AlphaAlpha

Thu, Jun 24, 2010 : 5:04 a.m.

"According to a 2003 report by the Huron River Watershed Council, the U.S. Geological Survey identified Argo as one of two dams in the state that most dramatically altered the natural flow of a river." Mr. Vernellis - Where is this report? A link would be excellent. Reports purchased 'by' special interest groups are often flawed... "In 1995, the state Department of Natural Resources identified the dam as a priority for removal because it no longer served its original purpose - provide hydropower by Detroit Edison." With Beach Petroleum's hole leaking anew, perhaps it's time to reconsider the hydropower option. Green energy, stimulus grants, AA Electric Power Co.

rob breckenfeld

Wed, Jun 23, 2010 : 11:32 a.m.

My wife and I read where thousands of gallons of raw sewage spilled into a creek that feeds the Huron up around Brighton. What does this mean to Ann Arbor drinking water??

DeeDee

Wed, Jun 23, 2010 : 10:55 a.m.

Oh, Puh-leeze. The Huron River Watershed Council is just another special interest group posing as something else. A few people want to get rid of Barton dam at the expense of the many, many, many people who: run, walk, row, fish, bike, walk dogs, canoe, kayak, etc. for some vaguely defined potential benefit. Take a walk along the Huron River, and get some idea of what the now beautiful Barton pond will look like most of the summer. It will certainly be too narrow to see from the existing paths and probably have big mud flats, and marshy areas along much of the newly exposed bank. And, in spite of what HRWC would have you think, it's hard to imagine that the new acreage will be developable for recreation, because it will be a flood plain! Leave the dam, with its historic and enormous recreational value to the city alone, and instead re-install renewable electrical generation. Build an outdoor history board about the dam, and about the benefits of renewable hydropower, and quit trying to deprive the many of this resource on the behalf of the few.

Wystan Stevens

Wed, Jun 23, 2010 : 12:57 a.m.

