#lakelevel

I was pleased to see that the author and creator of this blog (Phillip Will) admitted that the water levels since 2007 have been lower since the new Lake Level Control Structure (LLCS) was installed. He states the average is only .93 inches lower saying that really isn’t particularly dramatic. He makes it sound so minuscule. But later he complains that the water levels this past summer were over the legal level when in reality they averaged much less than an inch over the legal level. I don’t know how he arrived at .93 inches but being that much lower on average is quite a bit in environmental terms.

The reason the levels can’t remain over the legal level for very long, as his chart demonstrates, is because the top of the LLCS is at legal level. Once the level goes up it drops down quickly because the water simply flows over the top. The graph scale he used also increases the dramatic effect, especially when you consider the fact that Houghton is currently 13 times higher than the level displayed in Mr. Wills chart.

We all are at the mercy of Mother Nature. As we all know, we received an above average amount of rain this summer and the temperatures were well below average. That being said, since Mr. Will admitted to the scientific fact that the levels on Higgins have been lower since the LLCS was changed in 2007, the impact must be examined.

What else has changed on Higgins since 2007? Swimmers Itch (SI) has become much worse. Is this a Coincidence or not?  SI has been much worse all over Northern Michigan but Higgins is suffering much more than other lakes. I believe the lower levels have contributed to the dramatic increase in SI. The following describes some science to support this theory.

Higgins has an enormous amount of shallows, much more than most spring fed lakes. Lower than normal water levels (as we’ve experienced since 2007), no matter how much Mr. Will wants to discount the small amount, have upset delicate environmental balances. Small changes can have a dramatic negative impact. Here are some scientific facts:

Shallower water heats up faster.

Shallower, warmer water concentrates nutrient levels.

Higher nutrient levels increase algae.

Higher nutrient levels decrease oxygen levels.

The warmer the water, the more poisonous pollutants become.

Snails eat algae – more algae, more snails.

Snails reproduce faster in warmer water.

Snails produce two parasites, one is the SI parasite and the other is a parasite that blinds minnows.

Mergansers eat minnows and blind minnows are easy to catch.

More food for mergansers means more mergansers.

As the temperature of water increases the quality of the aquatic environment decreases.

The problem with those concerned about erosion is the fact that they are only concerned with that single issue and haven’t looked at the environmental impact lower water will mean if they achieve their goals and continue to keep the water lower. Their viewpoint is short sighted and myopic. That’s why the statutes require an environmental impact study (not a hydrological study) be completed before a legal level can be changed. It took quite a few years to get where we are concerning SI and it will take many more to reduce it. Keeping the levels on Higgins closer to the natural and legal level will certainly help. Lowering them will exasperate the problem. I hope some common sense prevails and the minority who want lower levels step back and understand what their efforts are doing to Higgins. Their statements regarding the water quality degradation the past few years support the water being maintained at the natural and legal level, not continuing to keep them at the lower levels as the low level supporters want.

That’s why a restrictor plate is needed and should be installed. The levels need to be maintained as close to the legal level as possible. I hope our Commissioners follow through on their promise to file for a permit to install one. I seriously doubt we will be able to keep the legal levels anywhere close to legal level if we don’t.

Today’s technology is great. If you don’t like what the majority wants all you have to do is start your own website and blog, create an unscientific survey with leading/biased questions, let everyone you know that shares your viewpoint respond and you get the results you want. Not surprising. Add your own set of facts and you have a recipe to confuse and mislead. The problem with the “Bad Idea” blog about the restrictor plate is the fact that several misleading statements were made. It is so typical of this blog.

A real survey was done and completed by the Higgins Lake Property Owners Association and the low water folks didn’t like it. What was their reaction? Instead of working inside the HLPOA, they went outside to create their own reality. Here are the results of the HLPOA Survey regarding the lake levels:

When asked “Is the lake level satisfactory?” the following results were reported:

44% said yes

11% said it should be higher

10% said it should be lower

8% were undecided

27% had no comment

If you remove those who were undecided and had no comment the results would be as follows:

68% said lake level is satisfactory

17% said the lake level should be higher

15% said the lake level should be lower

In other words, 85% said the water level should be the same or higher and only 15% said the level should be lower. It’s no wonder the low level folks freaked out and decided to create their own phony blog and survey. It didn’t suit their agenda. 

