The lock and dam building near the stone arch bridge has an interesting history of the falls. For those looking for a place to take their kids (or to spend some time alone or with a friend), I'd definitely recommend it. Watching the falls from the bridge during the spring can be pretty awesome as well.
It's been a while since I've been down there, but from what I recall, we wouldn't be looking at a couple thousand years before the falls had retreated upstream. The history discusses how far the falls have moved, and it's remarkably fast. Capping it was economically necessary at the time as Minneapolis/St. Anthony's viability depended on power generated by the falls. Human error did greatly contribute to the speed that the city was going to lose use of the falls had they not been capped, but it would have happened sooner or later. Due to the damage that occured to the falls back then, I think we would be unlikely to see a "grand waterfall" (unless that was engineered) - it would be far more likely to see a step cascade that would relatively quickly change into a rapids. You're right that it probably would be quite pleasant to view (and possibly canoe/kayak). I'm not necessarily against the idea of letting it naturally retreat up the river and disappear, but it's not something that should be considered lightly. The retreat of the falls upstream will dramatically change the face of the river as it moves upstream. Impact on riverfront property and development would need to be considered as well as potential impact on the bridges, docks, etc. There's also the fact that the river is used by boats and barges for various purposes. A lock and dam are going to be required to get around any non-navigable water. Having that non-navigable section on the move could be quite a difficult thing to manage. A century of upper river development has been based on the assumption that the falls were done moving. There's also the question of whether or not we get use (or could get use) out of the dam for power generation or other purposes. All things that need to be considered and balanced. I agree that the cap is not very attractive, although, it is more interesting to look at after reading the story of the effort it took to get it put in place. It might be nice to re-engineer the falls, but my feeling is that it is something that should wait until we're out of debt and have more fundamental needs taken care of. It'd be interesting if a private philanthropist wanted to take it on. - Jason Goray, Sheridan, NE > Yes, this is true that a natural and free St Anthony > Falls would gradually retreat upstream and > eventually erode down to a stretch of rapids. > However, it may be a beautiful and grand waterfall > to behold for one or two thousand years until that > happens. I find a lot of beauty in natural river > rapids also - much more beauty than I usually find > in artificial stream impoundments behind concrete. > >> I expect that's not possible. It's not the >> construction projects that have been the most >> damaging (although that tunnel under the river that >> collapsed was a Real Problem). The problem with >> "restoring" St. Anthony Falls is that the falls are >> created from a limestone cap over a layer of >> sandstone. The water erodes the softer sandstone, >> and the limestone cap, unsupported, breaks off. >> St. Anthony Falls thus retreats upstream, and has >> been doing so for 1,000s of years. The limestone >> cap gets increasingly thin as it is followed >> upstream. Shortly upstream of the place of the >> current St. Anthony Falls, the limestone peters out >> and disappears. Without that, St. Anthony Falls >> becomes a ripple in the river. The apron that is >> the current falls is protecting the remaining >> limestone. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:mpls@;mnforum.org Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
