FISHING NEWS: MD DNR Seeks Public Input on the Future of Bloede Dam

[flycatcher]

To be clear about this, DNR is seeking opinions from the public before making a final decision. The information above is informational, but really needs for individuals to voice their opinion to serve the true purpose of this announcement.
The option to remove the dam and actively manage the sediment, although more expensive (by about $900,000 than dam removal with passive sediment management) would be the option to most quickly achieve a restoration of the system to it's pre-dam ecology the quickest. Removal of the dam with passive sediment management would, in my opinion be the second best option.
I would urge those who read this to respond with their opinion to the dnr at: bloededam@dnr.state.md.us. DNR is encouraging citizens to offer their opinion online at this address.
Brandon, thank you for posting this.

[Thrillseeker]

Remove it. when I was a kid we used to be able to go inside it and slide off it. now it's blocked off so you can't do anything on it.

[reelcrazyfish]

We received a lot of great comments at the Open House. Most were in favor of removing the dam. The folks who prefer the Active removal (dredging the sediment) need to realize that it's not the preferred option JUST because it's the most expensive. We estimate 70,000 - 90,000 CY of sediment behind the dam. If it's actively taken out, it's needs to be trucked out. The average dump truck (particularly one going across the bridge downstream) can only hold 5 CY of sediment at a time. That's 18,000 dump trucks going through the Park. At an estimated 30 trucks per day, that's 600 days of trucking. That's a HUGE disturbance to Park visitors and that's only assuming no additional sediment gets washed in during the 1.5 years it takes to dredge out, which we know is not possible. Also, dredging creates it's own disturbance to the ecology of the river. Many folks brought up the possibility of sucking the sand out with a 10" tube like they have in Lakes in Maryland or like they do to replenish the beach in Ocean City. The problem with this method is that 80% of what you suck up with that pipe is water, so you either need to have a place to "dry" the sediment before hauling it, or you need to pay to truck water which greatly increases the cost. Other folks suggested using the CSX train. We would need to construct a "side track" for loading before we even consider this, and then we would have to truck the sediment up the bank and OVER a very active 42" sewer line which creates it's own problems. Even using this method, a rail car can hold about 180 CY of sand/gravel. CSX charges 20/Ton to ship and a visitor to the open house estimated this method would cost over $800,000 - very close to the figure we estimated for truck shipping but with the added hassle of moving sediment over the sewer pipe. Just some things to keep in mind when voicing your opinions.

Thanks.

JIM

[cwoods]

This is the kind of project that should not happen at all in a recession when the federal government is deeply in debt and Maryland is raising taxes and raising taxes. It simply is not necessary and is an example of excessive government spending. It should be put on hold and wait for better economic times.