The same goes for the restrictor plate. A lot of facts are taken out of context. When the Lake Level Control Structure (LLCS) was installed in 2007, it lowered the levels on Higgins dramatically. Well below the legal level. That is a fact. The USGS reports are not lies.

Therefore, in 2010, Spicer Engineering was contracted to make recommendations on how to improve the LLCS to better manage Higgins so the legal levels could be maintained. Again, the low level folks freaked out and the leader of the low level agenda, Pat Springstead, began lobbying for the removal of the dam. His support in regards to lowering the levels on Higgins and removing the LLCS are part of the public record. Those are the facts. 

All the restrictor plate will do is help Higgins maintain the legal levels on Higgins instead of keeping the levels so much lower as it has the since 2007. The uncontrolled spillway was massively larger than the previous LLCS had. This past year was exception with regards to the amount of rain we received and the lower temperatures which kept the levels much closer to the legal level. Most property owners on Higgins enjoyed the water levels this past summer. Some did not.

If a restrictor plate option is not employed next year and we don’t get as much rain and the temperatures are normal, we will not be able to keep the levels on Higgins anywhere near the legal level. That is what the low level folks want and that is why they don’t want a restrictor plate installed and that is why they are trying to create phony public support for their agenda. The restrictor plate is an option that will only be used if the levels start to drop below the legal level. It is simply there to help maintain the legal level, not surpass it.

That is the intention of the resolution the HLPOA passed. By the way, the low level folks keep saying that those who support the natural and legal level as determined by the Court in 1926 are in favor of “high water” in an attempt to mislead. We are the legal level water folks. The fancy charts and drawings are nice but can be confusing. Make no mistake about it, the restrictor plate is simply a tool to help maintain the natural and legal level on Higgins, nothing else. It’s that simple. A Restrictor Plate – Good Idea.

The HLPOA survey results regarding the lake level are in and the results were overwhelmingly in support of the lake level staying where it is. 71% said it was a top priority. If this were a political election, it would be called a landslide. Of those eligible to vote (registered voters) 27% voiced no comment which left 73% who voted. If you extrapolate on those numbers, 60.2% want the levels to remain the same, 15% want the levels to be higher, 13.7% want the levels to be lower and 19.9% were undecided. That means of those who voted, 75.2% want the levels to remain the same or to be higher. No matter the criticism about the time it took to tabulate, how the questions were asked, etc. the results were overwhelming. 

Additionally, 57% said the winter draw down date was a top priority. Of those expressing an opinion on a winter drawdown, 22% did not express an opinion. Of those who did express an opinion, 64% chose November 1, and 36% said it should begin September 15. Of course, Even if the September 15 voters were the majority, the Court Order does not provide for such and it would take a change in the Court Order to move the date.

Hopefully, this will put the issue of whether the levels should be lowered to rest once and for all. This supports how the HLPOA voted on a Resolution in support of the current levels in 2013, along with several other lake associations including Sunrise Heights, Sheridan Drive, Grosbeak Boulevard, Higgins Lake Environmental & Economic Coalition and Almeda Beach Associations. Not one association or group has passed a Resolution supporting lower water levels. This is a majority opinion. Hopefully, our local Commissioner in charge of maintaining the legal levels on Higgins will take note and do his job according to the Court Order.

This will allow us to now focus on more important issues like swimmers itch, etc.

Eric Ostergren West Higgins Lake Drive

Monitor’s Note: Also see the following blog posts and the discussion on the Facebook group Higgins Lake Slice in Time. HLPOA Member Survey - Results Summary, and HLPOA Survey - At Least It’s a Start.

There will be more survey information on this available after the HLSIT Survey is completed December 18th. If you haven’t done so already, please fill this out to be part of the conversation.

I appreciate the opportunity to respond to Mr. Will’s Posting entitled: “Higgins Lake Control Structure Management.”

