Actually their “warning” was a lawsuit by environmental activists... the reality is its an EMERGENCY spillway, and its by design accepted that damage may indeed occur if it is ever used. Erosion etc is accepted consequence.. the environs wanted them to concrete pave the entire emergency spillway, something that was not remotely justifiable from a cost or maintenance perspective...
And like it or not, to date, the spillway has not failed, its done its job...
What’s disturbing is how bad the original spillway had to be failing to wind up with the giant hole in it that it developed.. someone had been skipping on inspections and maintenance I suspect... or redirecting money elsewhere that was to be used for it, which is usually the case when this sort of things comes about.
Thank you for explaining the background of this emergency.
I would even know to ask about those specific questions. The predicament, though regrettable makes more sense now.
That giant hole of erosion is what’s wrong now.
The severity of that crater could have been avoided or at least better forecast and pro-actively prepared for.