Nevius Street Dam Removal - Non-Music Version

This Nevius Street Dam Removal video version has had the musical accompaniment deleted in the event that my Fair Use copyright requests to use those songs are turned down (you can hear the musical Part 1 [ • Nevius Street Dam Remo... ] and Part 2 [ • Nevius Street Dam Remo... ] versions of this video on KZbin until at least early-September 2013 so check those out if you like).
The Nevius Street Dam removal on the main stem of the Raritan River in central New Jersey was completed between July 24-31, 2013. This project was the third of three planned dam removals (the others were the Calco Dam and the Robert Street Dam - see those videos on KZbin also by searching for the video under those dam names) that re-opened nine miles of historically significant spawning grounds for American shad and other migratory fish on the Raritan River and the lower 1.5 miles of the Millstone River (in addition to numerous tributaries). This fish passage restoration initiative was managed by John W. Jengo of MWH on behalf of the Kinder Morgan, Inc., who is funding the project.

[@belowmes]

I could watch dam removal videos all day.

[@cybercab]

Me too. In fact, I often do.

[@MichaelfromtheGraves]

I already do.

[@andybaldman]

Damn!

[@masterspin7796]

@@MichaelfromtheGraves Me too!

[@user-bt9xd7ix3p]

Ето черное дело черного хозяина белого дома ... Що, не хватило ума срубить проход для риб??? ... И етими мозгами хотите управлять весь мир ??? .... Белоликие убожества ...

[@openroadstar6769]

I used to live near here and I remember crossing the bridge on a regular basis and would notice the dam every time. However, I no longer reside in NJ so I never got to see the river without the dam. The next time I am in NJ I will definitely check it out.

[@jessefoulk]

I go from watching flash flood videos for a week on KZbin to watching dams being taken out. Really exciting to see the backed up water be released. Well...a mind stress reliever to watch that. Looking for that WOW factor in all.

[@barbranewton9482]

Lol yep me to.

[@andybaldman]

If you like water being released, look up the ‘post 10’ channel.

[@flailios]

Excellent work! People often overlook fish because their out of sight, but they're still a hugely symbiotic part of an ecosystem.

[@RudyNortz]

Wow, a dam removal vid that actually shows a dam removal.

[@JohnWJengo]

Yes, thank you, that was my goal so I appreciate your kind comment. Thanks.

[@sven13kajasup]

The Nature loves your Videos!

[@JohnWJengo]

Thank you!

[@habbi126]

Thanks for uploading!😇

[@dingledooley9283]

Nice close ups of the hammer in the water, the percussion just atomises the surface, not too much talking either, thanks.

[@JohnWJengo]

Thank you for your kind comment, I appreciate it. It was fun zooming in on that detail and seeing the power of this amazing equipment we used. Thanks.

[@isaiahbadall6988]

this is going to be awsome

[@heyitsvos]

I'm curious why a simple spillway like this would require 5 years of planning? I understand the permitting yada yada yada, but I wouldn't think we would be talking about thousands of tons of sediment to worry about. Maybe just me....

[@JohnWJengo]

+heyitsvos Good question. It did take five years of planning but not because it was a big structure. We had to get the owner of the dam to agree to its removal, and as part of that agreement, we had to replace the service that the dam was supplying (0.75 million gallons of day of water supply). We went through three separate designs of where to get that replacement water, and those were rejected before we finally came up with a solution acceptable to the owner. Then we had to partially implement that design to prove that it would work and supply the water that they needed before the final approval to remove the dam was granted. Add that time to the five different state permits for the work (plus local permits), access agreements to drive under a high voltage power line and over a municipal sewer line, negotiate working around a bald eagle foraying area, plus develop a historical mitigation plan, plus gain consensus from the community, well, you get the idea. Thanks for the question.

[@heyitsvos]

JohnWJengo Thank you, I sit here humbled :)

[@sw8741]

@@JohnWJengo Thanks for a excellent explanation. Here in the West the eco whackos talk about removing huge dams that provide huge benefits so in general I'm opposed. East Coast, where many dams were built for old factories and the like are no longer useful, why not pull them out? If they are not useful, bye bye! 1 other thing, this was 2013, where is the 2023 update? I'm hoping to hear 200, 300% increase in fish and riparian species. Otherwise, you're just blowing wind up our skirts. Thanks.