The pond now called Argo has been a fixture of the local landscape since 1832, when Anson Brown erected a grist mill beside an early wooden version of the Broadway Bridge, and built the first dam to hold water back to power the mill. (Born a New Yorker, Brown started the settlement known as Lower Town Ann Arbor, calling Broadway and Wall Street after thoroughfares in New York City. Brown owned the mill, but was not the miller, and he died in the cholera epidemic of 1834.) An internet search wont find early 19th-century references to Argo, because the pond didnt have that name until 1892, when a group of Ann Arbor businessmen, investors in the Michigan Milling Company, took over the operation (then known as the Sinclair Mills) and rebuilt the structure that they named the Argo Flouring Mills. The dam and pond took their name from the mills, but no one knows where that name came from. Did the mills golden grain suggest a comparison to the brave ship Argo of Greek myth, which bore Jason and his men in search of the Golden Fleece? (The Michigan Milling Company had its offices at the Central Mills on First Street, where the Blind Pig is now and where, Im told, a certain golden liquid flows a beverage made from grain.) Through the decades, the dam was rebuilt a few times (and probably made a little higher, after the Eastern Michigan Edison Company acquired the water rights). But in a freak calamity that drew a crowd of spectators, the Argo mill exploded and burned on January 4, 1904. Firemen came, and the water that doused the flames left a white pall of icicles on the tall buildings ruined skeleton, a scene captured in dramatic photographs. The companys plutocrat investors decided not to rebuild, and a picturesque milling era we might call it the Flouring of Ann Arbor came to an end. From Argos ashes rose the Phoenix of a new era of power generation. Within a few years, the company later known as Detroit Edison had erected a power generating station on the mill site, running its turbines and generators with water from the millrace. Three weeks after the mill disaster, on January 27, 1904, the Ann Arbor Railroads trestle collapsed, dropping a heavy freight train and its cargo onto the ice of Argo Pond. In the days that followed, parties of gawkers turned out for that spectacle too, including small boys like the late Ray Spokes, who went out onto the ice and looted water-soaked crates of Beemans Pepsin Gum. The inadequate early trestle which stood close to the dam got replaced months later with another of thick steel, on massive concrete piers, a landmark still in place. (That year, 1904, was a bad one at both ends: on the last day of December, the Ann Arbor High School burned to the ground.) Throughout the 19th century, and early decades of the 20th, winter ice was harvested on Argo Pond, and stored in great blocks in straw-lined ice houses on the Main Street riverbank. Some of the ice buildings were owned by downtown caterers like Jacob Hangsterfer, whose big emporium depended on a steady supply of ice to preserve meats and other perishables, and to refresh thirsty customers at his ballroom, year round. Another enterprising German immigrant was Paul G. Tessmer, who in 1898 sold his grocery business and opened a boat livery the U. of M. Boat House on the ponds Main Street side. By 1906, Tessmer had a stock of 160 canoes and 40 rowboats, all built by himself. He and his big family lived in a house on Sunset hill, overlooking the pond a building that became the Elks Pratt Lodge. Tessmers docks and boathouse later were moved across the pond, to the foot of Longshore Drive, and became William J. Saunders canoe livery, then Jack Wirths, until 1969, when the Ann Arbor parks department took over. On moonlit evenings in June, the pond was jammed with U-M students in canoes, boys in blazers treating their sweethearts to a mandolin serenade. Around 1900, these romantics began calling the path along the headrace embankment Lovers Lane. (In the 1930s and 40s, the embankment became part of Ann Arbors hobo jungle.) One of the citys public works projects during the Depression years was the building of a public bathing beach at the foot of Longshore Drive, where the canoe livery is now. Tons and tons of Lake Michigan white sand were hauled in and spread around, to make the beach comfortable and pretty. Repeated summer polio scares in the 1940s eventually led to its closing. The pond was drained in 1930, when Edison built a new dam, and again in the early 1970s, when Joe ONeals construction company built the present dam for the city a project completed in 1972. Treasure hunters prowled the muck for artifacts, and collectors found old Ann Arbor bottles for their collections. Construction workers pulled a particularly heavy souvenir out of the mud: a set of ribbed steel wheels, from one of the boxcars that fell off the old railroad trestle in 1904! Argo Pond is an essential element of the history of Ann Arbor; it helps define our citys character. In historical terms, Ann Arbor has always had that pond, has grown up around it, and would not be the same without it. Some folks have called it stagnant, but of course that is absurd. It is a dynamic body, as dynamic as the city itself. The waters of the Huron have flowed since time began, and they have been flowing through the pond and over the dam, ever since Ann Arbor was a tiny village in the wilderness west of Detroit. By all means let us maintain momentum, improve the ponds surroundings, clear out shabby factory buildings on North Main Street, and replace them with an attractive multi-use facility, one which includes cafes and a dining terrace that overlooks trees and water. It is a view to be enjoyed in every season. But let us not rashly sacrifice our beloved Argo Pond, Ann Arbors urban waterfront. Argo is an asset, an amenity of the type that other communities long for. We should consider every means of enhancing access to it, and keeping its shining surface intact. Dont pull the plug on Argo dont let it go down the drain. My enjoyment of the river has been passive. I havent been out in a boat, havent stopped to watch the oarsmen, never even dipped a toe in Argo Pond but I appreciate Argos contribution to the quality of life in this place, and I like to see it now and then, and know that it is there. I hope that it will forever remain in the heart of our city, where it has been bubbling and rippling for 178 years.

AlphaAlpha

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 9:37 p.m.

"Anglers describe the water level rising so fast, they barely had time to scramble up the shore for safety." Hmm. No exaggeration there. "A relaxing paddle down the river for canoeists suddenly ends as their canoes and paddles hit mud." Oh, the humanity...

81wolverine

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 9:14 p.m.

