Author Topic: Scientific References - You MUST be joking!!!  (Read 24 times)

Michael Caswell

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
  • Location: Fairport NY
Scientific References - You MUST be joking!!!
« on: March 13, 2021, 04:58:43 am »
I almost fell off my chair when I read this!   (Actually, this was a re-read, but I'd forgotten how stupid the article was.)

I guess the philosophy at the STCC is, if you keep telling the same lie, folks will eventually believe it. FAKE NEWS? Methinks so!


https://sites.google.com/view/eriecanalclearcutting/scientific-references?authuser=0   

Which states ----

"Research and international practice indicates NO consensus that levees and embankments must be tree-free to ensure safety.  There is little empirical evidence that woody vegetation poses any risk to embankment stability; it is clear that trees themselves do NOT pose a major risk.  In fact, there are good reasons to believe that the trees on the canal embankments are in fact stabilizing these embankments."

Firstly, the STCC has never recognized that there is a huge difference between a LEVEE and an EARTHEN EMBANKMENT DAM. They seem to avoid the fact that levees are flood deterrents, while earthen dams are water impounding structures with much different rules.

Secondly, and MOST importantly, the published article the STCC references, is ONLY talking about trees on levees. The LEADERS of this Facebook group  have taken the "liberty" of adding the word "embankments" to try and steer the conversation the way that best fits their narrative. That is NOT what those who published this article said.

Read the article, is a discussion about levee construction, for irrigation purposes, not earthen embankment dams for retaining water, or building a canal waterway..

In this article, you'll see the 'expert witness' Dr Donald Grey, (a gentleman specifically called to testimony by the STCC) stating the difference between a levee and an embankment dam.


https://eriecanalfacts.wordpress.com/2018/04/19/testimony-in-question-vegetation-on-dams/

The article further expounds their theories -

Key conclusion from the literature review:

"The effects of widespread vegetation removal on the stability of natural slopes have been studied extensively as a result of a timber harvesting practice of widespread removal of trees known as clear-cutting.
 
Clear-cutting on natural slopes and streambanks generally leads to an increase in slope failures (Gray and Megahan 1989; O’Loughlin 1974; Pollen-Bankhead et al. 2009; Sidle et al. 1985; Wu and Swanston 1980; Ziemer 1978). ...

Both benefits and risks of converting wooded levees to grass-covered levees, including the engineering feasibility and economic costs of such conversion, have yet to be fully investigated."


Notice - there is Dr Gray - yes the same man who stated to the ECNA:

"I don’t know of any earth dams where woody vegetation was purposely planted or allowed to grow on a face of the dam.  Such is not the case with earthen levees where vegetation can often be found growing on both the landward and water sides.

An earthen dam is designed and built to prevent overtopping and minimize through-flow (seepage).   

Overtopping of an earth dam is prevented by building the dam high enough.   


By comparison earthen levees have been built mainly to withstand breaching that can occur during river flood conditions, through-flow and lateral scour.  The presence of vegetation on a levee helps prevent erosion that can occur during overtopping and lateral scour", while the levee is being used during flood conditions.


A LEVEE IS NOT WHAT ERIE CANAL EMBANKMENTS ARE, - THESE BERMS ARE ALL EARTHEN DAMS.

Levees do not have a phreatic line, and are NOT under pressure from the impounded or contained water, except in a time of flooding.

Many people have brought this FACT to the attention of the STCC on numerous occasions, yet they STILL ignore the difference between a levee and a dam.

Notice the STCC article carefully avoids the word DAM, because they know darned well, all the rules about phreatic lines and the avoidance of trees on a dam come into play.

But what else is expected from a group that uses distraction, deception & disinformation as "weapons" in their battle against NYPA, the Canal Corporation and public safety along the Erie Canal?


« Last Edit: March 13, 2021, 10:59:52 am by Doug K »

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Doug K

  • ECNA Co-Founder
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 674
  • Location: Brockport
    • ECNA US
Re: Scientific References - You MUST be joking!!!
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2021, 10:59:36 am »
Good points made by Mr. Caswell, once again, but perhaps the most significant statement anyone could make about Erie Canal Safety & the Stop the Canal Clear-Cut group on Facebook is this one:

But what else is expected from a group that uses distraction, deception & disinformation as "weapons" in their battle against NYPA, the Canal Corporation and public safety along the Erie Canal?

I can only add this:

Of course you can try to convince yourself that you will get the same level of information on Earthen Embankment Dam Safety from a group on Facebook, who is trying to save "shade", and prevent the NYS Canal Corporation from actually fixing their "non-compliant" dams in the State of New York.

I'm sure the leadership of this Stop the Canal Clear-Cut group has credentials that shows their expertise in Dam Safety, and that they have read and understood all of the Dam Safety rules & regulations of New York, and those published by other agencies tasked with providing SAFE dams in this country.


https://ecna.createaforum.com/the-stop-the-clearcut-argument/why-grass-is-good!/?message=1430
« Last Edit: March 13, 2021, 11:01:02 am by Doug K »