[@StereoSpace]

That dam and abutments look like they were built from dimensioned stone. Looked like beautiful stuff too. I had images of stone masons 100 years ago laying those blocks down. Quarried locally I assume too.

[@JohnWJengo]

+StereoSpace Your image is absolutely correct. J.B. Duke had the same masons who built his estate of Duke Farms in Hillsborough build this dam also. I found that the stone was largely the same rock as the brownstone buildings in NYC, which was quarried locally in New Jersey, namely the Stockton Formation arkosic sandstone, which cuts cleanly vertically and splits right along perfectly horizontal bedding planes. Thanks for your comment.

[@mark7880]

Those dam removers!

[@exi]

How exactly did you solve the replacement water problem? 0.75 million gallons don't come from nowhere... and they don't flow uphill, too...

[@JohnWJengo]

+exi Good question, we solved it in several different ways. Firstly, a water budget study indicated that the owner didn't need those 750K gallons every day (just during certain intervals in the summer) and secondly, that water was replaced via a combination of available groundwater and a soon to be implemented water recycling system. So, not only was the dam removed, there was a substantial overall reduction in water use, which benefits everyone. Thanks for your question.

[@johnbeck9671]

JohnWJengo

[@speedypete9694]

What did they do with the water intake for the lakes ?

[@JohnWJengo]

Prior and following the dam removal, two groundwater production wells and pumping stations were installed adjacent to the lake system at Duke Farms and those wells (and natural precipitation) now supply the lakes with water. That groundwater water is free of agricultural constituent runoff (unlike river water in this section of the state) so we expect the lake water quality to improve over time. Thanks for your question.

[@chrisstaylor8377]

How did it it take five years to ok this ?

[@borderreiver3288]

an amazing transformation once these dams are removed...

[@user-pg9vw3nu8n]

where was and is NJEPA when Millville NJ lined the river banks north of 49 going to the dam with concrete to create their new "nature walk" stating the reason for it was to stop erosion now we don't see any Herring, River shad or striper of any significant size. the fish have no reason to come up this far anymore because they have no place to spawn and a friend of mine tells me he went canoeing down the river and he would find Gill Nets going all the way across the river he was purposely pulling them up and tossing them onto the banks so fish can get by they are put out during the night when the state police boat doesn't come up this far. another thing I've seen disappear from the river Glass eels, when I was a kid everyone used to catch them sound bait shops I used to sit there watching swing by me during the day even and the last 10 years I haven't seen one but you go up to the dam crap ton of of snake heads

[@irvingfive7955]

Being a mason, I wonder how the masonry structure survived spring freshets. The old lime based mortars provided a lot of autogenous properties, but they weren't hydraulic.

[@123TauruZ321]

As far as i can see from the video, it seems they used quite thin layers of mortar and large, flat pieces of stone. I don't know if this might have had any effect on the effect you're mentioning here. I've worked as a masoner for 4 years and yes, it is quite interesting. I also think about one more thing, do we know that this river is frozen solid in winter time? If water continuously flow, i don't see how there should be any problem.

[@irvingfive7955]

123TauruZ321 After watching the video for a second time, I realized the stone masonry was encased in a cement. Given that the structure was in New Jersey, I would think that there is ice formation, but I am not sure of the severity.

[@8800081]

*COST:* $50,000 to build, $5 million to teardown.

[@JohnWJengo]

Actually, the cost to build the dam in 1902 in present-day dollars using standard discounting valuation would have the dam construction costing several million dollars, much higher than the cost to remove the dam. Thanks.

[@deedee5205]

Yeahhhh.

[@barbarawebster3203]

If there was no risk of flood the dam could of been removed sooner, I agree wildlife should be cherished 🤗🤗

[@renanelvira]

why did they built this in the first place?

