Apr 22, 2017 2 min read

How much thought was given to the decision to remove Marianna’s dam? Marianna businesses won’t stand to gain from the action, and the town can ill afford to lose anything.

Flooding was much worse before the creek profile was widened below the dam, and destroying the dam gives no guarantee that erosion to the stream bank opposite the old mine complex will not continue, possibly in an even more aggressive fashion. The argument that fish cannot ascend the dam for spawning activity is hollow. Before environmental regulation, there weren’t enough fish to make a difference in that regard. Now, any fish coming up from the Monongahela River to reproduce will have reached numerous opportune spots long before the dam. The creek above the dam will continue to be a fine habitat for smallmouth and largemouth bass, panfish, catfish and other fish.

The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission should continue their trout stockings in the upper reaches of the creek around Camp Anawanna, and local organizations should continue to augment this effort below the dam with the various activities that they undertake, such as the very popular canoe races and trout stockings.

Although no longer of use to the mining operation, the dam still impounds water which might potentially be of use to a future occupant of the mine building complex. Would it be wise to eliminate the possibility of such a business locating there, a business willing to provide jobs and conduct any necessary dam repairs, as per the regulations of the Department of Environmental Protection?

The decision on whether to keep the dam screams for the exercise of due diligence. I hope that this approach is being taken.

Martin A. Niverth

Marianna