Flood Review

[swamp1967]

Robert Lake

Having seen recent flooding in the south-east Kelowna, i wanted to see how our lovely City of Kelowna is handling creek flooding elsewhere. Anyone familar with Robert Lake out in Glenmore? https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.9363219,-119.4097138,720m/data=!3m1!1e3

Anyone understand why the City installed a pump and lots of pipe to drain a lake, that as far as I can tell has no homes near the lake?

[Fancy]

We were down at Antler Beach on Thursday and saw this sail boat high and dry. Now wishing I had been more proactive and tied it off to something before the water line rises and it drifts from shore.

20180419_102139.jpeg

20180419_102447.jpeg

Finders keepers

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

20180421_154551 (Resize).jpg

Having seen recent flooding in the south-east Kelowna, i wanted to see how our lovely City of Kelowna is handling creek flooding elsewhere. Anyone familar with Robert Lake out in Glenmore? https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.9363219,-119.4097138,720m/data=!3m1!1e3

Anyone understand why the City installed a pump and lots of pipe to drain a lake, that as far as I can tell has no homes near the lake?

Not sure what you mean ? The road to the houses on the east side is not high above the water, it looks like they have actually raised the road with fill. The water in the lake there is very high.

[Grandan]

20180421_154551 (Resize).jpg

Having seen recent flooding in the south-east Kelowna, i wanted to see how our lovely City of Kelowna is handling creek flooding elsewhere. Anyone familar with Robert Lake out in Glenmore? https://www.google.ca/maps/@49.9363219,-119.4097138,720m/data=!3m1!1e3

Anyone understand why the City installed a pump and lots of pipe to drain a lake, that as far as I can tell has no homes near the lake?

Going back to the late '90's there was an incident where a bicyclist drowned in Robert Lake when he rode off the edge of the flooded private road.
This is not the first time that Robert Lake has been pumped to bring down the water level because it was also done around the time of the flooding drowning. Around the same time the road bed was also raised with several feet of gravel to minimize the frequency of flooding the road.
I have noticed the amount of water flowing in Brandt's creek East Branch is unusually high and commented to my wife about it yesterday where it flows through our property. The water level would have to rise about 4 ft before it overflows the bank into the neighbouring orchard and another 4 ft before it reached our place so never a worry there.
Thanks for the tip, I'll be checking all this out.

[60-YEARS-in-Ktown]

There is about a thousand feet of pipe or more , to get it to flow quickly down the creek. They will be pumping a while..

[Grandan]

I did not get any notification of the release of Robert Lake water into Brandt's Creek. It is my responsibility to ensure that the creek is not blocked (on my property) so it would be helpful to know in advance that this would be coming. I was wondering why the roadside ditches along Sexsmith and Mail Roads were nicely cleaned up recently. I have not been along Curtis for a week or more so I don't know about that section.

[featfan]

https://wateroffice.ec.gc.ca/report/rea ... tn=08NM116

Big jump in Mission Creek flow in the last 2 days.

[Fancy]

Doesn't appear to have affected the lake level - yet.

[OldBlindDog]

Walked across the bridge off the Ziprick Road parking lot yesterday. The water is very brown and muddy, so the spring runoff has begun in earnest. Using the little beach by the bridge as a reference point, the water is nowhere near last year's high water point yet, though it is noticeably higher than it was a week ago. Of course, it is still early and there is a lot of snow to melt. The spawning channel and irrigation canal are both at a high water level.

[andrea-lake]

Still Gambling with a Flood

The water managers are reassuring the public that the lake level is 50 cm lower now than it was at this time last year. That may sound like a lot BUT is last year the appropriate comparison?

They told us they were managing the lake in 2017 on the assumption that it would be a relatively dry year. Instead of using 2017, wouldn’t the correct comparison be with the standards developed from 80+ years of experience operating the dam? The lake level rules from 1974 which were re-affirmed in the 1998 flood review state that in a high freshet year they should draw down the lake to a minimum of 341.32 meters and if they expect an extreme freshet they should lower it down by another 30 cm to 341.02 meters.

The lake managers should instead be saying, “Although we have drawn the lake down to 341.45 meters, the best advice from decades of past experience says we should be drawing it down to a minimum of 341.32 meters and potentially to 341.02 meters if we expect a wet spring on top of the very high snow pack".