I noticed the first photo showing the Dam on Higgins Lake which clearly shows that it was a Dam. Mr. Will was correct when he stated that we no longer have a Dam and now have Lake Level Control Structure (LLCS).  The major difference you will notice in the photo and the LLCS is the fact that the Dam or any Dam can retain water well above levels that could be normally attained. When completely closed, the top of the LLCS is at the natural and legal level; a big difference. That means if we receive a large amount of rain and the water on Higgins rises above the natural and legal level, it flows over the top of the LLCS just as if a natural barrier were there. Another major difference the LLCS has a 4.75 foot constant spillway that can’t be closed.

That is why water on Higgins rarely exceeds the legal level and when it does it is rare it ever goes more than an inch over legal level and even then it comes down quickly again. Additionally, water can’t be banked as it could be with a normal dam as professed by the low level supporters because the water simply runs over the top of the LLCS.

In fact this summer was very unusual. The natural and legal level has rarely been reached ever since 2007 when the new LLCS was installed.

I’ve been asked why I call the current legal level on Higgins the natural and legal level and I’d like to explain why. In 1926, the property owners on Higgins petitioned the Court “to determine and establish the natural height and level of Higgins” and make it the legal level to be maintained thereafter. The levels on Higgins had fluctuated dramatically during that period since the logging occurred in the late 1800’s when the opening to the Cut had been dynamited to allow more water flow for the logs down the Cut to Houghton and the Muskegon River. The Court sought expert engineering advice from Fargo Engineering and “…ordered and adjudged that the natural height of Higgins is 1161.70 feet as established June 30, 1926.” The 1161.70 feet was later corrected to 1154.11.

It is important to realize that the authorities at the time (over 80 years ago) were a lot closer to where the natural level of Higgins was, than we are today.

The obscure news articles cited by Mr. Will twist the meaning of the clear and concise language of the Court Order. The articles reasoned that the flows into Higgins could be problematic which might cause the levels to rise far above the legal level. That was the reason the LLCS was designed the way it was. This past spring the legal levels were two inches below legal level and Commissioner Melvin left the gates wide open until May 8, when they should have been closed on April 15, 3 weeks earlier. I could understand the gates being kept open if the levels were at or above legal level but not two inches below. Houghton Lake was flooding during this entire period while Higgins was dumping water downstream to them. That is an issue we should all be concerned with.

An effort to obtain a clarification for the Court on the clear and concise language of the Court Order was another attempt by Commissioner Melvin to modify the language without any public input. It was an attempt to rewrite the original order without any opportunity for both sides to have any input or public discussion.

Furthermore, there is no legal precedent on any legal level anywhere in Michigan that states that the legal level is a “maximum” level. It would be as absurd to ask the court to make the legal level a “minimum”. The fact is the legal level is to be kept as close to that level as possible. It is a target and the LLCS is supposed to be managed to meet that target.  That hasn’t been done for years and that is why Commissioner Melvin must be removed from that responsibility.

I must also comment on the second photo showing the water at the LLCS site and the laughable commentary that the level on Higgins was the same as the level on the Cut. The implication was that water wasn’t flowing down the Cut. That would be like saying a river doesn’t have any flow because the level on the river is the same throughout even though millions of gallons were flowing. If there is a blockage (like stop boards) the flow will be impaired. That is why the stop boards should have been removed so the flow could be increased to help reach the winter level. Not using all the tools available to reach the winter level is negligent.

The additional commentary regarding the capacity that the Cut would be exceeded if all the openings on the LLCS were open. That is another misnomer. When heavy rainfall for extended periods occur and the legal levels on Higgins are exceeded and all the openings on the LLCS are opened, that would be true. There is little we can do about Mother Nature. However, during normal periods such as we currently have, the capacity is not exceeded if the stop gates would have been opened.

Here are a few facts:

The low level supporters on Higgins are a small minority.

Mr. Will is one of those who want the natural and legal levels on Higgins to be lowered.

The HLPOA overwhelmingly passed a resolution in 2013, supporting the natural and legal levels, which Resolution stated they would resist any attempt to change it.

The previous leadership of the HLPOA supported lower levels and they were replaced because of that support.

The question the low level supporters on Higgins need to ask themselves is whether the will of a small minority on Higgins should dominate the will of the large majority on Higgins?