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 1709
    #1784541

    shock

    I’ll be at the St. Paul meeting.

    Denny O
    Central IOWA
    Posts: 5821
    #1784548

    Does this move also have anything to do with the aging of the locks . They are being faced with the need to replace them too.

    buckybadger
    Upper Midwest
    Posts: 8175
    #1784549

    Wow. That’d be a change to say the very least. I do not see it happening at all, but for anglers who enjoy the upper Mississippi in its current state…it’d be best to squash this thing before any politicians/idiots jump on board.

    I’m not very knowledgeable about P3 and P2, but my assumptions are it’d be a negative for anglers who run the river and enjoy its current state. I also think it’d significantly impact P4 as it’d be the main stopping spot for even more sediment with the above pools becoming more turbulent. I’ve heard the figure of ~75 years for the upper half of P4 from Lake City northward at its current sedimentation rate before it’s just one channel surrounded by marshy sediment. This would ramp up that timeline I’m sure.

    Dutchboy
    Central Mn.
    Posts: 16656
    #1784563

    My guess is it will cost over $100 million over 20 years to study, litigate & act upon. Likely another $100 to actually do something.

    We will all be dead before anything would ever happen. First thing they would need to control is the flooding.

    Mike W
    MN/Anoka/Ham lake
    Posts: 13294
    #1784575

    Im all for it. Any river fishermen knows nothing stays the same on the river. We just adapt and go find the next bite. Thinking all those rapids might include some awesome spawning habitats. To think pool 2 fishing could even get better.

    munchy
    NULL
    Posts: 4931
    #1784579

    Im all for it. Any river fishermen knows nothing stays the same on the river. We just adapt and go find the next bite. Thinking all those rapids might include some awesome spawning habitats. To think pool 2 fishing could even get better.

    X2

    Dave maze
    Isanti
    Posts: 980
    #1784583

    While I’m 100% sure it won’t happen… it would be really cool to see the river as it was 80-100 years ago. The issue with silt and debris washing into the shipping channels will shut it down.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1784590

    First thing they would need to control is the flooding.

    The dams are opened up when it floods, it’s already a “wild” river in high water. There isn’t any control off flooding now or if they would take out the dams.

    It’s going to be interesting to hear the “spin” put on

    In 2015, the Corps permanently shut down the Upper St. Anthony Lock to stop the spread of the invasive Asian carp. But the closure also stopped barge traffic — ending the era of heavy commercial use.

    Politics and money have a way of making me sick.

    If I were the owners of the companies that relied on barges for my materials and went out of business because of the closers, I would be suing for being lied to.

    Personally I couldn’t say if a “wild” river is good or bad, but I’m beside myself because of the facade used saying “we must close the dam because of Asian carp”.

    Pure BS.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1784592

    The locks at St.anthony falls were shut down temporarily while the coon rapids dam had new “asian carp proof” gates put in few years back now. Those gates have since been completed.

    Funding also just got approved for second phase of the Mississippi front over north/northeast Minneapolis.

    I simply don’t know enough about it to form an opinion, but as Mike said it seems to only open up more potential for the river.

    buckybadger
    Upper Midwest
    Posts: 8175
    #1784616

    I don’t see this creating a ton of spawning habitat. Think of all the runoff from the greater metro area. Now, take out some dams that slow the water considerably now, and you’re going to see an uncontrolled muddy system that eats away river banks faster than ever. There isn’t going to be an expansive backwater area that floods. It would be a larger toilet effect depositing the silt and sludge from the rapid water even further down river.

    This would be bad news for P4.

    pool2fool
    Inactive
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 1709
    #1784626

    I need more details so I’m hoping the meeting is more than just an open-mic whining into a black hole type of thing.

    They’re talking about a river so shallow you can wade across with miles of rapids for canoes/kayaks/tubes. (Oh Great, urban version of the Apple River here we come!)

    My biggest question is how far downstream will this kind of habitat be the norm? If they could do it in a way that kept the rapids up in p1 while maintaining the second pool, I’m listening.

