AW: proposed hydro at sunset falls
Printed From: ProfessorPaddle.com
Category: General
Forum Name: Whitewater Forum
Forum Discription: Open Discussion Forum. Whitewater related subjects only
URL: http://www.professorpaddle.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=11292
Printed Date: 19 Sep 2025 at 5:20pm
Topic: AW: proposed hydro at sunset falls
Posted By: AaronS
Subject: AW: proposed hydro at sunset falls
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2011 at 6:17pm
|
Trap and haul...around natural barriers? Wish I was a biologist cause I don't get it...
Oh...and the hydro plant sounds less than desirable, but I dont know anything about their proposed system. ------------- If you're not prepared to be wrong you'll never come up with anything new. |
Replies:
Posted By: water wacko
Date Posted: 07 Oct 2011 at 9:02pm
   no way..------------- "Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." ~Howard Thurman |
Posted By: jP
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 12:13am
|
Under siege. Just like Ernies. ------------- 🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋 |
Posted By: huckin harms
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 8:42am
|
yikes... This would be a very big change. One of the very best things about the Sky is that it is a free flowing river. To dam it would indeed be a great tragedy in my mind. Thanks for the heads up (Okeefe) and hopefully the hurdles to this project will preclude its development. ------------- |
Posted By: septimus prime
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 10:36am
|
Depressing! ------------- Jon Shell Bee |
Posted By: jP
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 10:50am
|
Not to steal the spotlight from the mighty Skykomish, but Here is an op-ed regarding micro hydro on the N. Frk Snoqualmie that would effect Ernies Gorge, Seattle's closest class V run. The plight of Ernies should concern EVERY serious washington boater, even those who don't push the V. You're all encouraged to take a few minutes to inform yourselves and respond to this publication with a letter to the editor. Hete's the link and below I've cut n pasted the op-ed itself. Thanks in advance for taking a look...
http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/east_king/svr/opinion/131077938.html Opinion | Let’s find out if a new dam is right fit for North Fork Oct 04 2011 Do you want to fill a Town Hall sometime? Just announce a meeting to discuss a proposed hydroelectric project anywhere on Washington State rivers. The knee jerk reaction is almost always not just “No!” It’s “Hell, No!” And so it is with the small hydro being proposed on the North Fork of the Snoqualmie River. The late Joyce Littlejohn and her neighbors in Ernie’s Grove said “Hell, No!” to the City of Bellevue when they filed a preliminary permit upon the North Fork in 1982 (FERC P-5926) to include a hydroelectric component with their dam to provide drinking water to the Greater Eastside. She was joined by the folks in the Snoqualmie Valley from North Bend to Duvall. Her point: You just can’t plunk down a 250-foot-high dam, creating a reservoir impounding over 2,300 surface-acres of water upstream from an historically flood-prone valley. Just 10 years before, in the 1970s, the US Corps of Engineers proved that a similar project on the Middle Fork would not be safe from breaching. Joyce was right. I knew the Littlejohns, and on behalf of Weyerhaeuser, I joined her and many others in the environmental community in objecting to the Bellevue project, which was eventually rejected by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and rejected again on appeal. FERC’s rejection of the Bellevue proposal was not a statement against hydroelectric power. It was a rejection of that particular proposal. When I was serving on the King County Snoqualmie Valley Citizen’s Advisory Committee in the mid-1980’s discussing appropriate land uses in the forest zone, we considered the future needs of green energy sources, including small hydro (or Micro Hydro as they are called today). We considered the small environmental footprint that they offered and almost “turn-key” aspects of their day-to-day operations. Since the passage of the King County Comprehensive in 1989, hydroelectric generation facilities have been a permitted use in the forest zone. King County Title 21A.08.100, Para. C14 (dated Dec. 2010) limits the height of the diversion weir to eight feet above the stream bed, and 30 feet across with no more than three acres of surface water impounded. King County Code limits the penstock length, the size of the turbine house, and road access. I support the concept of green energy, particularly when it is done in a smart way. But it doesn’t matter what I support. None of this works without the full support of the property owner: Hancock Forest Resources Group. We all may remember the widely publicized event when Hancock conveyed their development rights (TDR) to King County. It was a magnificent gesture indicating that Hancock did not acquire the Snoqualmie Tree Farm for residential conversion. Unless otherwise stated in the deed, TDRs usually pertain to the total number of residential lots per acre permitted under KCC Title 21A within the array of zones inside the transaction. For example, Hancock most likely would have retained development rights to non-forest uses such as mineral extraction and other permitted mixed uses compatible with forest management. They clearly will have a front seat in these proceedings. The North Fork