More Lutsen - Poplar River Issue

By -
We recently contacted State representative, C. McFarlane, looking for some clarity on the passed bill regarding the Lutsen Resort water consumption bill.

McFarlane informed us that the bill they passed will,  for the the first time, limit the resort's use of water from the stream.  Once that annual allocated limit is met, water will not be allowed to be pumped for the remainder of that that year.  She also stated that the permit issued to Lutsen has a 5 year time limit to look for a long term solution. 

Below is the language from the conference committee report:
  Sec. 101. CONSUMPTIVE USE OF WATER.
53.11Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.265, subdivision 3, the legislature
53.12approves of the consumptive use of water under a permit of more than 2,000,000 gallons
53.13per day average in a 30-day period in Cook County, in connection with snowmaking
53.14and potable water. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, the permit for the
53.15consumptive use of water approved under this section shall be issued, subject to the
53.16fees specified under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.271, without any additional
53.17administrative process to withdraw up to 150,000,000 gallons of water annually for
53.18snowmaking and potable water purposes. The permit authorized under this section shall
53.19be suspended if the flow of the Poplar River falls below 15 cubic feet per second for more
53.20than five consecutive days. The permit authorized under this section shall be reinstated
53.21when the flow of the Poplar River resumes to 15 cubic feet per second or greater. The
53.22permit shall be for a term of five years.

In our email correspondence to Rep. McFarlane we also asked what studies or reports were cited that show that the amount of approved water usage will have no impact to the watershed or fishery.  We were referred to Rep. Dill to answer that question.  We will post any reports or studies that surface from Rep Dill.

To all our readers, we welcome constructive comments to our posts, but as stated in the previous posts we are not going political on this. we plan to be rational and get all the facts. If the facts state harm to the fishery is possible, then let's fight with all we have.  Republican, Independent, Democrat does not matter here.  In a fight you are either with us and the fishery or against us. It will be that simple from Minnesota Steelheader. 

To those that have commented and stated you are not political, then proceed to negatively name one political party 3 times in a single paragraph... well, as you can see your comments are not published.... sorry.  Keep it real and we will happily share your thoughts with our readers.  Keep it political and your letters and paragraphs will evaporate into the cyber abyss.  Not fair?  Come on guys! 

In the mean time we will continue to track this frustrating issue and do our best to bring unbiased clarity to our reports. 

Comments

NMF said…
Couple Items:


Little concerned about the proposed language just for the simple fact that 15CFS is really low, even for the Poplar. That and we're talking about winter presumably. So if the flow hypothetically went to 0cfs for 4 days during a stretch of -10, seems like the potential for freezeout would be extreme. And that would occur before the 5 day threshold was met to stop drawdown or withdrawal.


Second item - Math guys/gals help me out here. I ran the historical flow numbers for the Poplar such as I have. My assumption would be November 1st - April 30th for snowmaking= 182 days. 150 million gallons per annum during a 6 month period is 825176 gallons per day or 34341 gallons per hour.


Poplar mean flow for those months is as follows: January> 33cfs/888,686gph, February> 27cfs/727,107gph, March> 28cfs/754,036gph, April> 133cfs/3,581,673gph, November> 79cfs/2,127,460gph, December> 374cfs/1,346,494gph


So say they took all of their daily water at once: Jan=2.42cfs (Surplus), Feb=-3.6cfs (defecit), Mar=-2.7cfs, April=102.41cfs, Nov=48.4cfs, Dec=19.39cfs.


If they took their daily water allowed over 24hrs (34,341gph): Jan=32cfs, Feb=26cfs, Mar=27cfs, Apr=132cfs, Nov=78cfs, Dec=49cfs. What's interesting is those numbers are almost exactly a 1cfs reduction in flow vs. the monthly mean if you carried that out to a daily value.


Couple important questions to answer:

What's the minimum flow threshold necessary to support the entire food chain (micro/macroinvertebrates, aquatic plants etc.), native brook species (darters etc.), up to and including trout and migratory fish (Steelhead, coho, chinook, pinks and coasters) at any point below the pumping station(s)?


Does water withdrawal affect Ph levels, particularly with regards to acid shock due to rapid snowmelt etc?


What are the 3, 5 and 10 year maximum, mean and minimum historical water withdrawal rates for snowmaking at Lutsen?


I'm sure more questions will come to mind. Feel free to chime in...
NMF
10:30 PM
Zaniel said…
If Lutsen only took 150mil gallons/182 days every day of the season, there would probably not be a problem.

