Talk:List of dams and reservoirs in the United States
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of dams and reservoirs in the United States article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comments
editWhy does pennsylvania have nothing listed on this page. I believe that pennsylvania should build a hydro electric dam to lower the expense of electric. does anyone have any info on what PA could do for hydro power. Thanks alot NL wide reciever
email me any info warner_8@steelersfan.net
I think "List of dams and reservoirs in the United States" or "List of dams and their reservoirs in the United States" would be far better titles--ID as a list, and match the format of the content. I'll probably do it sometime if I don't see/hear any objections. Niteowlneils 02:57, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Why does Oklahoma have nothing written here. They have the most of any state —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.251.100 (talk • contribs)
- Because you haven't added them yet. --Kbh3rdtalk 00:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Number of major dams per state
editDon't know if this could be worked into the article, but here is a list of the # of "major" dams per state in 2005 according to the same dataset used to draw that map (source cited on image description page):
Rank | # Dams | ST | Rank | # Dams | ST | Rank | # Dams | ST |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 687 | CA | 19 | 169 | IL | 37 | 92 | SC |
2 | 566 | TX | 20 | 168 | WA | 38 | 73 | ND |
3 | 384 | CO | 21 | 165 | WV | 39 | 71 | MS |
4 | 322 | OK | 22 | 162 | MT | 40 | 65 | CT |
5 | 300 | PA | 23 | 161 | NE | 41 | 61 | NH |
6 | 296 | FL | 24 | 155 | UT | 42 | 56 | NJ |
7 | 280 | MO | 25 | 140 | WI | 43 | 55 | LA |
8 | 244 | NY | 26 | 140 | ME | 44 | 55 | SD |
9 | 217 | GA | 27 | 134 | WY | 45 | 36 | VT |
10 | 216 | MN | 28 | 132 | NV | 46 | 34 | MD |
11 | 211 | KS | 29 | 123 | MI | 47 | 31 | AK |
12 | 209 | KY | 30 | 122 | TN | 48 | 29 | PR |
13 | 186 | AR | 31 | 120 | AL | 49 | 23 | HI |
14 | 185 | OH | 32 | 113 | ID | 50 | 18 | ? |
15 | 185 | IA | 33 | 105 | NM | 51 | 6 | RI |
16 | 180 | OR | 34 | 105 | AZ | 52 | 1 | DE |
17 | 174 | NC | 35 | 98 | IN | |||
18 | 174 | VA | 36 | 96 | MA |
There are 52 entries because it includes Puerto Rico, and there are 18 dams w/o a state, or for which the data columns got messed up and which confused the automated count I used. That would bear further investigation before putting into the article. In any case, we can now tell the Okies that Oklahoma does not have the most of any state, though it is ranked up there at #5. --Kbh3rdtalk 08:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Rename proposal
editPlease see a discussion here regarding the renaming of this article and similar ones.--NortyNort (Holla) 02:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
resource
editLake-Be-Gone Woes "Deterioration, Environmental Issues Threaten America's Dams—and Local Economies" November 19, 2011 Wall Street Journal by Jim M Carlton, excerpt ...
Now, as the waters recede, Burlington is joining dozens of other communities across the U.S. that must readjust as dams that once gave birth to new waterways and thriving economies based on tourism, irrigation farming and hydropower are altered or dismantled, reverting landscapes to the way they were decades ago.
Are breached dams dams?
editThat is, if a dam has been breached, should it still be listed here? Jar354 (talk) 00:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- I think so perhaps with a brief note giving the conditions of the breaching. Dam removal for fish habitat being the most popular right now, at least on the West Coast. —EncMstr (talk) 03:47, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of dams and reservoirs in United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320101043/http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/fishing/shad/boshers.html to http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/fishing/shad/boshers.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)