Adirondack Forum  
Rules Membership Donations and Online Store Adkhighpeaks Foundation ADKhighpeaks Forums ADKhighpeaks Wiki Disclaimer

Go Back   Adirondack Forum > The Adirondack Forum > General Adirondack Discussion
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: What should happen to the dam at Duck Hole?
The dam should be rebuilt, regardless of the impact or cost. 15 9.87%
The dam should be rebuilt, but at minimum cost and minimum impact. 36 23.68%
Doesn't matter to me. If it's rebuilt or not, I'll still be happy. 17 11.18%
Duck Hole should be left as it is, allowing nature to gradually reclaim the area. 70 46.05%
All remnants of the dam should be removed, allowing nature to quickly reclaim the area. 14 9.21%
Voters: 152. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-19-2011, 12:49 PM   #1
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,296
Duck Hole: What do you think?

We've had a lot of discussion about Duck Hole here lately- I decided to post a poll to try and gauge public opinion (at least amongst forum members) as to what should be done in response to the breach of the dam at Duck Hole.

The poll is completely anonymous, so hopefully we'll get more votes that way. So feel free to vote for how you really feel.
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2011, 03:38 PM   #2
Judgeh
Member
 
Judgeh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,291
Before I vote, what is your definition of impact? Rebuilding the dam has the impact of restoring the lake to what is was or not rebuilding the dam turns the area into a meadow. Is there something in-between? Or an impact greater than restoration of the lake? Just asking.
Judgeh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2011, 06:45 PM   #3
WillisB
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 372
I didn't vote because none of the options fits my opinion. I believe it should be rebuilt from private donations and grants, not with taxpayer dollars.
__________________
www.canoetripping.net/forums
WillisB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-19-2011, 08:47 PM   #4
Dick
somewhere out there...
 
Dick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: avatar: Patagonia
Posts: 2,822
It would be interesting to do a similar poll for Marcy Dam and compare results.
Dick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 06:17 AM   #5
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,007
Too bad there wasn't a way to discern if a voter ever visited the Hole. I never been there so does my vote hold sway?
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden

Last edited by geogymn; 11-20-2011 at 08:39 PM..
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 11:17 PM   #6
TCD
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,951
I voted for "I'll be happy...", because I will be. It's certainly not very important in the overall scheme of my happiness!

I visited Duck Hole many times, and found it very pretty. I'd like to see it restored to being a pond; but I sure wouldn't want resources spent on something like that, that is purely an aesthetic concern, when we've got trails that are a muddy mess, missing bridges, etc., which are actual impediments to the use of the resource.

I'd like to see the beavers rebuild that dam. Maybe if we dragged a couple dead trees across the river, and then spread around some kind of food that beavers like, they would show up and finish the job for free...
TCD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 06:58 AM   #7
randomscooter
Native Earthling
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Scooterville, NY
Posts: 1,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillisB View Post
I didn't vote because none of the options fits my opinion. I believe it should be rebuilt from private donations and grants, not with taxpayer dollars.
My interpretation of the word "cost" in the first two poll options is "taxpayer cost". If I'm correct, then zero taxpayer dollars would qualify as "minimum cost".
__________________
Scooting here and there
Through the woods and up the peaks
Random Scoots awaits (D.P.)


"Pushing the limits of easy."™
randomscooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 09:39 AM   #8
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judgeh View Post
Before I vote, what is your definition of impact? Rebuilding the dam has the impact of restoring the lake to what is was or not rebuilding the dam turns the area into a meadow. Is there something in-between? Or an impact greater than restoration of the lake? Just asking.
Certainly a complicated issue! I was thinking of impact in terms of impacts as a result of all the construction work, but feel free to define it for yourself...

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillisB View Post
I didn't vote because none of the options fits my opinion. I believe it should be rebuilt from private donations and grants, not with taxpayer dollars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomscooter View Post
My interpretation of the word "cost" in the first two poll options is "taxpayer cost". If I'm correct, then zero taxpayer dollars would qualify as "minimum cost".
The second option originally mentioned using volunteer labor and donated materials as means to keep the cost down, but it was too long and the forums told me I needed to shorten it before I could post the poll...

Quote:
Originally Posted by geogymn View Post
Too bad there wasn't a way to discern if a voter ever visited the Hole. I never been there so does my vote hold sway?
I agree, but that's beyond the abilities of the forum software. No one's opinion is more or less important just because they have or have not been there, of course- there are intrinsic values that we place on wilderness. Wilderness even has therapeutic value for those who don't ever even visit it- for some, it's enough to know that as a society, we've preserved such areas.
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 10:02 AM   #9
PA Ridgerunner
Just a hiker...
 
PA Ridgerunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Jay, NY
Posts: 678
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSettahr View Post
No one's opinion is more or less important just because they have or have not been there, of course- there are intrinsic values that we place on wilderness. Wilderness even has therapeutic value for those who don't ever even visit it- for some, it's enough to know that as a society, we've preserved such areas.
Amen!
__________________
Steve

Rule #6: Don't take yourself so G.D. seriously. There are no other rules. - Zander
PA Ridgerunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 12:37 PM   #10
ndru
Member
 
ndru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 138
at this point the damage is done. i say just let it be. let nature reclaim the land.

if nature decided to rebuild by way of beavers, then that would be just fine by me as well.
ndru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 08:24 PM   #11
geogymn
Member
 
geogymn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSettahr View Post
Certainly a complicated issue! Wilderness even has therapeutic value for those who don't ever even visit it- for some, it's enough to know that as a society, we've preserved such areas.
Well said!
__________________
"A culture is no better than its woods." W.H. Auden
geogymn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 09:24 PM   #12
ALGonquin Bob
Lake Lila - Low's Lake carry
 
ALGonquin Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 1,117
Nature and DEC made the decision: no dam.
__________________
"Like" my FB page http://tinyurl.com/FB-BuffaloPaddles and visit my map ALGonquin Bob's "BUFFALO PADDLES" Paddle Guide

Check out my "Mountain Blog" http://tinyurl.com/BobMountainBlog2

46er #5357W
ALGonquin Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 09:31 PM   #13
Neil
Admin
 
Neil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,118
Anthropomorphism

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALGonquin Bob View Post
Nature and DEC made the decision: no dam.
Nature doesn't make decisions. Nature just happens, randomly.

