By Paul in Illinois on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 12:26 am:
The Discussion Board at the Copper Range Railroad site has alot of info on the Redridge dam both pro and con.
Yes, building dams on that site changed the environment. Yes, we needed and used the copper those dams helped produce. Yes, we aren't always good at taking care of the environment. Yes, there are billions of us that require food and shelter - we WILL have an environmental impact. We need to use what God and/or nature gave us wisely.
The Redridge Dam became surplus during the '30's when the Baltic Mine closed. Since they continued to use the railroad trestle there, the dam was maintained. There were weirs and an overflow spillway to prevent the dam "topping over" The steel dam itself did not fail in '43 and '76, the system did and it did top over. Copper Range cut the holes in '79 as an expedient means to stop maintaining the dam. By doing that, they started the slow distruction of both the wood and the steel dams, and left the problem for the township residents. The wood dam, after being submerged for 70 years, did its job for and another 25 before it had to be removed or fixed. The holes cut in the steel dam relived the pressure on it, but years of outflow have caused alot of damage to the concrete footings. That will be the next opportunity. Then there is the road and the fill - essentially another dam a couple of hundreds yards downstream. If the steel dam goes, money will have to spent on the road.
The steel dam has historical and engineering significance. It is worth preserving and stabilizing for those reasons and the purely practical reason that it will cost less to save it now than it will to remove it later. The site would make a great multi-use park. From what I saw last month, a good compromise might have been achieved. There is still some of the wood dam left, the reservoir is smaller, but the aquatic it life it supported for over 100 years still has a home. And the steel dam can still stand as a memeorial to the humans that designed and built it. Man and his works are part of the environment, useing resources is not inherently evil. We are here and we have to use resources to survive. If one really doesn't want to have an environmental impact, they need to stop eating and get off the planet - sorry, there just isn't any other way. We need to use our brains and plan for the furture.
By FRNash/PHX, AZ on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 01:04 am:
Lovely flowing stream good. Dam bad.
Do we need a bounty on those dastardly beavers?
By danbury on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 02:54 am:
Well put, Paul. Now, how do we agree on just how much impact is acceptable/necessary?
I certainly do not like big dams (Right on, that people to the desert remark, Dr. Nat!), but since I prefer less fossile and nuclear energy plants, I have to think about them. I should like to think that quite a lot of smaller dams would cause less impact (and possible damage?) than some of the superlarge constructions there are.
There have been small mill runs in Germany for centuries, and with modern day knowledge, they could be integrated into streams with minimized impact on ecology.
By Candy, CA on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 11:20 am:
Shawn, your pictures are fantastic! You got to see all the seasons while you were there!
By Euroman, MI on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 12:29 pm:
Old photos from Pequaming can be found on this website along with other towns from Baraga County.
http://www.hwy41north.com/historical_photos.html
By Joe Dase MTU Mining Engineer on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 12:47 pm:
Dam Guy-
Its illegal unless you obtain the proper permits