    This is selfish, but the fact is that pool 2 is really the only place within the twin cities proper where you can run a motor boat. To see that go away would be the unfortunate end of an era in my opinion. There are maybe 30 lakes, numerous ponds, Minnehaha Creek, etc. in Minneapolis and Saint Paul, all of which provide exclusive access for paddler use. Pool 2 is all we got!

    Tom Sawvell
    Inactive
    Posts: 9559
    #1784627

    “You remove the dams and the river scours itself out. The silt is full of heavy metals and dioxins,” said Chapdelaine.

    And just where do they think the dioxins will end up? Maybe insist that these are removed PRIOR to removing the dams/locks?

    Jon Jordan
    Keymaster
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 6019
    #1784634

    My biggest question is how far downstream will this kind of habitat be the norm? If they could do it in a way that kept the rapids up in p1 while maintaining the second pool, I’m listening.

    I would assume the COE would still maintain a minimum 10 foot channel for barge traffic into St Paul and up the Minnesota. That level would be controlled by the Hastings Dam. In other words, there would be little to no change in 99% of pool 2 water level.

    I would imagine the rapids would end somewhere between the Hidden Falls boat ramp and Minnehaha creek. (Probably closer to the creek.)

    -J.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1784635

    Maybe insist that these are removed PRIOR to removing the dams/locks?

    The tune will change before that happens. There is less pollution in the rivers then was once thought. Hence building islands from dredge material. (although it would make sense that sand doesn’t hold pollution)

    pool2fool
    Inactive
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 1709
    #1784638

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>pool2fool wrote:</div>
    My biggest question is how far downstream will this kind of habitat be the norm? If they could do it in a way that kept the rapids up in p1 while maintaining the second pool, I’m listening.

    I would assume the COE would still maintain a minimum 10 foot channel for barge traffic into St Paul and up the Minnesota. That level would be controlled by the Hastings Dam. In other words, there would be little to no change in 99% of pool 2 water level.

    I would imagine the rapids would end somewhere between the Hidden Falls boat ramp and Minnehaha creek. (Probably closer to the creek.)

    -J.

    Thanks for the clarification, Jon. The quote that concerns me is “The roughest areas tapered off where the Mississippi joined the Minnesota River past Fort Snelling.” — if they duplicated that, it takes out Hidden Falls and Watergate.

    On pool 1 the affected parties are essentially the Minneapolis Rowing Club, the U of M rowing teams, the charter cruises out of Bohemian Flats, and the occasional fishing boat or pleasure cruiser who locks up from p2. Overall it’s an incredibly under-used body of water since the downtown Mpls lock closure. I drive along that stretch twice a day on my commute and it’s empty 98% of the time. I have always felt that Bohemian Flats (under the Washington Ave UMN bridge on the West Bank) would be a great place for a DNR access, but the paddler park is much more in line with my expectations around here.

    FishBlood&RiverMud
    Prescott
    Posts: 6687
    #1784642

    Most the dioxins in the river today are from hand soap.

    There’s quite a few articles about dioxins in the sippi.

    This is a large change. I do not have a stance at this point.

    Pools 1&2 never excited me anyway… 95% of the reason is “inland MN laws” are so ridiculous.

    When I read about the tubers and rafters from the cities all that comes into my mind is the amount of garbage they’ll leave in the river. Which don’t excite me any.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1784643

    don’t see this creating a ton of spawning habitat. Think of all the runoff from the greater metro area

    The water that comes from the north is a much cleaner watershed than that after the MN river. It gets cleaner by the year and all the major feeder creeks in the metro are in the process or project starting to further clean them up. This water would be before the crap of the MN dumps in and absolutely would create miles of greater habitat. The initial silt may poo poo on it but it would be cleaned off by the flow not long after.

    Walleyestudent Andy Cox
    Garrison MN-Mille Lacs
    Posts: 4484
    #1784648

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Jon Jordan wrote:</div>
    In 2015, the Corps permanently shut down the Upper St. Anthony Lock to stop the spread of the invasive Asian carp. But the closure also stopped barge traffic — ending the era of heavy commercial use.

