Plan 2014 (High Lake Levels)

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#61
Hamilton ‘Beach Crawl’ celebration will have to wait

Jun 21, 2017 02:22 by Matthew Van Dongen 
Hamilton Spectator|



Hamilton's official clean beach coming-out party will have to wait.

The city sought expressions of interest from private companies earlier this year to run a series of "Beach Crawl" events aimed at fighting the impression that it's not safe to swim in Hamilton.

Only one unidentified company made a pitch, a new city report shows, and the proposal came with a subsidy request for $114,000 in city cash.

City tourism managers proposed an alternative Wednesday that would see municipal marketing staff work on a ramped-up "awareness campaign" for Hamilton beaches for now.

Coun. Sam Merulla, who pitched the Beach Crawl idea, endorsed the staff compromise with the proviso he'd like to see the campaign grow in future.

Merulla said his preference was to see a "visible celebration" of Hamilton's beaches to combat the "false impression" created by the city's history of industrial harbour pollution.

(The city has permanently closed Bayfront beach because of unsafe bacteria levels, but all Lake Ontario and conservation area beaches in the city were posted as safe to use earlier this week.)

But Merulla added he's not keen on providing a "subsidy" for a privately run event.

The Ward 4 councillor also said he'd like to revisit the beach party concept in a year without record Lake Ontario water levels.

At the moment, most of Hamilton's lake and harbour beaches have largely disappeared underwater.

The city will likely have to spend tens or hundreds of thousands repairing shoreline and waterfront trail infrastructure once water levels recede.

mvandongen@thespec.com

905-526-3241 | [MENTION=650]matt[/MENTION]atthespec
Full article;
https://www.thespec.com/news-story/7384370-hamilton-beach-crawl-celebration-will-have-to-wait/
 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#63
Lake Ontario levels are falling – but damage costs are rising

Jul 04, 2017 06:00

by Matthew Van Dongen 
Hamilton Spectator



Record Lake Ontario water levels are slowly falling — but the bill to fix associated flood and shoreline damage in Hamilton is going up.

A new update e-mailed to city councillors estimates the cost of "known remedial actions" for flood and rain-damaged city infrastructure between $4.5 million and $6.8 million.

But that does not include the cost of long-term work on the saturated escarpment Rail Trail or the final bill to replace eroded sections of the Waterfront Trail between Princess Point and Bayfront Park – some of which remain underwater.

The lake hit a historical high-water mark of 75.88 metres above sea level in May – more than a metre above the average level last year. The rising, storm-lashed waters flooded low-lying lakeside homes, devoured beaches and took a bite out of popular shoreline trails.

At the same time, Hamilton was inundated with May rain that caused Spencer Creek to overflow, undermined roadways and contributed to mud and rock slides on the Kenilworth and Sherman Access roads.

Lake levels have since fallen about 11 centimetres since the May peak, in part due to increased outflow into the St. Lawrence River recently approved by the international body that controls water levels on the Great Lakes.

Even still, the water remains too high for a city-hired specialist to determine the extent of the damage to flooded sections of the popular harbourfront trail, according to the memo from public works head Dan McKinnon.

The trail has been closed since late April and will stay that way "for the foreseeable future," McKinnon said. Repair costs won't be known until a damage study and remediation plan is finished, but staff expect the total to exceed $1 million.

Temporary repairs to minor collapses on the Rail Trail, meanwhile, have allowed the popular walking and cycling path to reopen. But experts continue to drill bore holes to test for underlying "instability," meaning the jury is still out on the extent – and cost – of eventual long-term repairs.

Other weather-related challenges include a near-doubling of average daily flows of sewage and storm water through the city's treatment plant as well as delays and increased costs for a project meant to stabilize the eroding banks of Chedoke Creek alongside Hwy. 403 and at one of the city's oldest landfills.

The city has inquired about the possibility of provincial disaster assistance to help with the growing tab, but so far it doesn't look like the city will hit the "necessary threshold," said McKinnon.

He said the city expects to apply for future provincial help on flood prevention projects once it finishes an ongoing flooding and drainage master plan study.

mvandongen@thespec.com

905-526-3241 | [MENTION=650]matt[/MENTION]atthespec

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/...vels-are-falling-but-damage-costs-are-rising/
 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#64
The white line on the pier wall shows where the lake level was at it's highest;



From last October, water is below the rail;



Recently install rock barrier to protect a section of the Trail;

 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#65
Hi Scott
this latest news blurb you posted, got me thinking and looking for some information. The last wettest Spring on record was 2000, it was reported that from April to end of June we saw over 373 ml of rain. I have tried to find the number for this years spring amount. Just lots of news more about the lake level height. Wondering if you know where I can look or if you have the amount that fell this year? I checked the lake level for the spring of 2000, April to end of June and the highest level was 75.26. It would be interesting to compare the numbers between these two years. I did look at the lake level prior to spring and you can definitely see this year the IJC was holding back more water in Lake Ontario, especially towards the end of February. The question I pose if I am correct in showing that the IJC is responsible for the flooding this spring due to their new mis managed plan, why doesn't the City of Hamilton and all of the others impacted go after the Federal Govt, seeing that it was a Federal board that made the decision- ie " Man made flooding ".
 
