GLUE Members Report – Aug. 19, 2010

The following lake level editorial will appear on WWW.grandlakenewsonline.com today and will be distributed to 22 area publications. Legislative luncheon is at 11:30 at Mulberry’s Restaurant in Langley. We’ll be expounding on lake level and the sorry condition of the on/off loading docks which used to be by the areas public boat ramps.

Cheers from Grays Hollow

Grand Lake “Levelgate”… Week Two!

Last week’s comments on the history of the annual dropping of the Grand Lake level for the purposes of millet seeding, to benefit migratory waterfowl, got lots of atta-boys from your average “LarryLaker,” but to date, hasn’t struck a nerve in the political arena. But as I once told Kevin Easley, to tell me no, I’m uniformed or I just don’t agree with you is an age old American option, which separates our country from most of the others… but for a guy with an ego like mine, being ignored becomes a source of irritation. I’m not alone when it comes to being ignored about the annual issue of lake level.

Over the past eighteen years, I’ve written about this ongoing issue more times than I can count. During my seventeen years as owner/publisher of The Chronicle of Grand Lake, known to some of you old timers previously as The Grand River Chronicle, the annual barrage of complaints by lakers in late August were as predictable as the hot weather associated with the last full month of summer. But some have done more than complain to a local newspaper about a lake issue they seemed to consider more important than the usual riff with the lake patrol or a difficult time getting a dock permitted.

We ain’t bright enough to be syndicated, or anything like that, but we do distribute pieces originated by Grand Lake News Online to some 22 media outlets in northeastern Oklahoma. Some print ‘em, some don’t.  Last week we received an e-mail from John Clark after he saw our thoughts on this subject in The Grove Sun and posted online by the Grand Lake Business Journal.

Clark, a Grove resident and Grand Lake stakeholder, had grown weary of seeing his dock grounded in late August and suspending his boating season for at least sixty days. Last year, prior to the lowering of the lake, he donned his private investigator hat and started to seriously do his home work on this issue.  In late summer, he submitted a detailed letter, complete with photos of his grounded dock, to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission outlining his concerns. He followed that up with a September 3, 2009, extended telephone conversation with the FERC staff. He obviously had gotten the attention of this giant federal bureaucracy and received a letter in response on September 23, 2009.

With John’s permission, I’m going to share portions of their response below so we can all get the flavor of dealing with this issue. The first portion of their letter restated Clark’s concerns. The remainder of the response was divided into two sections; Regulatory Summary and Regulatory Response as follows:

Regulatory Summary

In a September 3, 2009 telephone conversation with Commission staff, you indicated you familiarity with the rule curve balances. We appreciate the time you have devoted to this material, and will only briefly review the pertinent issues and requirements here.

On April 24, 1992, the Commission issued a license to GRDA to operate the Pensacola Project, which includes Grand Lake. License article 401 requires GRDA to maintain target reservoir elevations according to an operating rule curve. The elevations under the 1992 rule curve ranged from 741 to 745 feet PD. Under that rule curve, the reservoir was lowered from 745 to 741 feet PD, beginning July 6. License article 404 required GRDA to seed mudflats with millet while the level was down to provide food and cover for waterfowl and create bass habitat in the spring.

Upon the request of GRDA, the 1992  rule curve was amended in a December 3, 1996 Commission order, increasing recreational boating opportunity by delaying the summer drawdown, so that the lake remains up to two feet higher for about 3 weeks. In approving the amendment, the Commission added article 411 to the license to mitigate environmental effects under the new rule curve. Article 411 required GRDA to develop a Fish and Waterfowl Habitat Management Plan.

GRDA’s Management Plan was approved in a May 22, 2003 Commission order. The order deleted license article 404 and the requirement to annually seed millet. The plan established a Fish and Wildlife Technical Committee made up of representatives from federal and state resource agencies and GRDA to manage wildlife mitigation and enhancement work. Each year, the Technical Committee identifies appropriate projects, which may or may not include millet seeding. The Commission is not involved in annual millet seeding decisions. The Commission relies on the expertise of the Technical Committee to identify projects that will best serve fish and wildlife each year based on prevailing conditions, including those that affect millet success.

Response to Concerns

We appreciate your concerns regarding water levels at the Pensacola Project’s Grand Lake. As you know, water at Grand Lake is managed to fill a number of needs. The Commission works to not favor any party or interest, but rather attempts to ensure the GRDA complies with the 1996 rule curve, which was approved after considering its effect to all significant reservoir uses. The 1996 rule curve provides up to three more weeks of higher water levels for boating recreation, while significantly shortening the period in which millet can be successfully planted if so chosen by the Technical Committee.

An amendment of license article 401 and the 1996 rule curve for Grand Lake would require an amendment request from GRDA supported by significant consultation and cooperation from state and federal resource agencies, as well as local municipalities and stakeholders. Any proposal to change the rule curve that reduced seasonally available storage capacity would affect flooding issues and would need to include significant modeling and consultation with the U.S. Corps of Engineers regarding flooding and flood water storage. It would be noticed for public comment, which the Commission would carefully consider, and then be submitted to a rigorous review required under the National Environmental Policy Act.

As you may know, GRDA applied to the Commission to amend the rule curve for Grand Lake on January 26, 2004, requesting that article 401 be revised to allow reservoir target levels to be maintained at 744 feet PD throughout the year. The Commission found that the application did not contain necessary consultation, or provide necessary information and analyses, for consideration of such an amendment. In a letter to GRDA dated March 16, 2004, the Commission detailed the deficiencies of the application. GRDA chose to withdraw its application in June 2004.

The Commission will always be willing to examine further amendment requests from GRDA, and we certainly encourage active participation by stakeholders such as yourself. We appreciate your input on this issue and your comments are part of the public record for the Pensacola Project.

Thank you again for providing your input on the matter

As we can see, as a result of John Clark’s experience, what appears to be the simple task of raising the lake level by a mere foot with the stoke of a pen is anything but that. And if the FERC response is read carefully, it reveals the original modification of the rule curve to allow for the millet seeding of a few acres of mud flats has been embraced by other stakeholders with their own set of circumstances. Next week we’ll examine the specifics of the flood interest, like in nearby Miami, along with the myth that an elevation of 741’ would quickly go away if thousands of acres, along with a bag full of money, were awarded to the wildlife interests in the way of mitigation.

See Ya’ Around the Pond!