Just being a PITA.
__________________
The best, the most successful adventurer, is the one having the most fun.
Neil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2011, 09:33 PM   #14
ALGonquin Bob
Lake Lila - Low's Lake carry
 
ALGonquin Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 1,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
Nature doesn't make decisions. Nature just happens, randomly.

Just being a PITA.
I expect nothing less.
__________________
"Like" my FB page http://tinyurl.com/FB-BuffaloPaddles and visit my map ALGonquin Bob's "BUFFALO PADDLES" Paddle Guide

Check out my "Mountain Blog" http://tinyurl.com/BobMountainBlog2

46er #5357W
ALGonquin Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2011, 12:15 AM   #15
rADK
Member
 
rADK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NY
Posts: 242
Basically, Duck Hole was synthetic wilderness. I'm not a big fan of that sort of thing but I wouldn't stop anyone from rebuilding it.

Personally I see Nature reclaiming it as beautiful in a way....She finally broke free from the shackles imposed by man and is on her way back to being pristine and wild. It's also a reminder that nature always prevails, and no matter how hard we try our "impact" is always temporary.
rADK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2011, 12:40 AM   #16
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,296
It's certainly interesting to be able to run an informal poll like this and see what the overall perception of the community is. Certainly, there have been vocal proponents of both options (repair vs. leaving it), but it's interesting to see that the majority of this community is in favor of leaving it as is, and, in fact, nearly as many people favor actually physically removing the remnants of the dam as favor repairing it!

I wonder if that's because the ADKForum Community tends to value "untouched" wilderness a bit more? It'd be interesting to see if we did a similar poll on ADKHighPeaks to see if the results were different...
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 11:23 PM   #17
ALGonquin Bob
Lake Lila - Low's Lake carry
 
ALGonquin Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 1,117
I imagined the Duck Hole mud flats transitioning into a grassy meadow as part of forest succession, but it could also become more like the burned zone on the shoulder of Noonmark. I hiked through that area this week, and it’s now a very thick “forest” of 1 to 3-inch diameter alder trees (more like tall shrubs right now) – not very scenic, but moose seem to like it up in Algonquin Park.

EDIT: I read an article that describes the thicket of trees on the Noonmark burn zone as consisting of "white birch, fire cherry, big tooth aspen, and quaking aspen".
__________________
"Like" my FB page http://tinyurl.com/FB-BuffaloPaddles and visit my map ALGonquin Bob's "BUFFALO PADDLES" Paddle Guide

Check out my "Mountain Blog" http://tinyurl.com/BobMountainBlog2

46er #5357W

Last edited by ALGonquin Bob; 12-04-2011 at 10:45 AM..
ALGonquin Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 11:57 PM   #18
DSettahr
ɹǝqɯǝɯ
 
DSettahr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALGonquin Bob View Post
I imagined the Duck Hole mud flats transitioning into a grassy meadow as part of forest succession, but it could also become more like the burned zone on the shoulder of Noonmark. I hiked through that area this week, and it’s now a very thick “forest” of 1 to 3-inch diameter alder trees (more like tall shrubs right now) – not very scenic, but moose seem to like it up in Algonquin Park.
It really depends on a lot of factors. You'll certainly see trees spring up higher up, near where the shoreline used to be. My understanding is that Duck Hole was pretty much a marshy swamp before the dam was built, though, and that wetness will probably prevent a lot of tree species from being able to move into the area. I'd say it's a lot more likely that herbaceous and woody wetland species, not forest trees, will take over most of the mud flats (similar to what you see in Flowed Lands).
DSettahr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 05:37 PM   #19
richard1726
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: 06333 & Pittsburg, Berlin GR, Edmonton
Posts: 469
Might it end up at beaver flats, since there is less trappping now. (Multiple terraces with beaver dams between.)
richard1726 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2011, 08:30 PM   #20
chairrock
Indian Mt.Club
 
chairrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,706
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard1726 View Post
Might it end up at beaver flats, since there is less trappping now. (Multiple terraces with beaver dams between.)
It is a cycle....beaver food,..etc....junk.....predators.....don't expect beavers unless there is a good food source....for the long term, it is so dynamic....so many variables....

there might be a beaver damn again....but I have seen those suckers build in the wrong place just because they could...or whatever....
__________________
Be careful, don't spread invasive species!!

When a dog runs at you,whistle for him.
Henry David Thoreau

CL50-#23
chairrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

DISCLAIMER: Use of these forums, and information found herein, is at your own risk. Use of this site by members and non-members alike is only granted by the adkhighpeak.com administration provided the terms and conditions found in the FULL DISCLAIMER have been read. Continued use of this site implies that you have read, understood and agree to the terms and conditions of this site. Any questions can be directed to the Administrator of this site.