Meeting Highlights: Team of Experts in Favor of Removing Dam

In an effort to have the vote in favor of the access agreement for habital restoration and , the Clinton River Watershed Council brought numerous professionals well versed in biology, fisheries and dam removals to the meeting Tuesday night.

The board ended up , with a 4-2 vote, with members approving the project noting that after hearing the experts’ opinion, it is the township’s best option for habital restoration and to avoid liability if the dam falls on its own in the future. Though most , one resident, Greg Lautzenheiser, expressed his support.

"No one likes change but I think this will be a win-win investment in our community … and I do support it whole heartedly," Lautzenheiser said.

A win-win situation revolving around dollars and sense, as Dan Keifer, former employee of the Watershed Council and member of the technical advisory committee put it, was what many experts focused on.

“With 100 percent funding already in place this grant is ready to roll,” said Anne Vaara, executive director of the Clinton River Watershed Council.

The township avoiding liability lawsuits, the removal being done at no cost to the township and the benefits to the wild life in the creek were addressed along with several other items in favor to the scene change.

Here are additional highlights from the team in favor of removing the dam:

• Vaara noted that the mill race hasn’t been cleaned properly in quite some time as it was intended for use.
• Residents will be facing a continuation of sediment deposition regardless of whether the dam is removed or not, Vaara said.
• The mill race is on private property and doesn’t meet criteria for the grant for habital restoration because it is viewed as a historical asset more so than an environmental one, but the council submitted a list of other possible grant sources the neighboring residents could pursue.
• According to Vaara the use of the grant should not be put on hold while seeking out other funding resources
• The council ensured as stated in their reports that the “dam should be removed in a manner that will preserve the historical significance and marker for the millrace including maintaining flows that are necessary for this”
• Other Michigan dam failures were brought to the attention of the board to demonstrate that the dam could fail by natural causes and the township would be responsible because they own it. The council noted the potential of being sued is one of the possibilities they will risk by not removing it.
• Jim Francis, fisheries biologist with the Michigan DNR, noted that it will benefit fisheries, ecology of the creek and other aquatic resources. 
• “This is a very sound, good project that will undoubtedly benefit the ecology of Paint Creek,” said Scott Tiegs, assistant professor of biological sciences at Oakland University.
• Bryan Burroughs, member of the technical advisory committee, said, “This project is the opportune and the ideal time … the important thing to know is these are incredibly hard-to-acquire funds.” He also noted similar grants are diminishing.

Board Trustee Marc Edwards, who had showed his cards at the beginning of the meeting pointed at the biologists and said, “at the end of the day we have to believe these guys” as he proceeded to make a motion to approve the removal of the dam.