Bureau of Reclamation shares lake operation status with local citizens

A sizeable group of stakeholders gathered at the Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area visitor center Friday to hear about the current status of Big Horn Lake water levels.

The public meeting was hosted by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Montana Area Office and covered topics including water supply conditions in the region and the Bureau’s proposed summer operating plan for the lake. Issues like sedimentation and tourism also came up during the meeting.

After an introduction by BOR Area Manager Ryan Newman, reservoir operations specialist Brooks Stephens gave the main presentation using a series of PowerPoint slides that demonstrated how the Bureau predicts when and how much the lake will fill for the season, a complicated and challenging process through which the Bureau attempts to incorporate data based on winter snowpack, spring runoff and expected precipitation.

Stephens noted that a combination of factors that include a mild, dry winter, low mountain snowpack, less runoff than normal, dry soil that soaked up much of the runoff that did occur and a continuing regional drought has led to the lake filling slower than normal to the elevation needed to launch boats at Horseshoe Bend – 3,620 feet.

Careful planning and forecasting, along with conservative water release at Yellowtail Dam, would at least allow the launching elevation to be reached by the end of May, Stephens predicted, and indeed, by Monday, June 1, the elevation of Big Horn Lake stood at 3,620.18.

Former county commissioner Keith Grant pointed out that boats could be launched at an elevation of 3,614 several years ago before sedimentation filled in the lake at Horseshoe Bend.

Stephens said there are three components that contribute to the inflows into Big Horn Lake: Boysen Reservoir, Buffalo Bill Reservoir and tributaries below the two bodies of water. He said the Bureau establishes the release rate in November to reach a target of 3,617 feet by the end of March.

“We have no way of knowing what the snowpack is going to be, so that puts us in a good position to be able to comfortably handle a very high inflow forecast or a very low inflow forecast,” Stephens said of the targeting method. “You’re all aware that this is a low water year with drought conditions. We have a very low inflow forecast, so in situations where we have a very low inflow forecast, like right now, we’re already going into full conservation mode to try to conserve as much storage as possible.”

Stephens said the April through July inflow forecast is 36 percent of average for Boysen Reservoir, 66 percent for Buffalo Bill and 37 percent for Big Horn Lake. It’s the lowest inflow year for Big Horn Lake since the early 2000s, he said.

Anticipating the drought and low inflow, Stephens said the Bureau has been “fairly proactive” in regard to releases at the dam, moving from 2,000 CFS to 1,750 to 1,580 and now 1,500 CFS, noting, “We do plan to hold at 1,500 CFS until conditions either improve or worsen.”

Asked if 1,500 CFS is the minimum release level for the dam, Stephens replied, “We’re kind of at the extreme low end of what our operating criteria defines. That 1,500 CFS (release) is considered the minimum release for a healthy fishery downstream of Yellowtail Dam. There is a scenario where we would make a cut later on if we determine that we are rolling into another situation like in the early 2000s where we start stacking some of these drought years on top of one another, back-to-back. There’s a scenario where we would need to take some additional measures to conserve storage.”

Fortunately, he said, better planning and a higher end-of-March target elevation has left the lake in a better situation than the early 2000s, Stephens added.

“I’d like to thank the Bureau of Reclamation for their new operating plan,” Grant said. “In 2000 we didn’t have an operating plan like this, and I appreciate you coming down to Lovell and filling everybody in on the operations, and I think that we should bring out the fact that the Wyoming Bureau of Reclamation and the Montana Bureau of Reclamation are coordinating closely, which they weren’t in the early 2000s. … Things have changed a lot since the 2000s, and we appreciate that.”

“I believe that’s correct,” Stephens said. “That wasn’t always the case, but yeah, I maintain routine communication with the person who operates Boysen and Buffalo Bill.”

Park Service

New Bighorn Canyon NRA superintendent Dustin Sene gave an update of operations at the park and first thanked the Bureau for being a good partner for him as he learns reservoir operations. Sene said the marina and campground at Horseshoe Bend are up and running, and courtesy docks were being installed as the lake reaches 3,620.

One issue the park is dealing with is that the log boom at Horseshoe Bend has fallen into disrepair over the years and has been removed, with plans to replace the boom as soon as possible.

“We do have funding for it,” Sene said. “The reality of it getting put in place this year is still a variable; we don’t know what that’s going to look like. So we’re working really hard to try to get that put in place, and we will as soon as it gets here; we’ll get that put in place.”

Sene said safety at the Horseshoe Bend swimming beach is a concern with no log boom in place, so the park is looking into buoys to keep boaters away from the swimming area and establish a no-boating zone.

One person in attendance asked when the fish cleaning station at Horseshoe Bend would be up and running, and Sene said it’s unclear at this time when repairs would be made. Later in the meeting, Susan Workman said she could help organize some volunteers to help with some projects, and Bighorn Canyon Interpretation and Education Manager Christy Fleming said she would love to work with volunteers.

Sedimentation and other issues

 As the meeting continued, the familiar topic of sedimentation at Horseshoe Bend was raised once again, with local officials lamenting the lack of progress on the issue and federal officials noting that, while studies have been conducted over the years, a plan has never been developed to deal with the issue. Grant said the last study was done in 2017, and former state representative Elaine Harvey urged a partnership with the Bureau of Land Management to address the issue.

Newman said the BLM has been responsive to cooperation in the past.

Ideas discussed included dredging or pumping sediment and dikes that could funnel the sediment downstream into deeper parts of the canyon. Newman suggested “bringing folks back together to stand up a plan moving forward.” He said a comprehensive plan for the Big Horn Basin would need “everyone at the table” similar to a gathering that was held at the community center a couple of years ago.

Newman said dealing with the material dredged or pumped from the lake would be an issue, and Grant noted that the bentonite companies at one time expressed interest in using dredged material for mine reclamation work. Newman said he would be interested in listening to proposals.

Harvey said when the Big Horn River was dammed and the lake and recreation area were formed in the 1960s, Big Horn County lost 73 family farms and 30,000 acres of taxable farmland, with promises made that tourism would make up the difference in revenue. One of the major problems, however, has been the variability of the lake level and date of full lake operations, which make tourism planning difficult. She said the Bureau and Park Service should be able to plan for the lake to be in full operation by or before Memorial Day every year.

“There are people that come and spend money here, but it’s a hard thing to invest your money in a community that has uncertain outcomes every single year and no long-range plans to make a difference in changing the status quo,” she said. “We’re leaving it all up to Mother Nature and thinking that we are totally helpless, and we’re not.”

One member of the audience asked why the end of March target couldn’t be set at 3,620 rather than 3,617.