Duck Hole Dam

[lumberzac]

Well stated Grumpy. The historic aspect is probably going to be the best way to preserve the dam. The current dam, as I understand, was built by the CCC in the 1930’s. I’m not sure how well this will fly but maybe there could be a push to try and get the dam on the historic register. If successful, this could add protection to the dam legally as well as help in getting grant money to restore the structure.

Form a friends group, similar to many of the fire towers and other historic sites within the Adirondack Park. Show the DEC, that there is a group of people willing to fund restoration work to the dam as well as provide volunteers. If the DEC sees that there is interest in saving the dam and they don’t have to fully fund and provide all of the staff to save it, it is more likely that there position will change.

 

[Warren]

I would agree that the historical approach is the best reason to preserve the dam. That said, shouldn't a real biologist/ expert be consulted as to the benefit of having a wetland restored? Such open lands are rare in that area (to my knowledge).

I do have fond memories of Duck hole, saw the largest King of all Frogs there sunny himself at the foot of the dam.

 

[TCD]

A couple points:

There is a pretty substantial wetland/meadow along the trail towards the Sewards, a couple miles west of Duck Hole. Also, small Hunter Pond and a neighboring unnamed swamp a couple miles towards Upper works from Duck Hole are teeming with wildlife. Also, there are some good sized wet meadows along Roaring Brook on it's way into Duck Hole. So while there are a lot of ponds (like Henderson, Preston and DH), there are also quite a lot of wetlands.

I agree with several posters who say that the historical aspect is the best channel. (Although in the end, it will come down to $, like everything else in Albany.)

I went to the Save Duck Hole site. Folks at Save Duck Hole should be careful of the facts in their presentation; the two pictures depicting:

"Duck Hole in 2000" "Duck Hole in 2005"

"In the above photos you can see the deterioration of the dam in just the last 5 years."

imply that the change (disappearance of the bridge) happened simply through "deterioration." While the bridge had in fact deteriorated, the fact is that it's gone because it was ripped out by DEC.

Whether you feel that the bridge should be restored, or whether you feel that the dam should be removed, it's only money and politics that will make it happen. Don't expect anything to happen fast. Look at the simple bridge over John's Brook. How many years has that been pending repair? My understanding is that it is a petty interagency squabble that is keeping that from getting done.

 

[Wildernessphoto]

We were in to Duck Hole over Memorial Day weekend. Here's some shots for those who have never been there. This is MacNaughton Monday Morning across Duck Hole.

 

[Wildernessphoto]

Here's the sunset on Saturday evening:

 

[Frosty]

Either it's wild or it isn't.

Building and constructing shouldn't be allowed. It isn't elitist or paranoid. Nature is good enough as it is. Let it be.

One person wants to reconstuct a dam, another wants to build a resort.

Both look at the constructing as an improvement on nature. The only difference is the entirely personal opinion as to which is prettier: a man-made lake or a man-made resort.

In my opinion, the lake wins hands down, but what makes my opinion better than the resort group? Why just a dam for Duck Hole? Why not other dams other places?

Either it is wild or it isn't. If you want land to be wild and for nature to rule, good. If you want to make improvements on nature, fine. But don'e expect everyone's idea of what is an improvement to match yours.

 

[Grumpy]

. . . don't expect everyone's idea of what is an improvement to match yours.

Excellent point, wherever you stand on the question.

G.

 

[Wildernessphoto]

Either it's wild or it isn't.

Building and constructing shouldn't be allowed. It isn't elitist or paranoid. Nature is good enough as it is. Let it be.

One person wants to reconstuct a dam, another wants to build a resort.

Both look at the constructing as an improvement on nature. The only difference is the entirely personal opinion as to which is prettier: a man-made lake or a man-made resort.

In my opinion, the lake wins hands down, but what makes my opinion better than the resort group? Why just a dam for Duck Hole? Why not other dams other places?

Either it is wild or it isn't. If you want land to be wild and for nature to rule, good. If you want to make improvements on nature, fine. But don'e expect everyone's idea of what is an improvement to match yours.