Last edited:

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#66
Evening Scott,
I found the historical data tab on the Environment Canada web site, no need to go digging for it. I did some quick math and when I have some more time to research it, I will post the results. But my immediate reaction is WTF. This spring rain amount compared to the spring of 2000 in nearly half, yes half. I want to take some time to now look at other areas around the great lakes before I post again but I am do not like the numbers and how the IJC responded. City Of Hamilton better start getting some help from the Federal Govt, if this is how the IJC handled this years spring rain fall.
 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#67
Evening Scott,
I found the historical data tab on the Environment Canada web site, no need to go digging for it. I did some quick math and when I have some more time to research it, I will post the results. But my immediate reaction is WTF. This spring rain amount compared to the spring of 2000 in nearly half, yes half. I want to take some time to now look at other areas around the great lakes before I post again but I am do not like the numbers and how the IJC responded. City Of Hamilton better start getting some help from the Federal Govt, if this is how the IJC handled this years spring rain fall.
It could be that it isn't so much how much rain we received, but how much the seaway got. It seemed there was a nasty storm running up the east coast every week which dumped significant amounts of precipitation. The lake was getting backed up once the thaw started and it didn't help that IJC had the levels too high to begin with.
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#68
It could be that it isn't so much how much rain we received, but how the seaway got. It seemed there was a nasty storm running up the east coast every week which dumped significant amounts of precipitation. The lake was getting backed up once the thaw started and it didn't help that IJC had the levels too high to begin with.
Valid points, that can repeat itself next year. Here is the monthly Environment Canada summery link, neat tool that breaks down every aspect of the weather for any given month.

http://climate.weather.gc.ca/prods_servs/cdn_climate_summary_e.html

and this is the link you gave me, that shows the Great Lakes water level

http://www.tides.gc.ca/C&A/network_means-eng.html

With these two links you can compare the wettest spring of 2000 vs this year (2017). The historical data has even a column showing how much snow fall was received. If you add this all together, 2017 got approx. half of the precip we saw in 2000. Now you have to ask yourself how bad could if have been if we had even a bit more rain? IJC defends their actions of holding back the water to save the wet lands on both sides of the dam and didn't open them fully until water levels down stream had gone down. If they had released them early it would have damaged Montreal and parts of Quebec that were hit with flooding. Since I started this thread, I admit, I didn't know much about the powers that be controlling the Great Lakes, so I took to task to read up on as much information I could find. From what I have to found, make me believe the current 2014 Plan the IJC is working from is not a good solution. If not changed City of Hamilton will keep spending millions on damage repair.
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#69
Yesterday I was given an opportunity to learn more about the lake levels and why this year we flooded vs the previous years. Our city's Councillor Mr Chad Collins took the information and concerns I have about the lake levels to the powers that be. Even though the historical data I presented shows we did not have the wettest spring on record, it still did not capture other data that influences our lake. The email response we received shows at the end of it, that Lake Erie has been the main reason for the high water levels this year. Lake Erie has been pumping a tremendous amount into Lake Ontario this spring. I sent Scott a copy of the email in hopes he can post the numbers here on the thread for all to see. I still look at it and wonder what the out come this year would have been if they had kept Lake Ontario pre spring water levels down. I did ask one question that I have not seen been asked to date, I asked if we will flood again next year or the years after that. He replied that we have " a somewhat higher chance of recurrence " due to the above normal water levels in the Great Lakes. So don't put away your rubber boots, we may need them again next spring or even as early as this fall with the storms that come then.
 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#70
Good morning, sir: Our colleagues at CCIW’s Boundary Waters Issues Unit relayed your message onto me for a response. I am the Canadian Regulation Representative of the International Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Board.

Attached, please find a series of plots showing the precipitation anomalies to date this year, by month, including July’s to date. It is very clear to see that precipitation has been very high this year, particularly for Lake Erie and especially Lake Ontario. The very good news is that, to date, July has been quite dry. Let’s all hope that trend continues.

