Higgins Lake Dam (LLCS) - Could it be managed better? - Guest Post
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.
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?
Eric Ostergren
West Higgins Lake Drive
Non-Riparian Owner