Good morning,

Just a reminder, you don’t need to live in Grafton, or even in Rensselaer County, to support the preservation of Martin Dunham Reservoir. This is a regional issue with statewide implications. Saving Dunham is about more than one lake; it’s about setting a precedent for how we protect public lands and historic infrastructure across New York.

Please continue to share the petition—we’re approaching 2,000 signatures!

DEC flagged deficiencies in 1981 and again in 2024. Four decades later, no substantial repairs have been made. The reservoir is now at risk of permanent loss.

The Martin Dunham Reservoir in Grafton, New York, is not failing, but it is being failed.

In 1981, a federal-state review conducted under the National Dam Safety Program produced the Phase I Inspection Report: Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam (Inventory No. NY 672). It found that while the dam posed no immediate threat to human life or property, it had critical deficiencies that warranted action.

“The most serious deficiency noted was a large wet area near the right abutment contact at the downstream toe of the main embankment. The ground in this area was very soft and there was minor sloughing of the embankment slope.”
— Phase I Inspection Report, 1981, p. 12
This same report identified a significant hydrologic concern:

“The spillway does not have sufficient capacity to discharge the peak outflow from one-half the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)… Therefore, the spillway is assessed as inadequate.”
— Phase I Inspection Report, 1981, p. 9
Remediation steps were clearly outlined:

“Investigations into the causes and possible treatments of these wet areas should be commenced within 3 months... Remedial measures... should be completed within 12 months.”
— Phase I Inspection Report, 1981, p. 12

Yet no such remediation was ever undertaken. Trees were not cleared. Backfill was not replaced. Outlet valves remained nonfunctional. Concrete continued to degrade.

Fast forward to February 2024, when NYSDEC Dam Safety Section Engineer John Smith released the Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study commissioned by New York State Parks. It echoed and reaffirmed the very same concerns raised in 1981, now compounded by time and inaction.

The 2024 study concluded:

“The dam’s existing outlet works are in poor condition… and do not allow for controlled or emergency drawdown, which presents a significant safety concern.”
— Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study, 2024, p. ES-1
It also stated:

“The dam is classified as a Class C – High Hazard dam and is currently rated as ‘Unsound – Deficiency Recognized’ per the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) dam safety rating criteria.”
— Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study, 2024, p. 2

Notably, this high hazard rating is not a condemnation. It reflects risk if failure were to occur—not certainty of failure. And the cause of that risk is clear:

“The dam is in a deteriorated condition and does not meet current safety standards for spillway capacity, outlet control, or seepage management.”
— Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study, 2024, p. 4

And yet, even after 43 years of consistent documentation, no substantive repairs have been made. Instead, the public is now faced with a “removal option” that threatens to erase a 112-year-old cold-water fishery, a recreational asset, and a cultural landscape, all for the state’s convenience.

Repair is not impossible. The 2024 report outlines clear pathways to preserve the dam through reinforcement, outlet upgrades, and sediment management. But repair is more expensive than removal, and cost is now driving the discussion.

The public was never consulted when the state chose inaction. Now, they are being asked to accept loss.

“The reservoir is a vital environmental and recreational resource within Grafton Lakes State Park. Its loss would significantly alter the park’s offerings and ecosystem.”
— Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study, 2024, p. 6
The Martin Dunham Reservoir wasn’t deemed unsafe, it was deemed neglected. And that neglect has been institutional.

If the reservoir is drained, it will not be because of catastrophic failure. It will be because those responsible to maintain it chose not to.

The Martin Dunham Reservoir wasn’t condemned, it was simply left behind.

What’s at stake now isn’t just a dam or a body of water. It’s the kind of care we expect from the institutions meant to protect shared spaces. The 1981 inspection laid out a roadmap for maintenance. The 2024 study confirmed that the reservoir still has value and function. What’s been missing isn’t engineering, it’s commitment.

Preservation is still possible. So is repair. But time, like water, moves in one direction.
The reservoir doesn’t need to be a liability. It can be a legacy.

Let’s make sure it’s not lost through inaction.

You can read the reports here.

Your voice matters. Sign the petition and get involved today at www.savedunham.org. 

Disclaimer:
This article is based on publicly available reports, including the 1981 Phase I Inspection Report: Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam and the 2024 Martin Dunham Reservoir Dam Feasibility Study. The views expressed are those of the author and are intended to inform and encourage public discussion on the future of the reservoir. Factual references are drawn from official documents; all commentary reflects personal interpretation and concern for the preservation of public environmental resources.