    Politics and money have a way of making me sick.

    If I were the owners of the companies that relied on barges for my materials and went out of business because of the closers, I would be suing for being lied to.

    Personally I couldn’t say if a “wild” river is good or bad, but I’m beside myself because of the facade used saying “we must close the dam because of Asian carp”.

    Pure BS.

    Brian…I could be wrong (anyone correct me if I am), but most all the commercial barge traffic to Minneapolis and north was just about over anyway. And the quote “ending the era of heavy commercial use” was just the final chapter as I think the era was over years ago. I think the last major company using barge services was Northern Metal Recyclers and I think they’ve are being pushed out by the surrounding neighborhoods as being the last heavy industry (polluter) in the area.

    As Nick pointed out, there’s a new direction for that area and yes the river is always changing…even if it is the land that lines the bank of the river.

    Funding also just got approved for second phase of the Mississippi front over north/northeast Minneapolis.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1784660

    https://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/news/2018/04/30/northern-metal-recycling-moving-from-north.html

    Northern metals is moving after being fined again last year. They’ve been crapping on N/NE mpls for years. The GAF plant is always cranking away, not sure if they’ve ever used barges. I’ve been cattin off their snags out front for years.

    I agree with BK though. Thought it was a conspiracy years ago. It’s not the fact that a few businesses, as big as polluters they were, should not be pushed out by a cities agenda under the veil of a freaking fish. Principles involved here.

    Walleyestudent Andy Cox
    Garrison MN-Mille Lacs
    Posts: 4484
    #1784661

    <a
    I agree with BK though. Thought it was a conspiracy years ago. It’s not the fact that a few businesses, as big as polluters they were, should not be pushed out by a cities agenda under the veil of a freaking fish. Principles involved here.

    Oh I agree wholeheartedly with you and BK regarding principles. Just pointing out that commercial barge commerce was likely over in that area regardless of the reasons for closing that lock.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1784663

    should not be pushed out by a cities agenda under the veil of a freaking fish. Principles involved here.

    Thank you.

    What was the name of the landscaping company that received it’s rock and such via river? They relocated to with sometype of payoff from MPLS.

    The Corp maintains or trys to maintain a 9′ channel.

    Remember the storm sewers (think road salt) goes directly into the river.

    There’s a reason there are “do not eat fish” signs along this section of the river, just downstream of Mill Ruins Park.

    wormdunker
    Posts: 582
    #1784673

    So apparently they are giving up on the spread of Asian Carp and the like? Removing the locks would essentially open the path for carp spread.

    I would like to see some whitewater yaker’s drilled by a 15-30 lb jumping carp. Could make for anew drinking game, Call your kayak color and watch for them to get drilled.

    This is likely a way for the Corp to hold the DNR financially responsible for the lock closure, threaten to close them or sell them to the State to alleviate expense to the Corp.

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1784675

    apparently they are giving up on the spread of Asian Carp and the like? Removing the locks would essentially open the path for carp spread.

    Coon rapids dam had new gates put in that are carp proof….

    buckybadger
    Upper Midwest
    Posts: 8175
    #1784679

    So apparently they are giving up on the spread of Asian Carp and the like? Removing the locks would essentially open the path for carp spread.

    I would like to see some whitewater yaker’s drilled by a 15-30 lb jumping carp. Could make for anew drinking game, Call your kayak color and watch for them to get drilled.

    This is likely a way for the Corp to hold the DNR financially responsible for the lock closure, threaten to close them or sell them to the State to alleviate expense to the Corp.

    I think we have a winner. The Corps can save money IF the MNDNR would consider taking the locks off their hands. I don’t see this happening, but it is worth a shot. The ~$62 million that a similar removal project cost is a pretty big number considering upkeep is at $1.2 million per.

    There are plenty of places to kayak, float, drink, party, and pollute the waters of the area already. We don’t need an urban apple river or the garbage and other concerns that come with it.