What if they make a mistake this year by using the wrong standard of comparison? If the lake floods again how would they justify their actions in another flood review report? The water managers should be saying, “Despite drawing down the lake to its current level, it is still at a minimum of 10 cm above the recommended level for a high freshet year and 30 cm to 40 cm above the recommended level for an extremely high freshet year”. Contrast that with what they are actually saying to the public.

[LTD]

the lake will be fine i would be more concerned if lived by a creek especially around the end of the week

[brentville]

Still Gambling with a Flood

You nailed it, GAMBLING!

The Ministry starts entering data into their inflow prediction program as early as November....5 or 6 months ahead of the target date? I'm pretty damn sure these fools don't own a crystal ball and REAL Meteorologists say 7 day forecasts are pushing the limits of today's science. "Weather models do a relatively good job at helping meteorologists predict what the weather will do three to five days in advance, but anything beyond 7 days is stretching the limits of accuracy and science." - CWG Meteorologist Dr. Steve Tracton https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/10/08/accuweathers-45-day-forecast-fails-to-impress-in-multi-city-test/?utm_term=.fb999bc2de8a Their own Programmer stated that 10 day forecasts were useless garbage...yet they start predictions 6 months ahead!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Ministry blames the 2017 flooding on "extremely unusual weather conditions"...*bleep*? Weather can be unpredictable! They obviously knew this because they operate a program specifically designed to predict the results of weather conditions 1/2 a year in advance. You can't do this and then claim you had no idea "extreme weather" even existed! F g A s The risks were known and they took the chance anyway!

Who delegated these morons to play God with the Okanagan Lake levels anyway? They even commissioned a white-wash report that exemplified Staff for following procedures...even though those procedures caused the flooding. This report conspicuously ignores the real question, WHAT CAUSED THE FLOODING?.

What caused the flooding: Attempting to predict lake levels by feeding data, known to be suspect, into an inflow prediction program and then acting upon the results as if they were written in stone! Not an act of God and definitely not "extreme weather" by itself. If they hadn't deliberately raised the lake level some 480 mm above normal, "extreme weather" alone wouldn't have caused any flood damage.

[Glacier]

Um no one has a crystal ball, so they are making an educated guess. I trust their judgement over anyone on this forum.

[andrea-lake]

I agree with LTD, the creeks and rivers are of most concern right now. The lake still might be fine, and my sample forecast chart on “Monitoring lake level to prevent flood” (link below) demonstrates that same probability.
viewtopic.php?f=119&t=77601&start=30

However, the authorities are still taking a gamble on how high the lake could rise if we get a wet spring and/or if the freshet happens too quickly. They don’t build enough of a contingency for unexpected weather in addition to a higher than normal snowpack. As Brentville points out, the weather is unpredictable. Consequently, they should begin to increase the rate of drawdown earlier and follow the 1974 standards based on 80+ years of historical experience. That is the judgement we should be relying on, and these rules were re-affirmed in the 1998 flood review.

[seewood]

However, the authorities are still taking a gamble on how high the lake could rise if we get a wet spring and/or if the freshet happens too quickly. They don’t build enough of a contingency for unexpected weather in addition to a higher than normal snowpack. As Brentville points out, the weather is unpredictable. Consequently, they should begin to increase the rate of drawdown earlier and follow the 1974 standards based on 80+ years of historical experience. That is the judgement we should be relying on, and these rules were re-affirmed in the 1998 flood review.

From observations while walking the dogs over the dam and down the channel the past month or so, All I can say, I really don't know how much more the dam could be opened and increase the flow. We all know the channel was engineered for a max flow volume, which was exceeded last year for some time. Currently the channel is pretty high.
Also, I really don't know about the down stream lakes, dam flows and the flows into the US. Me thinks this emptying of the lake is so much more than just opening the dams and be damb'd of those downstream well into the US.
If it is a slow melt or even with this week of warm weather, I don't think we will have too much of an issue with really high water. If a moisture laden storm hits us right after this warm weather, the lake will fill much like last year. Drain too much and then it goes dry for the next 5 months or so, 2003 was like that, there will be complaints the lake is too low...