Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Eightmile Lake dam emergency
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Ringangleclaw
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 1559 | TRs | Pics
Ringangleclaw
Member
PostSun May 20, 2018 8:34 am 
Would have been fun watching the helicopter fly in that mini-ex.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Klapton
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 940 | TRs | Pics
Klapton
Member
PostTue May 22, 2018 9:36 pm 
Matt Lemke wrote:
NacMacFeegle wrote:
The unsustainable growth of our population is a problem
I completely agree with this sentiment...will you join me in killing ourselves to help with this issue? embarassedlaugh.gif Like somebody famous once said: "The best way to help save the planet is to kill yourself"
I chose not to reproduce.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ringangleclaw
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 1559 | TRs | Pics
Ringangleclaw
Member
PostTue May 22, 2018 9:47 pm 
Klapton wrote:
I chose not to reproduce.
I'm sure the ladies applaud

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
HitTheTrail
Member
Member


Joined: 30 Oct 2007
Posts: 5475 | TRs | Pics
Location: 509
HitTheTrail
Member
PostThu Sep 27, 2018 6:28 am 
The latest development.... Excavator stuck in the wilderness by Tony Buhr Sept. 26, 2018, 5:47 p.m. LEAVENWORTH — How to remove an excavator trapped in the middle of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, miles from any roads? That’s the question that the Icicle-Peshastin Irrigation District and the U.S. Forest Service are asking. The irrigation district flew the excavator up to Eight Mile Lake in May to do emergency maintenance on the earthen dam there, said Tony Jantzer, Icicle Peshastin Irrigation District manager. Eight Mile Lake is about 40 miles west of Leavenworth and 3.3 miles from the nearest Forest Service road. The irrigation district would now like to drive the excavator out of the wilderness area, Jantzer said. But the Forest Service has some concerns about the impact driving it out might have on the environment and what laws it might violate, said Holly Krake, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest public affairs officer. It is working with the irrigation district to identify which route it plans to use to drive the excavator out of the wilderness area. “We need to work in partnership with the irrigation district to identify that route,” Krake said. “Based on the proposal from the irrigation district, the Forest Service would be able to identify any potential environmental issues and any laws or regulations that might weigh in on that proposed action.” Part of the problem is that both agencies have rights over Eight Mile Lake. Eight Mile Lake has been a reservoir maintained by the irrigation district since the 1920s, Jantzer said. But the U.S. Congress also designated Eight Mile Lake as part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness area in 1976. The Alpine Lake Wilderness is 414,161 acres in size and includes parts of the Wenatchee and Snoqualmie National Forests, on both sides of Highway 2. Wilderness are given more protection than national forests and activities within them are highly restricted. In 1990 the irrigation district gave the Forest Service the rights over the reservoirs, Jantzer said. But it kept an easement to do maintenance and repair work, he said. The irrigation district believes it can drive the excavator out of the wilderness area without permission from the Forest Service, he said. But it is still working with the Forest Service to find the best solution for both parties. The Forest Service, though, wants the district to complete a permit application, Krake said. After the district completes the application the Forest Service can review any potential impacts to the wilderness. “At this point in time we are working with the irrigation district and looking forward to their completion of that application so we can analyze those effects,” she said. Alpine Lakes Protection Society President Rick McGuire said his organization doesn’t support any mechanized use in the wilderness area, but recognizes that the irrigation district might have a legal right to access reservoirs. “Our position is that we don’t like seeing them drive things in and out of the wilderness, but there isn’t much we can do about it if they have a legal right to do it,” McGuire said. The Alpine Lakes Protection Society was one of the key organizations behind the creation of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness in 1976. The society continues to advocate for protection of the wilderness. If the Forest Service does not allow the irrigation district to drive the excavator out of the wilderness it may consider leaving it, Jantzer said. It cost the district close to $100,000 to fly the 12,000 pound 305 CAT excavator into the wilderness area, he said. The excavator itself costs $24,000 and the district plans on submitting an application with the Forest Service to construct a new dam at Eight Mile Lake anyway. “The district feels it is not cost effective to fly that thing out of there,” Jantzer said. “Especially when we know that we will be applying for a permit this year to replace the dam next year. If we can’t walk it out of there we’re going to leave it.” The Forest Service has requested that irrigation district submit a plan as to how they plan to remove the excavator, Krake said. But she would not say what, if anything, the Forest Service would do if the irrigation district decided to leave the excavator. Reach Tony Buhr at 509-664-7123 or buhr@wenatcheeworld.com.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9525 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostThu Sep 27, 2018 8:19 am 
I know the FS has threatened big fines against Snowmobile riders who's machine dropped in a crevasse on Mt Baker's Easton glacier if they didn't extract it. Many countries require a "return trip ticket" to be presented at customs to be allowed entry... So did the FS issue a permit to fly this thing in, without requiring a provision for extracting afterwards? Or is the district trying an after the fact cost savings?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 13005 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostSat Sep 29, 2018 10:11 pm 
Wilderness Act of 1964 Sect. 4 C wrote:
"...except as necessary to meet minimum requirements for the administration of the area..."
Unless it's considered practicable and reasonable to repair the existing dam or construct a new dam by employing the use of shovels, it very well could be considered reasonable that the use of a 6-ton excavator is the "minimum requirement".