[@brianzingleman3113]

I believe that was mentioned in the beginning of the video. To divert water for irrigation

[@cybercab]

Very interesting work! I really enjoyed the video. I find it remarkable that it took 5 years to do though. I know it's important to do environmental studies of this but it's says a lot about government overreach and inefficiency that it took so long. I'd be afraid to ask the cost of the decision. Probably many times what the actual work cost. No real suggestion but I find it sad. I know the video is an afterthought since it's mostly about doing the work. But here's some unsolicited feedback anyway. I would have loved to see a GoPro time lapse of the work or even a phone time lapse. I love watching this stuff. And maybe some underwater footage. The audio is a little rough is spots. A $15 lapel mic can be plugged into the camera or phone for much better audio. Great job though. I really enjoyed it.

[@JohnWJengo]

It does seem like a long time, but some of that time was arranging with the owner of the dam that we would replace their water supply that the dam was providing (a pretty important consideration for them), a lot of engineering studies that the removal would not adversely affect the bridge upstream, plus there was required public outreach and a question/response comment period. It wasn't necessary to get everyone to agree to the removal, but it was worth the time to talk to dam removal opponents to assuage their fears of what the river would do after the dam was removed. And yes, I have upgraded my video equipment since I shot this video and I have been using my GoPro more on these current projects so hopefully my next video will be in highdef and have unique time lapse images. Thanks for your comments.

[@andrewhollis6665]

weirs the point in removing all not just a section

[@JohnWJengo]

Good question. Fish migration studies have shown that anadromous fish cannot overcome notch entrance velocities so notching just a portion of the dam will not increase or improve fish passage. And I have found that the notches that were cut in other structures on the Raritan tend to get clogged with woody debris (it's amazing how many trees come down this river). As such, by removing the whole dam (which the owner desired) we open up multiple channels for the fish to use in migrating upstream and we give the river enough room to keep that woody debris continually flushing downstream. Thanks for your comment.

[@Maloy7800]

Americans are their Simplified English. It's a WEIR, not a dam.

[@JohnWJengo]

As mentioned under another reply, they are all weirs on this river. I refer to them as "dams" because they are officially named that in the Bureau of Dam Safety inventory files, but moreover because weir is a term that is relatively unfamiliar to the public at large, whereas a "dam" is something that everyone can recognize or visualize. Thanks

[@johnfranklin1955]

Hey genius take it from this American, a weir is a dam!

[@bitsnpieces11]

A dam stops flow in a river/stream and builds up a pond/lake. A weir is something on a dam that is used to control the water level, fixed or adjustable levels. You see the dams on these videos, the very top were the water runs over is the weir.

[@barbarawebster3203]

It took 5 years because too many jobsworths not interested in animals and nature 😢😢

[@kgw100]

cant believe they just drove that excavator right in the river like that

[@ntepup77]

why? the water isn't that high :)

[@donbaxley5530]

I don't get it. The weir is just a little hump in a river causing one side may be a few feet deeper than the other. So what s the big deal? Also why remove all of it. A 10 foot section would accomplish the same thing and save a lot of money!

[@JohnWJengo]

The migratory species (American shad, river herring, etc.) frequenting this river cannot pass over even the slightest obstacle (unlike salmon for instance). Also, a partial removal would cause the water to flow through that small breach at a higher velocity than the fish can overcome in their upstream migration so full removals are preferred (and are required by Dam Safety regulations). Thanks for your questions.

[@statom985]

www.pwik.przemysl.pl/public/images/original_449_gallery.jpg what about this constructions ?

[@kubeek]

That´s a weir, not a dam.

[@JohnWJengo]

+kubeek Indeed, they are all weirs on this river. I refer to them as "dams" because they are officially named that in the Bureau of Dam Safety inventory files, but moreover because weir is a term that is relatively unfamiliar to the public at large, whereas a "dam" is something that everyone can recognize or visualize. Thanks.

[@joshuacornell6667]

A weir is a type of flood control dam.

[@YouTubeDeletesComments]

Why not C4?

[@JohnWJengo]

+VancouverCanucksRock Explosives are prohibited generally on dam removals in New Jersey, but were mostly certainly disallowed here because of the presence of historical buildings and the locally-famous Nevius Street Bridge, the oldest documented metal-truss bridge in Somerset County (circa 1886) that runs across the river just east of the dam. Would have been fun to see the C4 in action though, I do agree. Thanks.

[@RH-mf7nv]

.

[@gantmj]

Zoom out!

[@woodenz]

What about fish gates ?? , plus your losing aeration of the water .......

