Dam removal

The latest conservation news, issues, or concerns in our backyard, city, state, or country.
Post Reply
lonninsj
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:48 pm

Dam removal

Post by lonninsj »

There's a movement in various parts of the country to remove dams to restore waterways and allow for the movement of fish to their natural spawning areas. Has there ever been a discussion of removing Bucksnort on Trout Run?

brntrout
Posts: 3131
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Dam removal

Post by brntrout »

Yes, there has been discussions on Dam removal many times on this board.

While it may appear the Dam on Trout Run is problematic for trout passage to spawn upstream its really not. Larger trout do successfully jump the Dam. If the Dam was removed it would allow more forage fish to travel upstream.

While many anglers would like to see the Dam removed the residents of Fillmore County do not! There has been attempts to remove the Dam in the past but it always gets shot down at the County level! The reason is they view the Dam as a historical site.

The Lanesboro Dam is another story it does impede fish passage. But, again Fillmore County residents view it as a historical site. The Lanesboro Dam is being restored this coming summer at a cost of 4+ million dollars

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm

Re: Dam removal

Post by S.T.Fanatic »

In my opinion there isn't anything in this country I would classify as historical.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

High Stick
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 6:19 am
Location: Driftless and The West

Re: Dam removal

Post by High Stick »

And just because something is old doesn't mean it's historical. What a waste of $4 million dollars. Could hire lots of summer help to brush and go after invasive/noxious weeds in the Driftless instead.

User avatar
TFO5wt
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 8:33 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Dam removal

Post by TFO5wt »

Exactly. This is an even worse expenditure of taxpayer dollars than horsebleep HI.

Marc Reisner's Cadillac Desert is a very informative book on water rights and dams. While it focuses on the West, and was written in the mid-80s, it is a quite telling and introspective look at how the dam building craze came about and its effects. I highly recommend it.
Simply put, people fish because it's fun

Cutthroat
Posts: 243
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:42 pm
Location: Two Harbors, Minnesota

Re: Dam removal

Post by Cutthroat »

Dams are loved by some locals---until they blow out. No dam is permanent-especially in places like SE Minnesota where flooding and siltation are constantly occurring.

brntrout
Posts: 3131
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Dam removal

Post by brntrout »

Cutthroat,

In most cases dams in SE MN won't be removed until they washout, and that's because it would be too costly to rebuild them, FORTUNATELY!

The Lanesboro Dam is not being restored in the true sense. Their actually going to build an entirely NEW DAM up against the upstream face of the old dam,while leaving the historic face of the old dam in place. Evidently Lanesboro people/Fillmore County folks love their dam, they fought politically to save it and find funding to restore it successfully!

The old dam isn't very stable anymore it leaks water, which shoots out the face of the dam in many locations. The Dam was build using giant cut rock blocks set and locked in place in an arch configuration which I heard was a standard Dam design of the time. Now days the whole structure is no longer tightly held together. I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of disaster happens during the reconstruction process especially with the unpredictable severe flooding we get now days?

If by happenstance, it does blow out during reconstruction there always that chance they won't have the funding to rebuild it then?

S.T.Fanatic
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:42 pm

Re: Dam removal

Post by S.T.Fanatic »

one can only hope. And hope nobody is hurt in the process.
“What more delightful avocation than to take a piece of land and by cautious experimentation to prove how it works. What more substantial service to conservation than to practice it on one's own land?” Aldo Leopold

brntrout
Posts: 3131
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:26 am

Re: Dam removal

Post by brntrout »

S.T.Fanatic wrote:
Mon Feb 24, 2020 12:08 pm
one can only hope. And hope nobody is hurt in the process.
I certainly wouldn't want anyone getting hurt either!

Of course, if the Dam went out the DNR ( probably Eco Services) would be forced to "restore" ( don't like using that term because its not accurate) the entire area upstream of Dam that was part of the old reservoir area. Unfortunately, I don't have any faith in them doing anything other than a crude flood control project which would provide little if any significant trout habitat.

Post Reply