I don't agree with Monica. If the channel was deeper the water would not freeze and would run into the Fraser. The shallow delta is the cause of the flood. The ice stpped on the sandbar and blocked the flow of the Nechako - - what is so difficult about that? It isn't a theory, it's a fact, If the fraser was frozen the water could stll run into the fraser under the ice. It isn't a bathtub--it's moving water and it is going downhill. Dredgeing the channel costs 'nothing' because there are companys here who would do it for the gravel. Raising the flood plain level did nothing for anyone involved. This really should go to a council meeting because right now we are listening to "one man" in edmonton who knows who, I understand from the meeting, is not an expert in this feild.

One would think that an engineer could come up with a better example than that. Personally, I'd use the bath tub example for a lake or reservoir, not a river.

That being said, I don't seem to recall the problem being that the water froze, I thought it was the fact that there was a huge ice dam that formed at the confluence, which essentially stopped the natural flow of water, causing it to find another way around. This was why they had to clear a channel was it not?

Unless you did some pretty serious dredging to the channel, I'm not sure it would accomplish all that much since the potential for backing up would still be there. How deep is the Nechako at the confluence anyway? At low water I can't imagine that the main channel is more than 5 or 6 feet deep, but maybe someone who knows can tell us.

The best solution, IMHO, is to eventually transition that whole area into a part of town that we can just let flood without worrying about property damage.

After they finish here maybe our city council and taxpayers can send them to Pakistan and introduce their "floodplain wisdom" to the locals there. Any help from us would probably be welcome. Take Danno with ya.

"The best solution, IMHO, is to eventually transition that whole area into a part of town that we can just let flood without worrying about property damage."

And where are these landowners going to relocate to? There is no other land of this zoning in town to relocate to.

"Eventually transition" was meant to imply that a process and plan would need to be undertaken in order to move everything out of that area. Part of that plan would undoubtedly include making suitable land available elsewhere for the industry and other users to relocate to. If they refused, perhaps expropriation should be an option.

We help improve the airshed, we reclaim our riverfront for more useful and pleasing purposes and we can start to redevelop the core of our city in a meaningful way. In short, we move into the 21st century instead of clinging onto the lack luster planning of our inception.

Nobody seems to remember the role of The Great Alcan in all of this??

doc
You are right.
Alcan released water which raised the ice which formed the ice jam.
Much of this problem was due to Alcan combined with extremely low temperatures.
It was not completely a natural occurrence.

NMG:
Reclaim our riverfront for more 'useful' purposes? Who is 'our'. That's a bit of an insult to the people who helped build this city and are now 'senior citizens'.
They said at the meeting expropiation was not an option. Willing seller, willing buyer may be but Dan Milburn said they are too broke to purchase the land. They are not too broke to go to China for dinner and a movie, or build a 400,000 dollar pedestrian bridge or buy a bunch of downtown outdated buildings.
Too many of the people in south fort are seniors and they don't want, nor can they afford, to leave. Being in a flood zone does not help the value of your home and selling it would leave you with nothing more than a down payment for the next one. I'm part of that retired poor group in SFG and I am not moving from my home until death takes me.

A deep, relatively narrow channel that drains all of the Nechako outflow would result in a higher velocity outflow that is less like to freeze. I have not been on the rivers this year, but in the past, after the runoff is over, the water at the confluence has been very shallow, and very slow. It makes sense to me that shallow, slow running water will freeze more readily than swift flowing deep water. Dredge it. Every September, if the water is low enough.
metalman.

You have got to be kidding me. I surely hope we aren't paying this consultant Monica women.

READ THIS MONICA>>>The reason the Nechako river over flowed it's banks a couple years back was completely and soley due to the icejam. Monica, do you know what caused the icejam? No you don't because you should be flipping burgers for a living not consulting. If the river channel isn't deep enough for the ice flowing down it to keep going it jams up on the gravel bars creating an icejam. The icejam then causes the river to overflow it's banks. The Nechako river is too shallow at it's confluence with the Fraser, thus preventing the ice from continuing on it's merryway downstream.
Go back to school Monica cause you are clueless!

Monica, Your prestigious engineering degree has failed you. Before your open your mouth and stick your foot in it,you should take a drive up airport hill,past the jail and look back at confluence of the two rivers. Dragonmaster is right. The millions of cu.ft. of sand and silt that washed down from Ottway a few years ago have choked the river at its mouth. Anyone with any common sense can see this. Dredge the river and the problem will be solved. This whole issue has gone on far too long. Try the commonsense approach. It works almost every time.The money spent on river consulting could have paved half the town. City Council... Wake up and start listening to the common experience, abundant in this town.

Monica... Commonsense engineering tells me that this is a river,not a bathtub. A bathtub will overflow if the plug is left in. You are right,raising the sides will only prolong the problem. Rivers,however,maintain their level through constant flow. If this flow is impeeded the river will spill over its banks. The deeper the river,the more volume of water will flow. This is the very problem that we face here. The river,over the years, has silted up at its mouth and impeeded the flow into the Fraser. Dredging will allow for better and faster flow,therefore the chance of an icejam is greatly reduced. I do not have an engineering degree, but I do have a degree in R.L.E. (Real Life Experience)P.S. And I don't charge a fee if I am out of touch, missinformed or wrong.

Before I read Monica's report, I felt that dredging was the best answer. Monica explained that there are two types of flooding: freshet and ice jams. Her example of the bathtub was to explain the freshet flooding.

She also tried to explained (over a chorus of rackus people) that dedging may not help and may actually increase ice jam flooding.

Does anyone remember the flood on Morning Place in 1996? It had nothing to do with the river being too shallow. This is a deep area of the river--yet it still jammed up.

Monica explained that ice jamming will happen when it is below -5C for 20 or more days. Frazzle and other ice will float down the river and jam on various things (including frozen areas of the river). This will continue until the river velocity is high enough that it can pull the ice under the water. In short, if we want to avoid ice jams, we need to keep the water velocity as high as possible. Dredging the river will increase the size of the channel, but the same amount of water will flow through. This means that dredging the river will actually decrease the velocity of the river and potentially lead to more ice jamming rather than less.

I think the idea of the side channel reliefs is a very good idea though and if dedging the water was free (because there are people wanting to buy the gravel), side channel reliefs should be free too, no?

but are the side channels gravel bed like the river?