That said, precipitation is but a single piece of a complex jigsaw puzzle that helps to explain why Lake Ontario levels are, say, high. Let’s take a quick look at some of the main pieces to this whole picture below, comparing values from early on in 2000 to those so far in 2017…

LAKE ONTARIO MONTHLY MEAN WATER LEVELS (m IGLD 1985)
***** 2000 2017
JAN 74.50 74.62
FEB 74.45 74.82
MAR 74.58 75.00
APR 74.82 75.35
MAY 75.10 75.80
JUN 75.26 75.81
AVG 75.78 75.23

LAKE ONTARIO MONTHLY MEAN OVER-BASIN PRECIPITATION (mm)
*** 2000 2017
JAN 64 73
FEB 62 61
MAR 52 74
APR 109 115
MAY 132 152
JUN 142 109
AVG 94 97

LAKE ONTARIO MONTHLY MEAN OUTFLOWS (m3/s)
***** 2000 2017
JAN 5940 6440
FEB 5900 6890
MAR 5820 7390
APR 5940 7610
MAY 6770 8560
JUN 7520 10310
AVG 6320 7870

LAKE ONTARIO MONTHLY MEAN TOTAL INFLOWS [NET TOTAL SUPPLIES] (m3/s)
**** 2000 2017
JAN 5940 8360
FEB 6040 8150
MAR 6930 8580
APR 8240 11020
MAY 8540 11030
JUN 8420 9640
AVG 7350 9460

At first glance, yes, the average precipitation values from 2000 compare relatively well to those from 2017. It has only been slightly “wetter” over the Lake Ontario basin for the first six months this year. So why has the lake been an average of 55 cm higher and why is it currently 44 cm higher than at this time in 2000? Let’s break down the much-higher inflows above and have a closer look. Total inflows are comprised of the outlows from the upper Great Lakes (i.e., through Lake Erie, down the Niagara River and Welland Canal into Lake Ontario) plus what is known as the net basin supplies (the algebraic sum of precipitation over the lake surface, plus runoff from streams tributary to Lake Ontario, minus evaporation directly off the lake surface)).

LAKE ERIE MONTHLY MEAN WATER LEVELS (m IGLD 1985)
***** 2000 2017
JAN 173.82 174.29
FEB 173.75 174.40
MAR 173.83 174.47
APR 173.95 174.64
MAY 174.07 174.82
JUN 174.18 174.83
AVG 173.93 174.58

LAKE ERIE MONTHLY MEAN OUTFLOWS (m3/s)
***** 2000 2017
JAN 5390 6470
FEB 5190 6690
MAR 5240 6650
APR 5540 7040
MAY 5800 7440
JUN 5960 7350
AVG 5520 6940

LAKE ONTARIO MONTHLY MEAN NET BASIN SUPPLIES (m3/s)
***** 2000 2017
JAN 550 1900
FEB 860 1460
MAR 1690 1930
APR 2700 3890
MAY 2740 3570
JUN 2440 2290
AVG 1830 2510

You can clearly see that the outflows from Lake Erie have been much higher this year than in 2000, owing to the fact that Lake Erie has been an average of 65 cm higher and is currently also 65 cm higher than at this time in 2000. On average, outflows from the upper Great Lakes have contributed an additional 19 cm or so a month to Lake Ontario’s level this year compared to in 2000. Also, net basin supply values this year have mainly been higher. This is mainly due to higher runoff in all likelihood (as evaporation tends not to differ much year-to-year during these particular months, and, as noted above, the overall precipitation values are about the same). This difference also constitutes an additional average of 9 cm or so a month to Lake Ontario’s level since the beginning of the year.

It’s worth noting, too, that Lake Ontario outflows this year are much higher than those in 2000, and have recently been eclipsing them by about 2800 m3/s. This factor alone constitutes an additional 38 cm of water recently removed from Lake Ontario within a month’s time. So, in short, one can expect a more rapid decline in water levels this year.

Hopefully this short comparison of conditions now to those of 2000 sheds some light on a large part of the reason why water levels this year have been so much higher than then.
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#71
Thank you Scott for posting the email response. Thru the IJC I was able to find the lake level graph, showing where we have been and where we may be headed. I sent Scott a copy of it in hopes he could post it here. The chart shows going forward what they expect the maximum and minimums levels to be for the remainder of this year.
Here is the link in the mean time if any are interested. You will need to zoom in to see the numbers easier.

http://www.waterlevels.gc.ca/C&A/bulletin-eng.html




 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#72
Representatives urge Trump to issue disaster declaration

Sent in by member Opie;

U.S. Rep. Chris Collins, R-Clarence, joined four other upstate New York lawmakers in an effort to push President Trump to issue a disaster declaration in Lake Ontario's high water levels.

In the July 12 letter to Trump, the lawmakers, all of whom represent districts that border the lake or St. Lawrence River, point out the lake is at its highest level since record-keeping began over a century ago.

