food for thought

In this day an age of technology, why hasn't a pipeline from the lake to the far upper reaches of the salmon river been put in. It would have to be pumped up from the lake but then dumped back into the river so that there would be recreational water for both fishing and kayaking without the worry of a drought. The salmon/trout would have plenty to swim up in as well as that water would be cooler as it flows through that under ground line. They have big pipes doing just that here in the catskills for NYC water supply, and that's longer. The portal on the esopus creek is a prime example. Since the hatchery provides for the whole lake communities this would be a smart idea to insure that it gets its quota of fish. Let alone what it could do to the summer runs. If it was dumped into the lower reservoir it could also help generate the power used by the pumps. What do ya think?

The NYC watershed is a gravity fed system.  The cost to not only build but pump water uphill would be astronomical and not practical. 
 

Lets run it by Obama and his Chicago crowd,they had no problem giving that Solar Co. 500 million so they could go bankrupt in style.Hell it's only money they can print tons of it to flush the river LMAO!

Well, primarily cold water distribution piping is usually designed and sized to move the water through the pipe at 7' per second. Using this as a basis, lets assume a 14" diameter pipe would be suitable for a proportional example to referrence it to cfs (cubic feet per second)...with that being said, a 14"diameter diameter pipe at standard operating velocity would produce 7 cfs. So, lets think bigger now... lets think of a dual triplex system that would consist of 6 28"supply pipes(each with capabilities of approximately 14 cfs)... this would approximately supply 84 cfs of return water based on typical pipe sizing velocity standards... now lets talk pumping...most high rises and skyscrapers are engineered for gravity feed from a storage reservoir on the roof top. When it comes to head pressure, the size of pipe has no meaning at all... a one foot column of water loses the same head pressure for every foot of rise regardless of diameter...with that being said, how tall is the empire state building???? I doubt the salmon river has near that rise in elevation from the lake to the lower reservoir so pumping is not as intense as one would think... for routing of pipes, the river would be a perfect channel for the pipes to follow...it would basically just be a return loop of water from the river mouth to the lower res... and yes hook, it would get cooled significantly... is this thinking way out of the box...YES... but its ideas like this that built this world in to what it is today...cool thought hook and thanks for sharing... id assume your fire hose experience has something to do with your idea ;)

On the other hand, before base flows came about with the 185 cfs, the river always managed to sustain itself in the summer...and yes kings always showed up early here and there with an early run every now and then... and ot was a guarantee that the church pool was loaded with steelhead and browns by mid august every year...im talking about before the fly zone was even opened...secondly, and most importantly, the river ran more of a natural course....there was no distinguished bank and when flows were turned off to absolutely just about nothing, this gave ample time and space for roots and plants to sustain a good root base and protect river banks from washing out. And most of all, it allowed the reservoir to sustain more water...and colder water at times...
maybe the 185 base flow overall is not as good for the fishery as they thought it would be... maybe its doing the exact opposite...look around, the river is eroding, the summer trout are no wheres what they used to be and most importantly...the reservoir is getting sucked dry too often...

Wow, thats a lot of food for thought....lol

i do agree with dime that the artificial flow rates they establish and the water management practices they use for power generation and flood prevention (something they do a wonderful job of :) )have caused the river to have issues and not fit the flow pattern or bank errosion patterns streams like the SR should have....if left to nature it would be much more of a channel, not over widened and eroding banks like it is today

Dime,  those numbers you put up are  actually close to the minimum flow of 185cfs. You might want to consult a flow/velocity/diameter calculator. I did it with a chewed on pencil...  A few other little engineering mistakes....Dumb carpenter's like me are sometimes good at math. lol.  Before any dams were constructed, the Atlantic runs were phenomenal and self-perpetuating.  One thing to consider about the river being primarily a channel with occasional  fall lines- wading possibilities are severely reduced.  The fisherman/days calculation would be cut down  considerably. Not many gravel bars to hang on.  This would be good or bad, depending on how you look at it. Drift boats would rule.  The river might not broaden until it reached the estuary. Hmmmm.... DSR would really be worth it then.
The SR,  in its current state,(pun intended) fishes as well as many rivers in Alaska. Ain't so bad...
 
Charlie

Charlie, thank you as i did just recheck my numbers and i came up with 179.5 cfs... when i posted i was doing it in my head while typing rather than paper... see us dumb plumbers and fire sprinkler guys are too concerned with protecting the health and safety of the public rather than the math... lol...

Yes, the river is not too shabby, but i believe a better flow schedule would work better in the summers. Maybe 100 cfs during the week and 185 during the weekends... it would give more diversity to the ecosystem and allow fish to get to cold water holds and pools still...and the water savings would be pretty significant...but we do all know that the water flow deciders have no concern with the fishery.... and most of all im just a dumb plumber ;)...lol