Happy New Year Grand Lakers!

For the final two months of 2007 to have just quietly passed by, 2007 will be remembered as on of the more tumultuous since the closing of that final gate in the Pensacola Dam in 1940. Shortly after the first of the year, when the GRDA announced plans for meetings to gather public input on the pending shoreline management plan, the stage was set for some serious sparks to fly. From the onset of the stakeholder working group meetings, it was obvious the anti-development crowd had orchestrated the upper hand when it came to the SMP draft.

Individuals and groups like ours, who were not on the same page as the naysayers had their opportunity to voice their concerns about the plan. As we all know, the opposition to the plan developed by the stakeholder working groups was virtually unanimous. GLUE, and many others, used these meetings as a forum to address our concerns for the negative impact this plan would have on economic development and user freedoms which have made this lake Oklahoma’s best kept secret. Those favoring much more stringent controls and federal involvement said little to defend the plan while utilizing their podium time attempting to discredit the authority and any one else who wasn’t in lock-step with their thinking.

After the dust settled from the public meetings, the authority responded by doing a massive rewrite of the plan put forth by the stakeholder working groups and the consulting firm hired to develop the plan. After another round of public meetings to answer questions regarding the changes made to the plan, it was finally taken to the GRDA board in October. A board vote on the new plan was delayed for thirty days to allow time for the resource agencies to comment on the plan. Resource agencies carry a lot of clout at the FERC and are made up of state and federal wildlife agencies, the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, the Department of Interior and others. Most of us walked out of that October meeting thinking the plan would be approved at the November meeting and be winging its way to D.C. before the holiday season. But as ESPN college football commentator Lee Corso has been know to say to his sidekick Kirk Herbstreight, “Not so fast, my friend.”

First we were told the vote would be delayed until the December meeting because the comments from the resource agencies had not all been received in a timely manner. As December approached, I was first told there wouldn’t be a December board meeting for various reasons that were so mundane I don’t even remember what they were. Then we learned there were meetings being held with some of the resource agencies and the authority which would ultimately lead up to their final comments on the plan. Now were told any vote by the board on the plan has been delayed for six months to allow the state and federal wildlife groups to conduct studies to determine the impact of the plan on fish and fowl, but  I learned last Friday they may well be looking at more than what’s best for the fish and fowl.

It seems they want to re-introduce two controversial issues which I thought had been dead and buried in the final meetings of the SMP working groups. The wildlife people, both state and federal, had always favored a dock density plan to determine when a particular area of Grand Lake would be deemed overdeveloped. At the time, their formula for determining a state of overdevelopment was fuzzy at best. But the end result would go something like this; once an area was categorized to dense with docks, no more would be permitted unless one was removed. Of course they have no plan on how to monitor this program other than to tell the authority it’s their responsibility.

The other issue is the much ballyhooed carrying capacity study to determine if there are two many boats per surface acre on Grand Lake. From what I gather, they are pushing for a new study even though one was already done by the GRDA and their consulting firm, Kleinschmidt and Associates. That validity of that study was challenged by the anti-development crowd since it didn’t reveal anything that wasn’t already common knowledge by Grand Lakers who had ever spent any time on the water during the three major summer holiday weekends. Party Cove, Dripping Springs, Woodard Hollow and perhaps Duck Creek were over limit for boats on those weekends. Other than that, Grand Lake was no where near capacity throughout the rest of a year. Brady and Company were really hoping the carrying capacity would serve as the cornerstone to limit the future growth of Grand Lake.

The fact the resource agencies are embracing both the carrying capacity study and the dock density issues certainly raises some serious questions. Dr. Darrel Townsend, who heads up the eco-systems group for the authority, was very vocal in his opposition to a dock density approach to dock permitting during the SMP stakeholder working group meetings. He cited the man power requirements and technical expertise that would be needed to manage such a conceptual approach as the main drawbacks. And since the carrying capacity study didn’t really seem to be a hot button for the wildlife guys before, it’s probably not rocket science to speculate they may well be representing the interest of another interest group.

Since my requests for a meeting or telephone call from the GRDA’s chief executive officer to clarify what the future might hold have been ignored, let me speculate a little more. Has the authority sold out to the resource agencies in exchange for some favorable comments on the SMP?  What other reasons could there be to re-open discussions about a dock density plan, which they opposed, and a new carrying capacity study? Furthermore, of what use would a new carrying capacity study be if done in the next six months and before the peak season? Is this but one of many delays yet to come? I wish I knew! It would certainly appear the tail is once again wagging the dog. As we learn more, I’ll keep you advised.

Pending Lake Rules Change

We also recently learned of some revisions to the existing lake rules. As most of you know, the ones in place now are extremely rigid, restrictive and probably almost impossible to enforce. These current rules were adopted, in my opinion, by the authority to avoid further controversy and legal action regarding activities on the shoreline of Grand Lake while the SMP was being developed. It’s also my opinion they embraced a set of rules similar to what was contained in the vegetation management plan of other SMP’s developed by their consulting firm, Kleinschmidt and Associates. That was definitely a knee jerk reaction to some litigation revolving around a developer removing trees in the back of Duck Creek.

We’re anticipating the changes to be somewhere midway between the existing ones and what’s contained in the new plan. It got to be better than the current situation.

See Ya’ In Tulsa?

If there’s an interest, I would like to host a gathering of our membership during the week of the Tulsa Boat Show to discuss ideas and concerns you may have. We have a long ways to go, and now it appears longer, on the shoreline management plan. We’re still active on the lake level issue and I’d like your ideas on some other issues for 2008. A meet and greet session would certainly provide an opportunity to develop our game plan for 2008.

Now, get back to those bowl games and have a great 2008!