Results 11 to 20 of 33
Thread: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
-
June 21st, 2017, 10:22 AM #11
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Because of water level changes, fishing access is not likely. Some dumb sh*t will get caught up in rising water. It is possible to provide a separate, smaller lake for recreation as part of the project. That is what was done at Muddy Run in Lancaster county.
Illegitimus non carborundum est
-
June 21st, 2017, 10:32 AM #12
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Careful, now you're starting to sound like an Excelon Energy employee. Oh no, some dumb shit won't hear the sirens we need to stop the people from fishing along the shore line south of the dam.
That is the kind of crap I was alluding to in my previous post. Excelon Energy now controls both Safe Harbor and Conowingo and they have done everything they can do to limit fishing on "their" property enough those there was previously an agreement to allow fishing. Conowingo no longer allows fishing from the catwalk. Safe Harbor closed off fishing from the shore on the east side of the river. If you cross the rail line you're trespassing which completely blocks the entire eastern side of the Susquehanna.
Congowingo was done shortly after 9/11 because terrorism. Yet, they don't stop to think that someone could parking a fucking truck full of explosives right beside the generator building on the dam and blow the whole thing to shit. The rail lines started to be enforced because of a couple of stupid people getting caught on the tracks, and as far as I know there weren't any incidents at Safe Harbor, but they still closed down the shore line. Then there's Holtwood dam where the company, I believe again Excelon, decided to close the park because they didn't want to pay to maintain even though there was supposed to be an agreement in perpetuity to maintain the park for the public. That was put in place as retribution for taking the land to begin with.
If public land is going to be taken for use like that, something needs to be given back to the public in exchange.Rules are written in the stone,
Break the rules and you get no bones,
all you get is ridicule, laughter,
and a trip to the house of pain.
-
June 21st, 2017, 10:55 AM #13
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
The Holtwood park situation is not Excelon, it is Talen which sold the power plant, but still owned the park with no way to manage it. They should have made arrangements for continuity of the park either with the company that bought the power plant, or with the township or county. They really screwed the pooch on that one!
At the Holtwood dam they use lights and sirens to warn of rising water. I thought they did the same at Safe Harbor, but apparently not, or not anymore. Sorry to hear that.Illegitimus non carborundum est
-
June 21st, 2017, 11:39 AM #14
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Safe Harbor and Conowingo still use lights and sirens to warn of rising levels. It's worked fine since the dams were built. No real reason to change it, maybe we should be letting Darwin do more of the work. If you're too stupid to get out of the way, then you're probably too stupid to live. There's more than enough time when the sirens sound to get off the shoreline.
I don't know if you followed the resolution of the park or not, but it was eventually turned over to the Lancaster County Conservatory and it's open again. That was good, but it doesn't really resolve the other issues with the other dams. I know at Holtwood you used to be able to walk right down to the platform on the west side of the dam, I think they fenced that off now too, probably due to terrorism. I think the overlook at Safe Harbor is now closed, but I'm not sure of the one at Holtwood, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.
Holtwood Overlook: http://www.jedidiahstolzfus.com/holt...k-holtwood-pa/
Holtwood West side: http://www.jedidiahstolzfus.com/holt...m-holtwood-pa/
Safe Harbor Overlook: http://www.jedidiahstolzfus.com/safe...-conestoga-pa/
I did have another one standing on the railroad bridge over the Conestoga where it empties into the Susquehanna, but it's been lost now.Rules are written in the stone,
Break the rules and you get no bones,
all you get is ridicule, laughter,
and a trip to the house of pain.
-
June 21st, 2017, 11:55 AM #15
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Thanks for the update on the park. I knew something was in the works, but did not know the result. Here is a bit of trivia for you. On the back side of the substation on the Holtwood Overlook, There used to be an unofficial shooting range in the right of way. As I remember it was only 50 or 100 yards and consisted of a bench and a single backstop. That went away some time in the 1990s.
Illegitimus non carborundum est
-
June 21st, 2017, 12:19 PM #16Super Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
- Location
-
Levittown,
Pennsylvania
(Bucks County) - Age
- 69
- Posts
- 843
- Rep Power
- 4386769
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
There would have to be some sort of land swap as the SGL were also purchased with Pittman-Robertson federal excise money that would have to be repaid back to the feds other wise.
-
June 21st, 2017, 02:09 PM #17
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Is this supposed to be a power project or a reservoir project? If it's power, it seems like an awful lot of work to create power, in making an artificial flowing source of water. Where is the water on the upper level coming from? The article mentions something about a self contained system, so that would mean they'd be pumping the water back up to the upper level. How much energy would they be expending to pump the water back up and how much energy would be left over for usage in other places?
Rules are written in the stone,
Break the rules and you get no bones,
all you get is ridicule, laughter,
and a trip to the house of pain.
-
June 21st, 2017, 02:21 PM #18
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
It all works on the principle of buy low -- sell high. The net in power is negative, but the idea is to use cheaper night time power to fill the reservoir, then sell it back at high daytime prices (think heat wave) and make a profit. It is an established method that works. They actually use more power to fill than they get coming back, but the price difference makes it profitable.
Muddy run was established to use the cheap power from Peach Bottom to fill the lake.Illegitimus non carborundum est
-
June 21st, 2017, 02:28 PM #19
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Ahh, see I'm looking at it from a physics standpoint, not the funny money standpoint.
So the water is a self contained system, but the plant would still need to get power from another source to refill their upper reservoir. Still seems like a waste of resources, it may be a "proven" system in regards to bookkeeping, but not so much in the technological sense.Rules are written in the stone,
Break the rules and you get no bones,
all you get is ridicule, laughter,
and a trip to the house of pain.
-
June 21st, 2017, 02:29 PM #20Super Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Location
-
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
(Allegheny County) - Posts
- 898
- Rep Power
- 1265929
Re: Proposed Taking of Game Lands
Smith Mountain and Leesville lakes in Va work in a similar fashion.
The Lord Bless You
Similar Threads
-
york game lands
By southpoleman69 in forum RangesReplies: 7Last Post: July 14th, 2013, 06:13 PM -
State Game Lands (109)
By 40calman in forum PennsylvaniaReplies: 5Last Post: November 24th, 2011, 01:07 PM -
CC On State Game Lands
By 40calman in forum Concealed CarryReplies: 1Last Post: November 23rd, 2011, 01:11 PM -
Game Lands?
By Wasz in forum GeneralReplies: 8Last Post: May 14th, 2009, 01:40 PM
Bookmarks