Whole article;
http://www.lockportjournal.com/news...cle_1f0136f4-2f59-51bc-89f8-7196cb26923d.html

Also some before and after pictures;
From 2013



From today;



From 2013;



From today;


One more from the Burlington side;

July 2012


July 2017

 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#73
Last night on the CFTO news, comment was made that this flooding is 100 year event. This was made while drone footage of the Toronto Islands was being shown. The same comment was made by the powers that be and I felt and still feel in my opinion to not be accurate. Lake Ontario was free flowing until 1958, then we dammed it up. Now we control the Lake not mother nature. That we have 59 years of data to work off of and 41 years pre dam to study. To say 100 year event all things must be equal during that time, which is not the case because of the dam and " human " control over the lake. Anyways here is the Official reply from the board to my 100 year dispute

You’re correct that the river was dammed initially around 1958. We use the record from 1960 onwards for assessing actual lake levels since regulation began. However, reliable water level records overall began in 1918, and outflow and water supply estimates date back to 1900 in many cases. So we have a century or more of historical water supply sequences we can look at in terms of looking at the probability of such things recurring. And so we can simulate regulated water levels for each of these past water supply sequences and consider current water levels, regulatory structures and river conveyance conditions in so doing. In this manner, we can treat the supplies from any given year as having an equal chance (compared to the others) of recurring again now. We can also “perturb” the model in consideration of such things as currently high inflows or higher expected precipitation as well as other climate-change consequences.

here is a link to the drone video, CTFO news was showing last night in case you wish to view

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/watch-in-...oronto-island-for-july-31-reopening-1.3508363

We still need to have the lake level come down soon, or the 5% chance of being in flood stage come January goes up.
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#76
One of the past post, there was a link to an article about the lake level with a graph. I have copied it below

http://www.thesuburban.com/news/lak...cle_c2581611-0b3d-5800-a797-da21cab470c0.html

Along the bottom of the graph, you can make out certain dates, with those in place we can now compare how the lake level is dropping based on the IJC's estimates. If you take a look at the July 7th reading, the lake was somewhere around the 75.77 M mark. The next measurement date was on Friday and the graph has the lake at approx. 75.6 M. If you go to the Fisheries and Oceans site, you can find the average for Friday was 75.71 M approx. So the numbers do show it is going down but not at the rate expected. I will do another comparison next week and per the estimates, we should be seeing a big drop. However it seems that the rainfall we are getting is not helping. The flow into Lake Ontario is greater then the flow out

http://buffalonews.com/2017/07/24/record-lake-ontario-outflows-continue/
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#77
Here are some beach shots from this past weekend. The first two pics are from Saturday, then the next are taken Sunday afternoon with 20 km winds from the east and waves measuring 2 to 4 feet in height.


Sunday

 

scotto

Administrator
Staff member
Feb 15, 2004
6,985
218
63
The Beach Strip
#78
Record Lake Ontario outflows continues

7/25 - Buffalo, N.Y. – As wet weather persists in the Great Lakes basin, the U.S.-Canadian agency that sets the rate of water flows out of Lake Ontario has decided to maintain the record flow levels it began in the second week of June.

The International Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Board of Control continues to allow nearly 2.75 million gallons of water per second to flow into the St. Lawrence.

The record outflows were begun in response to complaints of flooding along the New York shore of the lake. The board said Friday it can't allow more water to leave the lake without risking more flooding in the Montreal area and endangering safe navigation in the St. Lawrence.

Lake levels are now 7.9 inches below their May 29 peak, but the amount of water entering Lake Ontario from rain, the Niagara River and other streams continues to exceed the outflows, the board reported.

The Buffalo News
http://www.boatnerd.com/news/news14.htm

more articles;

http://wskgnews.org/post/high-water-impacts-shipping-st-lawrence-seaway

http://www.thesuburban.com/news/lak...cle_c2581611-0b3d-5800-a797-da21cab470c0.html

http://www.newyorkupstate.com/weath...opping_but_not_fast_enough_for_gov_cuomo.html

https://www.durhamregion.com/news-story/7468785-ajax-to-host-great-lakes-conference-in-2018/

https://glslcities.org/
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#79
Down on the beach this weekend with our neighbours, one was raking up the debris washed up onto the shore from this past weeks winds. Lake level seems to have paused, yet looking at the charts its going down oh so slowly. Will use their data from this coming Friday to see how we are comparing to the IJC's predictions. Sunday was a great day to be in the water, refreshing and clean, almost like Wasaga beach, could walk out a hundred feet and have the water at waist level. Also it was great to see so many at the beach, place feels alive again.
 

Opie

Registered User
Staff member
Mar 1, 2017
318
119
43
The Beach Strip
#80
http://www.syracuse.com/opinion/ind...y_for_lake_ontario_flooding_your_letters.html

I came across this article from yesterday, have a read and take a look at the comment section. The reaction to the flood damage by some in the USA is night and day to what is said here on the Canadian side. As always two sides to every story but I hope the City of Hamilton takes into consideration the comments being made, before they spend one dollar more on the repairs to our flood damage. We have another spring to get thru and has the potential to be a repeat of this years flooding.
 
Top Bottom