    To each their own, but I don’t like the idea so far. Until there’s some logical unbiased evidence that it will not negatively impact those areas downstream also…I’m against it. I’m old school and don’t like change though, so maybe it’s just the stubborn part of me showing that the wife always complains about?

    …save the cliche’ “the river always changes” line too. The changes from year to year and flood to flood are the norm for anyone who didn’t use the river pre-lock and dams (1950’s and earlier). Removing 60+ year old dams is not the change that most river rats know and embrace on a regular basis.

    Walleyestudent Andy Cox
    Garrison MN-Mille Lacs
    Posts: 4484
    #1784684

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>wormdunker wrote:</div>
    apparently they are giving up on the spread of Asian Carp and the like? Removing the locks would essentially open the path for carp spread.

    Coon rapids dam had new gates put in that are carp proof….

    Wondered what wormdunker was talking about. The locks themselves are already the opening for Asian carp to move upstream. Because how did they get as far as they did without going through locks downstream? Coon Rapids dam is the last line of defense as I understand it too.

    pool2fool
    Inactive
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 1709
    #1784702

    Wondered what wormdunker was talking about.

    (I think) he’s referring to the fact that when they de-activated the upper saint anthony lock in 2015, the primary reason stated was to prevent the spread of invasive carp up river and into mn lakes tourist country. There was a lot of publicized anxiety about the downfall of that economy if carp spread up there, etc. They closed the locks “permanently” in 2015, 2 years after the Coon Rapids dam (upstream) had already been made “carp-proof.”

    The whole thing is complex. Political and community influence over the development of the Mpls waterfront, combined with the USACE wanting out but not without being paid?

    I’m looking forward to the meeting to learn more. The impacts downstream are the most important. Communities miles away shouldn’t suffer as a result.

    Brian Klawitter
    Keymaster
    Minnesota/Wisconsin Mississippi River
    Posts: 59992
    #1784711

    ^ Jackpot… but it really isn’t that complex.

    6 months after they closed the locks there was a FB post about returning it to a wild river. I was ticked off about the facade of Asian Carp being the reason, because I didn’t know what a wild river would do to the area at the time. In fact I’m still not sure.

    I posted my objection on the way they were closed (deceitfully) and some guy went “over the dam” on me and deleted me as a friend. He sure was teed off and let me know about it in no uncertain terms!

    Condos and parks will fill in the businesses that were lost. They bring in more tax revenue anyway.

    Oh well, back to burning one bridge at a time.

    Speaking of that… why not take out the Coon Rapids Dam? Wouldn’t that take care of the Mille Lacs debate? Turn the big pond into it’s natural state…a trickle of what it is?

    Running for cover!

    nhamm
    Inactive
    Robbinsdale
    Posts: 7348
    #1784712

    Has it been 5yrs already since they redid the gates there? Holy crapoly time flies

    wormdunker
    Posts: 582
    #1784715

    Sorry I guess I wasn’t clear. The Corp closed the St Anthony Lock (opened in 1963), which was the deepest of any on the Mississippi, solely as a line of defense against the spread of Asian Carp. Which is a shame because that middle stretch was fun to fish. By eliminating that lock all together in the new proposal they are paving a path right the Coon Rapids dam “Carp Proof” Dam as a sole line of defense.

    I will wait for proof it is actually carp proof.

    Here is a good article about the closure.

    https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/06/08/upper-st-anthony-lock

    In essence what they are saying is that they are willing to sacrifice the ecological the stretch of river from Hastings to Coon Rapids.
    Once they’ve established themselves in the food chain, the invasive carp begin to dominate the ecosystem: As they grow quickly and reproduce prodigiously, they physically displace native species from the best parts of the river habitat. They’re too big for game fish like bass and walleye to eat, which leaves humans as their only predators.

    As they force native fish out of their natural habitat, they also force them from their natural spawning grounds. It’s an assault from all sides on native fish and the river’s ecosystem.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 37 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.