But, they are getting a special permit which allows them to take "more than 2 million gallons per day average in a 30-day period." In other words, this permit is only necessary if they expect to take AT LEAST 60 million gallons in some 30-day period, even if they are ultimately "limited" to 150 million gallons for the year. (I use quotes because they have drawn 5 to 10 times their "limits" for the last decade. I don't see any reason why now is the time for them to start complying. They are more likely only limited by how fast they can pump and how many new routes they can cover with snow.)

15cfs is the Q90 for February, the lowest flow month of the year. (The year-round Q90 is 21cfs.) 15cfs = 9.7 million gallons per day. At that rate, it will take 6+ days for 60 million gallons of water to flow past Lutsen's pumps.

Remember, 60 million gallons is not their LIMIT for the month. This permit and legislation is not even necessary unless they foresee taking MORE than 60 million gallons in a month. If Lutsen goes for a long enough time without fresh snow, they could decide the need to use 70. . . 75. . . 90 million gallons in a month.

When the Poplar is flowing at an extremely low 9.7 million gallons per day, Lutsen can essentially draw as much water as they want for the next 5 days with impunity. Think they can get close to drawing 48.5 million gallons (9.7mil x 5) in 5 days? Not that they would need to draw anywhere near that much before a freezeout would occur.
4:59 PM
NMF said…
Zaniel-


All great points. I only ran the snowmaking scenario because that's the only usage we have a seemingly good handle on.

What we don't know, and what I'd really like to see are the other actual water usages in combination with snowmaking. Again those being 3, 5 and 10 year maximum, mean and minimum historical water withdrawal rates. (I mis-typed in my original post, it should have said all water consumption, not just for snowmaking.) They talk about "Potable" water which implies year-round pumping, but can still be a pretty amorphous term depending on what they do with that water once they get it.

Zaniel- Just curious... What's the source of your exceedence numbers?

Regards-
NMF
12:16 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Shorecasting the North Shore

By -
Image
Shore casting the North Shore of Lake Superior can at times appear to be a daunting task, it is, however, an enjoyable and very effective way to fish the big lake.  River mouths Most of us have seen the numerous fishermen lining the banks near the French or Lester rivers. Why? Because these are consistently good places to fish. A beginning shore caster would be smart to start their quest fishing river mouths, particularly early in the season when steelhead, Kamloops and lakers can be found in abundance. The river plumes provide warm water and a steady flow of bugs which fish like. Due to the fairly shallow water found at most mouths, it’s best to fish them in low light. Target these areas early in the morning and late in the evening or on a dreary overcast day. You will be less noticeable to the fish and they will be less apt to spook.  Seeing how there are over 25 potential stream/river mouths to fish it would be crazy to ignore these great areas. Fly and hardware...
Read more

Pom-Pom Eggs - The Inexpensive Glo-Bug

By -
Image
One of the most useful and productive fly patterns you can carry when you fish the runs for steelhead, kamloops and salmon are eggs. Any time free drifting eggs are in the stream is a good time to fish them and, they can be fished with any type of equipment from Fly to Spinning rods. A wise SE Wisconsin guide once told me, "Any pattern will catch fish, as long as it has an egg in it." As with all flies, you will go through A LOT of them. One option is to purchase them, but at a dollar a pop or more, making your own is a simple and inexpensive proposition. In a short amount of time and with just a few simple tools, you can crank out eggs by the hundreds at just pennies per piece. I’m going to assume that you know how to do some basic tying; but if you don’t, this is a good pattern to start learning with because it will teach you some of the basics: How to Start Your Thread , how to position materials, and the Whip Finish . On Sizing I use the metric standard because it is eas...
Read more

No Treble Hooks!

By -
Image
 Years ago all an angler had was a paper regulation booklet and the word from fellow anglers and DNR officials stating that treble hooks are not allowed in our north shore tributaries below the posted boundaries.  This should be enough, right? Today we still have those regulation booklets and honestly they have come a long way in clarifying the dos and don'ts regarding our north shore fishery.  We also have dozens of signs along our rivers explaining the dos and don't as well as specifically stating the use of treble hooks. If that was not enough, anglers can simply search the internet.  Heck, these days, you can search stream side right from your phone.  In fact this post will be available streamside to anyone willing to take the time to search the web or scan the UR code from our report cards that went out this spring. Pictured above is a photo of a a crankbait that is in many o' bass anglers tackle arsenal. Heck, I have a few myself. T...
Read more