Cameron Penney
The International Joint Commission’s Rule Curves Review Study Board hosted several public meetings last week, in both the district and across the border, to discuss the possibility of adjusting the rule curves for Rainy and Namakan lakes.
Bill Werick, a member of the technical working group, stressed the value of getting feedback from the public.
“People who are impacted by this decision will know things that we don’t know about how these impacts play out,” he reasoned.
“We’ve learned over the years that if we open up the decision process so that the people who are impacted by it see it happen, and have a role in it, they’ll have much greater confidence that the decisions are competent and honest.
When the current rule curves were implemented in 2000, it was agreed they would be examined after 15 years to assess their impact.
The curves have been under review since last August, with the study board slated to will make its recommendation to the IJC this coming spring.
“Then the IJC will have its own process to decide whether to change the rule curves or not,” Werick explained.
At the meeting held last Wednesday night at Rainy River Community College in International Falls, members of the public were offered fact sheets containing information on frequent questions, such as the control of outflow from Rainy Lake.
A preliminary weight of evidence matrix also was presented, which addressed whether the 2000 rule curves resulted in better, neutral, or worse outcomes to various factors in the basin.
Both the study board and the public agreed that while the information is useful, the matrix doesn’t currently indicate the degree of change that has occurred since 2000.
Werick noted that by attending the public meetings, he’s learned more about the rule curves than he previously knew, such as “the notion of operating at the bottom of the rule curve.”
“People have said that’s not such a bad thing,” he remarked.
“You would normally be concerned about it because as the water level drops, boaters have trouble,” Werick added, noting outboard motors would be more susceptible to damage.
“But some of the concerns are not as great as I thought they were.
“With the lower water, as the water level drops, you get more beaches,” Werick said.
“People like to go boating and go to the beach, so they get the beach with the low water.
“The lower water also gives you a little bit more room to [avoid] a flood if it happens,” he added.
During last Wednesday’s meeting, several members of the public voiced concerns over the amount of floods that have occurred here since the latest rule curves were implemented.
“The big floods, it really doesn’t make much difference whether you use [the] 1970 or 2000 [rule curves],” Werick reasoned.
“It made a great benefit to the people who live around Namakan because it gives them usable lake water in the early part of the year,” he explained.
“But there are still some things we still think we can look more closely at,” he stressed.
Werick said the current curve currently doesn’t have inter-annual variability, and there have been discussions about an adaptive rule curve.
“As an opening, the 2000 rule curves seemed to do what it promised to do—we want to make sure that we can’t do better,” Werick noted.
A total of six public meeting were held last week, with three on each side of the border.
In October, a second practice decision model will be prepared, with members of the public welcome to attend the meeting.
An initial practice decision model first was prepared in March.
Then in November, a draft decision model will begin before the final one is presented in March.
After the recommendations are presented, the IJC will decide whether to change or retain the current rule curves.
While a decision on the 2000 rule curve is still months away, Werick believes positive change will be brought forth from the recent meetings.
“The feeling I get from the meetings all around the basin is collaborative and promising,” he enthused.
“And it doesn’t always happen that way—it’s a good feeling.”