There's 2 main issues with maintaining Duck Hole from a legal aspect. One is the States responsibility to protect and maintain shorelines under article 14 section 4 of the state constitution:

http://www.adirondack-park.net/history/article14-text.html

Sec. 4. The policy of the state shall be to conserve and
protect its natural resources and scenic beauty and encourage the
development and improvement of its agricultural lands for the
production of food and other agricultural products. The
legislature, in implementing this policy, shall include adequate
provision for the abatement of air and water pollution and of
excessive and unnecessary noise, the protection of agricultural
lands, wetlands and shorelines, and the development and
regulation of water resources. The legislature shall further
provide for the acquisition of lands and waters, including
improvements thereon and any interest therein, outside the forest
preserve counties, and the dedication of properties so acquired
or now owned, which because of their natural beauty, wilderness
character, or geological, ecological or historical significance,
shall be preserved and administered for the use and enjoyment of
the people. Properties so dedicated shall constitute the state
nature and historical preserve and they shall not be taken or
otherwise disposed of except by law enacted by two successive
regular sessions of the legislature.

Also the APA recognizes these dams as conforming structures to be maintained.
http://www.adirondack-park.net/history/political/apa.html

"Man has affected wilderness areas the least out of any of the other six classifications, and therefore wilderness areas have the most restrictions placed upon their use. The only conforming "structures and improvements" are lean-tos, privies, existing dams, and foot trails and their respective bridges and signboards. Ranger cabins, aside from the Lake Colden outpost, are non-conforming, and should be removed."

The APA understands that these dams need to be maintained and considers them "Conforming Structures" that can be maintained and improved in a wilderness area.

What it boils down to is not the law(forever wild legislation), or the dam not being a conforming structure(APA)... but money. The State is picking and choosing what it's going to maintain and what it's going to let go despite it's legal obligations under the constitution.

I believe the State needs to replace this dam as part of its obligation under the law.

 

[Saratogan Filly]

Are beavers trainable?

 

[Wildernessphoto]

Just bald ones...

 

[stoopid]

Backcountry Heritage Association has been formed to spearhead projects like restoring Duck Hole Dam. Anyone interested in helping with causes such as this are encouraged to drop us an email through the site and we'll be in contact to let you know when projects come up. We're also incorporating and will be listed as a not-for-profit with New York, so we can do fund raising activites and be eligible for some of the available grant money. If we can get the cash together for the DEC maybe things can move forward.

 

[Petmac]

Let the dam crumble I say. The Adirondacks are famous for there lack of dams. That lake needs to be back in its original state (before the dam was even built). What we have there now is dam, or should I say a silt trap that has been collecting sediment run off from all the tributaries since the dam was built. All this sediment has settled on the floor of the lake and against the wall of the dam blocking and stopping invertebracy and habitat and feeding. Any fishing folk know that joy of stalking a Brook Trout as it fights the current of a free river for a position in the shade of a near shore vegetated area. It’s the natural cycle, no were in the cycle should a dam stop the progress of the aquatic world. It does not take a degree in hydrology to know that an undammed lake, river, or stream is far healthier then a dammed one. At duck hole there are no real stakeholders, except for that people that believe they should see a lake every time they come in viewing distance of it. Aesthetics is not a good enough reason to keep this contraption in working order. Think of the Aquatic life people not just the human, and what the human thinks is pretty. LET YOUR RIVERS RUN FREE!!!!!

In fact I was glad to hear that Marcy Dam is now out. Go to hear if you ask me. Let the native Brook Trout back up stream and let the slit flow down and become evenly dispersed over time. No one is going to benefit from the rebuilding of the dams. The Dacks are full of water; we don’t need to build catchments for it. There is no valleys or towns right below each damn that are in fear of flooding each year. There are no privet resorts that use the lake to drive their clientele around in boats. Damn the dams. Why do you want them? If it is for the bridge to cross the bodies of water, then we can build you a bridge that does no hold back water.


simply
peter

 

[Tom Rankin]

In fact I was glad to hear that Marcy Dam is now out.

Please elaborate...

 

[Petmac]

sorry maybe i sould have said: In fact I was glad to hear that Marcy Dam is going out and braking down.

simply
peter

 

[lumberzac]

sorry maybe i sould have said: In fact I was glad to hear that Marcy Dam is going out and braking down.

simply
peter

Actually, Marcy Dam was repaired last year after the breach.

 

[Tom Rankin]

Actually, Marcy Dam was repaired last year after the breach.

Yes, the above discussion lead me to believe it had developed a new problem. And since it's made partly of wood, it almost certainly will eventually have more problems.

As someone already said, it's ok for it to revert to a natural area, but a lot of people rely on the bridge there.