More work begins on Savage Rapids

Text Size: A | A | A

Print this Article Email this Article

Loading...

Matt Carstensen of Rogue River searches for treasure with a metal detector along the Rogue River near the site of the old Savage. The federal Bureau of Reclamation is developing a plan to redirect the river channel at Savage Rapids to the south bank to provide water for irrigation pumps that replaced the dam.Jamie Lusch

February 08, 2010

By Mark Freeman

Mail Tribune

The Rogue River's newly reconstituted “Savage Rapids” created by last fall's removal of Savage Rapids Dam isn't behaving the way water managers want it to.

So the new rapid is due for a set of reconstruction measures meant to make the Rogue bend there in a way that keeps the Grants Pass Irrigation District in business.

Construction crews as early as late this week will move about 6,500 cubic yards of gravel and rock once trapped behind the dam so it won't continue clogging GPID's pumping station built downstream to replace the dam.

Next summer, work crews likely will build a jetty or some other structure off the river's north bank to redirect the Rogue toward the pumps on the river's south bank.
Without the diversion, the plant could be left high and dry because the river has chosen to hug the north bank and steer away from the plant's water intakes ever since the rapid was restored in October.

“That's what we need to make this work,” GPID manager Dan Shepard said. “As long as that jetty's part of it, we're getting what we need.”

Officials from the federal Bureau of Reclamation, which has overseen the $39.3 million project, just can't seem to shake themselves free of the Rogue's biggest dam-removal effort, which has been more than 20 years in the making.

Bureau officials hope moving the gravels and sediments and building the jetty will remove any lingering doubts about whether the river and GPID's pumping station can coexist where the Rogue's worst fish-killer once stood.

“We have every intention to address this so the district isn't in the lurch,” said Bob Hamilton, the bureau's project manager.

“We think it will work perfectly when the sediment is moved,” Hamilton said. “We view the jetty as an insurance policy. When we walk away, we want to have that insurance policy.”

Nothing has worked perfectly at Savage Rapids since Slayden Construction Group crews breached a temporary dam and sent water streaming through the rapid for the first time since the old dam was built in 1921.

The construction plans assumed that a series of winter storms would carry away an estimated 250,000 cubic yards of gravel, rocks and other debris freed by the dam's removal.

But no such storm has materialized. The only freshet of sorts came on New Year's Eve, but the brief peak flow of 10,000 cubic feet per second was high enough only to move tons of gravel in front of the plant's water intakes.

“Mother Nature didn't provide the flood that we need,” Hamilton said.

So what was planned to happen naturally must be done artificially.

The bureau is in the process of amassing permits necessary to allow Slayden crews to dig out an estimated 3,500 cubic yards of gravel from in front of the intakes and push it downstream.

Meanwhile, Hamilton is negotiating with Slayden to enter the Rogue during a low-flow window to push an estimated 5,000 cubic yards of gravel from the middle of the Rogue channel to the south bank, behind what's left of the concrete dam. The rock cannot be hauled away because that would be considered mining.

That alone won't solve GPID's potential water woes, Shepard said.

Because the Rogue's new meander takes it away from the plant, plans now call for building a rock jetty or some other structure to push the stream south so it flows past the screened intake.

Engineers from the Bureau of Reclamation will design that structure this year, and construction likely will occur in mid-summer when water flows are low, Hamilton said. Whatever the design, it is not expected to be a navigational hazard for boaters, he said.

Hamilton said a ballpark estimate for the jetty was “a couple hundred thousand dollars.”
Slayden was expected to be under budget for the overall project, but all the bills have not reached the bureau, so no estimate was available Friday on how far below budget the project was.

Hamilton said he anticipated that enough money would remain to fund the jetty work.

Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 776-4470, or e-mail at mfreeman@mailtribune.com.

Print this Article Email this Article