Feds may consider river structures to boost lakes

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may take another look at placing structures at the bottom of the St. Clair River to boost water levels in Lakes Huron and Michigan.
Associated Press
Feb 5, 2013

 

Keith Kompoltowicz is watershed hydrology chief with the Army corps district office in Detroit. He says Congress authorized the corps years ago to put structures in the river to compensate for dredging that lowered levels on the two lakes. But then came a high-water period, and nothing was done.

Now, the lakes are at their lowest levels since record-keeping began in 1918, and many people in the region are demanding action.

Kompoltowicz says the Corps may request funding from Congress for a study. But it couldn't begin for several years and would compete with other projects for money.

 

Comments

Good 2 B Me

This is like saying that I might need a filling, but need to do studies and fight for money while my tooth rots. I am guessing that maybe Washington D.C. ought to take the Great Lakes Region serious for once.

iamrevolutionary

Didn't Kasich OK the bill that allow certain companies to take billions of gallons of water from Lake Erie last year?

grandmasgirl

I don't understand this. What will that do to the other lakes and rivers? Will their water levels stay the same?

pntbutterandjelly

Hi. Please scoll down until you read my comment to your post. Thanks.

Huron_1969

Seeing bureaucracy in action is like watching molasses go uphill in a winter storm - nothing will get done

T. A. Schwanger

Excerpts from::::
Lake Erie Water Levels
by D. Mark Jones

Crustal Rebound

Many people know that glaciers contributed to the creation of the Great Lakes. The ice in Ohio reached as far south as the present-day Ohio River. When the massive deposits of ice retreated, Earth's crust beneath began to rebound, similar to a couch cushion rebounding when you stand up after sitting on it. That rebound continues to this day, on the order of only inches per century. But the rebound is unequal. For example, geologists have recognized the remnants of ancient beaches in northern Ohio. If one were to follow the same ancient beach trace from northeastern Ohio to Buffalo, New York, the elevation of that ancient beach is well over 100 feet higher in New York because of greater crustal rebound there. Such tilting of one end of a lake basin higher than another causes water to pile up at the lower end of the basin. Over a century, this factor alone can cause water levels to rise the better part of a foot.

Some scietists believe the rebounding is quicker than originally thought.

Commenter

I thought the level of Lake Erie was controlled at Niagara Falls?

pntbutterandjelly

I agree with "grandmasgirl". My current understanding is that the smaller lakes (Erie and Ontario) may suffer at the hands of the other, upstream, lakes. If this is true I ask, "Why should our two lakes be negatively impacted by these manmade obstacles to natural water flow?" The backbone to our local "industries"; fishing, Cedar Point, the islands and all the ripple effects of the tourism dollars they generate will suffer. This is not only unfair but also unwise. I would also think a shallower Lake Erie would lead to a higher concentration of pollutants, algae blooms, fish die-offs and generally de-stablize the entire eco-system in and around its shores. I am open to comments.