project, like many, many others, is usually maligned at the outset by well-meaning people. Once the picture is more clearly understood, these same people wonder why we don’t have more of these small hydroelectric projects. And I fully understand my environmental friends who would get rolled over time and again by proponents of small hydroelectric projects if they didn’t take an initial hard stand. But I see in some news reports there might be room for negotiation by the North Fork proponents when talking about “flexible flow rates during certain times of the year.” I think Joyce Littlejohn and the community would support the idea of a small hydroelectric facility on the North Fork of the Snoqualmie, so long as the environmental, engineering and financial assessments show the project to be safe and viable. I’d like to see the Black Canyon folks be given the chance to prove whether or not their proposal is feasible. • Dick Ryon is a former land planner with Weyerhaeuser and a North Bend resident. ------------- 🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋 |
Posted By: water wacko
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 12:00pm
Posted By: jP
Date Posted: 08 Oct 2011 at 4:52pm
|
Not sure. ------------- 🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋🐋 |
Posted By: LisaF
Date Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 8:54pm
| Um, there's no dam planned for Sunset Falls, BTW, so don't get your knickers all knotted up about it . . . |
Posted By: water wacko
Date Posted: 10 Oct 2011 at 10:19pm
Posted By: LisaF
Date Posted: 11 Oct 2011 at 8:02am
|
I read the AW article linked at the top; it stated that water would be held upstream of Eagle Falls, which may or may not be accurate. That section is very prone to flooding, and there are a few homes up there, and it's quite far from Sunset Falls (with one other waterfall in-between) so I'm not sure I believe what was written.
-Tom O'Keefe, if you're reading this , can you provide some clarification? There are a couple of public meetings planned (the one I'm planning on attending is on Oct. 20 in Sultan, but there's another in Everett on ____? When I opened their link on meetings the page was blank . . .) I think anyone who has an interest in this should plan on attending one of the meetings. From everything I've read, it appears that the major issues (in no particular order) are: aesthetic (potential for dewatering the falls in summer/fall), access over private roads, and noise from the powerhouse. |
Posted By: water wacko
Date Posted: 13 Oct 2011 at 5:31am
 Oct 20th in Sultan. I couldn't live with myself if I didn't do something about this. If you care about free flowing rivers at all!! attend this meeting!! This isn't some micro-hydro on a class V+ Unrunnable gnar, this is the backyard run on the SKYKOMISH RIVER!!!!! I hope to see hundreds of boaters and river users at this one. For me this one counts more than any other. The Sky is a special drainage. C'mon!!!------------- "Don't ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who have come alive." ~Howard Thurman |
Posted By: AaronS
Date Posted: 13 Oct 2011 at 6:35am
|
The hard part about trying to be an advocate is that the opportunities they give you to advocate are during times when most people who work for a living are working for a living. 9:00 on a Thursday? In Sultan? I'm not sure how much of the "public" they want to hear from. ------------- If you're not prepared to be wrong you'll never come up with anything new. |
Posted By: Dale
Date Posted: 13 Oct 2011 at 7:16am
|
Occupy Sultan!!!
|
Posted By: LisaF
Date Posted: 13 Oct 2011 at 7:29am
|
Tuesday, Oct. 18th from 6-8 PM at PUD building, 2320 California St., Everett. If you plan to go, please RSVP Dawn Presler at
DJPresler@snopud.com |
Posted By: LisaF
Date Posted: 13 Oct 2011 at 7:29am
| Clarification: if you plan to go to either meeting, please RSVP to Dawn |
Posted By: huckin harms
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2011 at 1:08pm
|
I just got back from the meeting held in Sultan. Pretty informative. It is going to be quite the 'uphill' process for SnoPUD to pull this idea off. A handful of outspoken Northfork Riversite folks are against this project for many different reasons. Hopefully as word gets out more folks will get 'in line' to object to this project. It is presently being offered as a low impact green source of energy. Clearly this will have quite a big impact on those living in that tract. Renewable yes, green NO!
------------- |
Posted By: James
Date Posted: 20 Oct 2011 at 2:10pm
|
|
Posted By: okeefe
Date Posted: 21 Oct 2011 at 4:18pm
|
The dam would be about 8' high. Typo in my initial post--it will be upstream of Canyon Falls and not Eagle Falls. I was up yesterday with local property owners to tour the site. The project would blast apart the seal launch at the base of Sunset Falls for the powerhouse (for those who remember when we had access). I will acknowledge that they are working to minimize the footprint but have to ask the question: is this really the place to build a hydropower project when you have over 200 existing dams (e.g. Cle Elum) in this state where hydro could be installed? It is the only state scenic waterway in Western Washington, recommended as a Wild and Scenic River by the Forest Service, and identified as a Protected Area from hydropower development by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. It's not the right place for this project.
------------- Thomas O'Keefe PNW Stewardship Director American Whitewater |