Saucon Creek dam removal

afishinado

afishinado

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
16,140
Location
Chester County, PA
FYI, found this notice on another site. A good thing IMO, especially the stream enhancents that go along with the dam removal.



"September 17, 2009

Contact: Ryan Walt, Regional Outreach & Education Coordinator
717.626.9081 or rwalt@state.pa.us

Saucon Park Dam Removal

Elm, PA – It has been several years in the making but a dam on Saucon Creek in Northampton County is set to be removed. Work on the Saucon Park Dam located in Hellertown, may begin as early as this week. The dam which is located on Saucon Creek is a tributary of the Lehigh River.

The funding for this project came from two grants that were received. The 1st from American Rivers through their NOAA Community-Based Restoration Program Partnership Grant in the amount of $25,000. The 2nd is from DEP’s Growing Greener Funding in the amount of $64,000.

The dam is owned by the City of Bethlehem and is being removed to avoid liability and maintenance issues due to flooding. Project partners include the Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission, URS Corporation, Urban Research and Development Corporation, Northampton County Sportsmen’s Clubs, Northampton County Conservation District, and Wildlands Conservancy.

In addition to the dam removal, there will be 800 plus feet of stream bank stabilization work completed using devices such as a J-hook rock vane and rootwads."
 
:pint:

Agreed this is very good and the stream improvements on top of it.................*claps*

:-D Tender loving care and this stream could be even better than it is
 
Anyone fish this stretch since the dam has been removed? Have fish been holding there?
 
JeffS wrote:
Anyone fish this stretch since the dam has been removed? Have fish been holding there?

I'm not familiar with this particular dam, so I can't say whether its removal will be beneficial for trout or not.

But there is a very common assumption that ALL dam removals will benefit trout populations. That assumption is definitely wrong. Each dam is different. In some cases dam removal is very benecial to trout populations. In other cases it is highly detrimental. It depends on a lot of individual factors about the dam and the stream and the specific location, etc.
 
troutbert -

In my humble opinion, dam removal is beneficial to all fish populations.

Obviously, we are on a forum that leans towards trout, but, again in my humble opinion, if trout were meant to be in a given waterway...they are going to be in that waterway - regardless of a dam being present or not.

You know dams ruin fish populations...where are you coming from with this post?
 
JeffS wrote:
troutbert -

In my humble opinion, dam removal is beneficial to all fish populations.

Obviously, we are on a forum that leans towards trout, but, again in my humble opinion, if trout were meant to be in a given waterway...they are going to be in that waterway - regardless of a dam being present or not.

You know dams ruin fish populations...where are you coming from with this post?

Where I'm coming from is:

1) In some cases dam removals increase trout populations.

2) In some cases dam removals decrease trout populations significantly and essentially permanently.

It depends on the physical conditions of the stream, floodplain and dam itself.
 
Here is the deal on this dam removal -

The dam in question is within the TT Special Reg Section. In additional to the dam removal, bank stabilization and in-stream habitat work is being done above the dam. Trout have been holding in the run where the dam was removed and they have taken to the habitat structures upstream. This should be no surprise since this section of Saucon Creek is loaded with fish.

troutbert - on what good trout stream in PA have trout populations been significantly reduced or eliminated as a result of a dam being removed?
 
JeffS wrote:
Here is the deal on this dam removal -

The dam in question is within the TT Special Reg Section. In additional to the dam removal, bank stabilization and in-stream habitat work is being done above the dam. Trout have been holding in the run where the dam was removed and they have taken to the habitat structures upstream. This should be no surprise since this section of Saucon Creek is loaded with fish.

troutbert - on what good trout stream in PA have trout populations been significantly reduced or eliminated as a result of a dam being removed?

The removal of the West Penn Power Dam on Spring Creek greatly reduced the trout habitat and populations.

The removal of the McCoy Dam on Spring Creek also greatly reduced the trout habitat and caused a very significant reduction in trout populations. The recent work in August will help alleviate the situation somewhat, but the trout habitat is still not nearly as good as when the dam was there.

Trindle Springs? Maybe someone else who lives closer can comment on the removal of that little milldam with the nice plunge pool that swarmed with trout. How has that gone?

Many people assume that if you remove a dam that habitat conditions will return to a normal, natural condition afterwards. In many cases that does NOT happen, for complicated reasons.
 
troutbert you know better than this!

Dam removal is twofold - you remove the dam, let the stream take its course, and then come back to do habitat work.

The fish population at the McCoy Dam site is really suffering...

http://www.fishandboat.com/images/fisheries/afm/2009/3x03_09spring.htm

Do you fish a lot of plunge pools created by dams?
 