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
CC
cascade curmudgeon



Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 648 | TRs | Pics
CC
cascade curmudgeon
PostWed Oct 03, 2018 12:01 pm 
RandyHiker wrote:
Or is the district trying an after the fact cost savings?
Not to worry, we (taxpayers) will be paying for it. All of the IWG projects will be financed from "public sources." District will put excavator expenses under emergency dam repair.

First your legs go, then you lose your reflexes, then you lose your friends. Willy Pep
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9525 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostThu Oct 04, 2018 7:14 pm 
CC wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
Or is the district trying an after the fact cost savings?
Not to worry, we (taxpayers) will be paying for it. All of the IWG projects will be financed from "public sources." District will put excavator expenses under emergency dam repair.
Isn't the entire project "emergency" dam repair? What I don't know is to what extent this emergency is just deferred maintenance that was deferred too long vs the IWG had wanted to do the repairs long ago but since it wasn't an emergency the USFS "minimum tools"" wilderness policy required the work to be done with hand tools or some other wacky scenario.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
CC
cascade curmudgeon



Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 648 | TRs | Pics
CC
cascade curmudgeon
PostSat Jan 16, 2021 5:53 pm 
Randito wrote:
What I don't know is to what extent this emergency is just deferred maintenance that was deferred too long vs the IWG had wanted to do the repairs long ago but since it wasn't an emergency the USFS "minimum tools"" wilderness policy required the work to be done with hand tools or some other wacky scenario.
It's the former. In any case, here we go: Ecology is currently soliciting comments on the scoping for new dam. Remember, this is all going to paid for with "public monies." https://ecology.wa.gov/About-us/Get-to-know-us/News/2020/Dec-18-Eightmile-Dam-scoping https://ecology.wa.gov/Water-Shorelines/Water-supply/Water-supply-projects-EW/Icicle-Creek-strategy/Eightmile-Dam

First your legs go, then you lose your reflexes, then you lose your friends. Willy Pep
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
trestle
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 2093 | TRs | Pics
Location: the Oly Pen
trestle
Member
PostFri Jan 22, 2021 3:59 pm 
Randito wrote:
So did the FS issue a permit to fly this thing in, without requiring a provision for extracting afterwards? Or is the district trying an after the fact cost savings?
Good questions, and seems like they should have been the first questions asked in the article, but what a nightmare of jurisdiction. A little further in, thanks to CC, and it seems like the water district may have ultimate say on rebuilding the dam. But how did the mini-ex even make it there without a plan to get it back out? This is odd at best.

"Life favors the prepared." - Edna Mode
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
CC
cascade curmudgeon



Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 648 | TRs | Pics
CC
cascade curmudgeon
PostFri May 05, 2023 11:14 am 
Ecology is soliciting comments on the EIS for the Eight Mile Dam rebuild if anybody is interested: https://ecology.wa.gov/Water-Shorelines/Water-supply/Water-supply-projects-EW/Icicle-Creek-strategy/Eightmile-Dam Tthe summary on the announcement is somewhat inaccurate, as can be seen in previous posts on this thread. The state of emergency was declared before the spring melt-off as a higher runoff was expected because of the Jack Creek fire scar. The major erosion of the dam had happened years earlier, in 1990, and had never been repaired by the irrigation company that owns it. In related news, initial funding from the state for the overall Icicle Working Group project, of which this dam repair is a part, has been received by Chelan county https://kpq.com/chelan-county-signs-2-million-with-state-to-support-icicle-watershed-area/. Your tax dollars at work.

First your legs go, then you lose your reflexes, then you lose your friends. Willy Pep
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Eightmile Lake dam emergency
  Happy Birthday mountainflamingo!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum