Comments on: Oklahoma Dams Go Without Maintenance http://kosu.org/2011/08/oklahoma-dams-go-without-maintenance/ The State's Public Radio Fri, 24 May 2013 17:14:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 By: paul http://kosu.org/2011/08/oklahoma-dams-go-without-maintenance/comment-page-1/#comment-121850 paul Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:05:21 +0000 http://kosu.org/?p=101139#comment-121850 When this article was forwarded I was excited to see Oklahoma's smaller lakes and ponds getting attention form the press. However my expectations soon fell with confusing and ambiguous reporting on an important topic. This article is confusing because it easily mixes the idea of hazard rating with dam integrity. Hazard rating only deals with what is downstream and whether a that structure is insurable while an engineering inspection (which is required for every high hazard dam) speaks to integrity of the dam. Implications of the lack of maintenance by the NRCS were vaguely referenced and left to the reader to surmise. My expectations were to hear many of these high hazard dams have deficiencies (identified in the inspections) and how many people downstream are no longer insurable for flooding. I was also disappointed with the article's ambiguity regarding dam maintenance. Does this mean the dam integrity is at risk or that sediment needs to be removed to recover lost volume or that the water has gone from clear to brown or it is full of seaweed or potentially toxic blue-green algae? I'm sure the NRCS has a clear idea of what maintenance constitutes but that was not reported. It is nice you are thinking about Oklahoma's lakes and ponds but I was disappointing that an article of that length displayed such a lack of depth. The information given in the article would have been better expressed within one paragraph. . paul When this article was forwarded I was excited to see Oklahoma's smaller lakes and ponds getting attention form the press. However my expectations soon fell with confusing and ambiguous reporting on an important topic.

This article is confusing because it easily mixes the idea of hazard rating with dam integrity. Hazard rating only deals with what is downstream and whether a that structure is insurable while an engineering inspection (which is required for every high hazard dam) speaks to integrity of the dam. Implications of the lack of maintenance by the NRCS were vaguely referenced and left to the reader to surmise. My expectations were to hear many of these high hazard dams have deficiencies (identified in the inspections) and how many people downstream are no longer insurable for flooding.

I was also disappointed with the article's ambiguity regarding dam maintenance. Does this mean the dam integrity is at risk or that sediment needs to be removed to recover lost volume or that the water has gone from clear to brown or it is full of seaweed or potentially toxic blue-green algae? I'm sure the NRCS has a clear idea of what maintenance constitutes but that was not reported.

It is nice you are thinking about Oklahoma's lakes and ponds but I was disappointing that an article of that length displayed such a lack of depth. The information given in the article would have been better expressed within one paragraph. .

paul

]]> By: Ron Elliott http://kosu.org/2011/08/oklahoma-dams-go-without-maintenance/comment-page-1/#comment-121849 Ron Elliott Tue, 16 Aug 2011 18:43:00 +0000 http://kosu.org/?p=101139#comment-121849 This is a very real problem that needs to be addressed with increased funding for dam maintenance and rehabilitation. This is a very real problem that needs to be addressed with increased funding for dam maintenance and rehabilitation.

]]>