[@JohnWJengo]

It is a commonly held belief that aeration of river water by dams is somehow not happening in the absence of a dam or that such benefit outweighs the damage that dams inflict. This river has plenty of shoals, riffles and shallow sections that enrich it with dissolved oxygen (DO) and now there isn't a dead water impoundment upriver of the dam devoid of DO where only carp could survive. And no gate system, or ladder, or ramp can guarantee 100% fish passage that a dam removal can. Lastly, the dam owner did not want to have to maintain any kind of structure that would surely malfunction (and cost money) over time nor did they want to have the liability in case a person was injured or drowned at the dam. Thanks for your insightful comment.

[@richardoconnor7162]

if the fish could not cross that dam then evolution has by pasted them, and now it will dry up in the summer.

[@KB4QAA]

Except that it doesn't. Even if it did dry up, that is the natural feature of the river which the fish would be adapted to.

[@zeenaabdura2971]

There has to be a downside of removing all these dams.

[@JohnWJengo]

Honestly, we have yet to find a downside. These were artificial structures that disturbed natural river processes and the data that we are receiving for 2017 indicate that we might have a record number of migrating fish returning to the Raritan River since fish counting began in 1994. People can now safely boat the river, float the river, and fish the river and the owners of these former dam dams are delighted that they are gone because no one is getting injured or drowned, which was the case in the past. Thanks for your comment.

[@jgilpinj]

This is an interesting question: What things that both count as "natural" and are valued might be lost when a dam is removed? I have never heard the subject come up, theoretically or specifically, though I haven't done research to find it. An example that comes to mind is the species or varieties of fish preserved in the Calaveras Reservoir when that dam was built a hundred years ago. I may have a wrong idea about the fish there and, in any case, there's no chance that dam will be removed intentionally.

[@andybaldman]

Ask all of the creatures who formed and lived in ecosystems created by the dams. Nobody gives a shit about them.

[@Maloy7800]

So they got a huge excavator into the river, polluted it with tons of concrete and aggregate, destroyed beautiful lakes and stopovers for migrating birds - all to "restore" the environment that hasn't existed for 200 years. Silliness redefined?

[@JohnWJengo]

So, we removed all the concrete and aggregate from the river, restored the Duke Farms lake system with cleaner, cooler groundwater (without the phosphorous and etc. that affects the river water in the summer months), and now even more birds use the lakes as stopovers because they aren't blanketed with algae as they were when river water was being pumped to fill them. If we redefined anything, it was how to correct mistakes of the past that unnecessarily damaged the environment. Thanks.

[@kylecampbell1444]

You do realize that concrete is a natural material. It's just a mix of the proper stone. No more dirt went down river than during a flood

[@harlempixie338]

You are such a nice guy John...these people keep trying to bait and troll you, but you're just like a teacher who needs to keep repeating himself for the slower students. Great work.

[@kylecampbell1444]

Again it all natural out of ground products. A flood causes more mud to go down stream. Ever heard of erosion.

[@DAS-Videos]

I don't know how I feel about the wing dam removals my stance is neutral. To me it is trading one eco system for another one. What I have seen are lampreys, they now nest in the Duke's Park section. I am not a lamprey fan. You can see them near the end of the video at watch?v=H33dUMtyVMs

[@esquad5406]

What you guys trying to kill all the fish? The low head dam boil in puts 02 that cant get in the water other wise. Do gooders my god.

[@JohnWJengo]

While dams can inject a source of oxygen into the water column, it is a minor contributor as compared to the miles of riffles and rapids that we expose once the dams are removed. So, on balance, there is now far more oxygen being exchanged now that the dam is removed; furthermore, the mile-long, essentially stagnant, oxygen-deprived impoundment upstream of the dam has been eliminated and all types of fish now populate that stretch of river whereas pre-dam removal, I only observed carp in that section. Thank you for your question.

[@esquad5406]

That makes sense to me.

[@Boodieman72]

They should have left the weirs, IMHO

[@bogdanb78]

These Jersey ppl really hated the Dukes... no other way to explain this destruction... bye bye history... who cares?

[@KB4QAA]

Bye bye manmade dam installed for a private farm. Hello natures return to miles of river!

[@mikkie444]

What a shame, all that distruction just so a few fish can swim up stream