Marco: The city has spent more money in the last nine years (since the original state report came out indicating the Argo Dam earthen berm needed repairs) hiring consultants, calling meetings, debating, doing studies, etc, etc, than it needed to pay for all the annual maintenance bills for probably 5-7 years. The yearly maintenance is a drop in the bucket compared to the dam removal costs, building a new pedestrian bridge across the river, re-building docks and shoreline infrastructure, relocating the rowing community, and a bunch of other costs no one at the city even has their arms around yet. One big problem with this whole dam in/dam out debate has been the city and it's planners have NEVER estimated in detail the total costs of the dam removal option. So, the HRWC has created smoke screens like the Argo maintenance money coming from the drinking water fund to divert attention from this fact. Besides, where the maintenance money comes from is just an accounting issue that has nothing to do with the debate about the dam itself.

81wolverine

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 8:56 p.m.

This is just another cheap trick by Laura Rubin and the HRWC to resurrect the Argo Dam removal topic. No where in the article does it explain what the dam has to do with the fluctuating flow of the river. The only statement: "Rubin suggests three likely reasons for the rivers variations - Barton Dam, Argo Dam or Allens Creek." comes from Rubin herself - not exactly credible given her recent single-minded crusade to have the Argo Dam removed. It sounds like based on Mr. Vielmetti's comments that Allen Creek is where most of the high water flow is coming from - runoff from various areas of the city after high rain or snow melt events. How is removing the dam going to reduce that flow? With a free flowing river, I see no less exposure to occasional "floods" down the river when heavy rains occur. Again, this is another cheap ploy by the HRWC to keep the Argo Dam removal scheme in front of the public despite the complete lack of economic and ecological justification for taking it out.

Marco

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 7:37 p.m.

Re: tearing down "a perfectly good dam at a huge cost to Ann Arbor tax payers": Set aside the fact that, environmentally speaking, "a perfectly good dam" is an oxymoron. Fiscally, this thing is a boondoggle; the city has totally failed to figure out how it will pay to maintain the dam. There is no plan to pay the dam's significant long term costs. It's being paid for now by the drinking water fund—siphoning money from water infrastructure repairs—which cannot and should not continue. But the city still does not know what funds will pay. The embankment is taking on water and must be fixed. A big maintenance is due in a year or two. Taking the dam out will cost money. But so will keeping it in, and the longer it stays, the more it costs. So who's going to pay for it?

braggslaw

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 6:01 p.m.

I am looking forward to Class I or II rapids when the dam is removed. After the dam removal the oxygen content of the river in that area will dramatically increase so I see the Smallmouth bass population exploding and madtoms, hellgrammites, ephrons, Hex etc. returning to the area. There will also be in increase in bird and animal life as the river is restored.

Soothslayer

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 5:53 p.m.

The Argo dams "purpose" is long gone and was ill conceived to begin with. It needs to go so that more natural flow and fishing can return to the area. There's other areas that can be used for rowing all around, really there ARE (yeah maybe gotta consider carpooling but hey we're Ann Arbor right?).

John of Saline

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 1:34 p.m.

I wonder if the dam's feedback could be adjusted to smooth out the flow rate.

lisap

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 12:09 p.m.

Hopefully this is not another ploy on the part of the HRWC to try and tear down a perfectly good dam at a huge cost to Ann Arbor tax payers, and a huge loss of a beautiful blue park space. Leave the dam alone already!

Brian Vernellis

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 11:25 a.m.

Here's a background of the HRWC from its web site. http://www.hrwc.org/about/

tdw

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 11:20 a.m.

@Brian who is this so called " Council" made up of? is it just a bunch of Ann Arborites who think they own the entire river?

Rasputin

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 11:11 a.m.

Please, please please remove the damn dam!

braggslaw

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 9:59 a.m.

Tear the dam down, it is destroying the ecology of the river.

Davidian

Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 9:51 a.m.

Maybe now city council will understand why preserving Argo is a colossal FAIL.