I try not to get involved in these discussions. However, I felt the need to clarify misinformation regarding the removal of McCoy Dam and Cabin Hill Dam on Spring Creek. In both cases, PFBC staff noted a significant increase in trout biomass after removal of the dams. At McCoy, the PFBC documented a three-fold increase in trout biomass. This was prior to the completion of recent habitat work. We fully expect this trend to continue
as fish respond to the habitat enhancement. A detailed report of fish response is on the PFBC website under http://www.fish.state.pa.us/images/fisheries/afm/2009/3x03_09spring.htm. I've been involved in over 150 dam removals accross the state. I never observed long-term negative impacts to trout populations only positive responses.

R. Scott Carney
Chief, Division of Habitat Management
Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission
 
well there ya go :)
 
According to the NC area fisheries manager, they did not survey the plunge pools below McCoy Dam, and they did not survey the pools in the meander bends near the gas station. They only surveyed the "flat" behind the dam.

In the case of West Penn Power dam, they did not survey the pool behind the dam. They started in the riffle above that pool and went upstream.

Do you think the data provides a meaningful analysis of the effects of the dam removal if the deep pool habitats (which were eliminated by the dam removal) are omitted from the surveys?

And why do you suppose they were omitted?
 
troutbert wrote:
According to the NC area fisheries manager, they did not survey the plunge pools below McCoy Dam, and they did not survey the pools in the meander bends near the gas station. They only surveyed the "flat" behind the dam.

In the case of West Penn Power dam, they did not survey the pool behind the dam. They started in the riffle above that pool and went upstream.

Do you think the data provides a meaningful analysis of the effects of the dam removal if the deep pool habitats (which were eliminated by the dam removal) are omitted from the surveys?

And why do you suppose they were omitted?

The plot thickens......
 
Note that in the survey data shown for the McCoy Dam site, it states that only 500 feet of stream were surveyed. That's not very much.

Standard PFBC surveys are around 300 meters.

And the length of stream that had significant alteration from the dam removal might be somewhat a matter of opinion, but it is roughly one mile long (5280 feet.)

Doing a before and after survey of 500 feet, when the affected area was about a mile long, and not including the largest pool areas, means that they did not do a serious study of the population effects of the McCoy Dam at all.

It's too bad that neither the PFBC nor Penn State University did a serious before-and-after trout population study at the McCoy dam site or the West Penn Power dam site.
 
You know nearly every habitat work to put structure into stream is blown out by floods. some very soon after they are installed, others may last for years. But even the ones that last for years aren't permanent and will either be left to deteriorate, or repaired. Without substance forested buffers along streams and a wide undeveloped flood plain nothing is safe from floods.
 
The plot thickens......

It does but I already know the ending :lol:
 
troutbert wrote:
Note that in the survey data shown for the McCoy Dam site, it states that only 500 feet of stream were surveyed. That's not very much.

Standard PFBC surveys are around 300 meters.

And the length of stream that had significant alteration from the dam removal might be somewhat a matter of opinion, but it is roughly one mile long (5280 feet.)

Doing a before and after survey of 500 feet, when the affected area was about a mile long, and not including the largest pool areas, means that they did not do a serious study of the population effects of the McCoy Dam at all.

It's too bad that neither the PFBC nor Penn State University did a serious before-and-after trout population study at the McCoy dam site or the West Penn Power dam site.


Troutbert,

Mr. Carney replied to your post and certainly appears to be the right person to contact to share your observations and concerns. Sharing knowledge and data can only enhance understanding, and perhaps make projects such as these more beneficial to the stream in the future.
 
The work on Saucon Creek was completed on 10/9/09. There was a lot of wood added to the upper portion of the park. I am happy to report that these structures are holding fish and several nice trout were caught along this stretch as work was being completed.
 
Absolutely not true, you need to know what your doing and do it right!
 
An individual that has removed over 150 dams across PA made a post on the board.

Of the 150 dams the individual has removed, three have come under scrutiny in this thread. Two of the dams are on Spring Creek, which is one of the best streams in the state, and the other site was posted with a question mark so we won’t debate it.

Despite resounding evidence that dam removal is beneficial to trout (and other fish populations), people questioned the positive effects of dam removal on Spring Creek by saying dam plunge pools were not surveyed, stream survey samples were not long enough, and, I think, in-stream habitat structures are useless unless wide undeveloped floodplains remain intact.

I would guess such insignificant issues regarding two dams out of 150 is a positive thing.

We got a little off track, but the initial point of this thread was to point out the work being done along Saucon Creek. If you haven’t been there yet to check out what has been done make a trip. The engineer and equipment operators did a tremendous job along the stream in an effort to improve in-stream habitat and fish populations.
 
Back
Top