Illini Bill - I think the problem is they see the size of my house and think I can swing that kind of money easily. When in reality I had the opportunity to build at the lowest point of the great recession and had companies competing over getting my business. Then in the end after these companies kept calling me lowering the prices, I had a relative that came in below all of their prices and he built my house. Of course he used the same guy to excavate my house that I had out here yesterday though. I'm smart enough not to pay anywhere close to 8K.... for my 1/10th acre. That means if he wanted to do a 1 acre pond - 8K multiply that by 10 to get an acre.... that's $80K an acre. That's a ridiculous price.
Fish n chips - I don't think it's as bad as a swamp. In the summer, the ground stays dry... even the wettest part where the pond is going. It's during the spring (when we have the snow melting and rain coming in) the ground stays saturated where the pond is going. It rained Monday about 1.10" and Wednesday I was walking on it. Water wasn't on the surface, but you had that squishy sound from stepping on the clayish soil. The ground is ever so slightly tilted towards this pond area. If you stand back where this pond is going and look up the yard behind my septic, you can see the ground maybe drops 3-4" within this 400' span. So it's a very gradual slope, but I'm hoping they can make that greater so it collects more water.
Could this possibly turn into a swamp at all... that's kind of concerning.
Here's the area when we were clearing out all the brush last year. You can't see the gradual slope from this angle, but it's their
I am in agreement with you, you do not have a swamp now. But by definition, what you want to create could possibly be considered a wetland because it cannot drain anywhere over the ground(if that is truly the case because of topograhy?) That's why I keep asking the question, do you really have no place to drain off the excess water to? Is the only choice for the water to leave the area by means of soaking into the ground? And if it is soaking into the ground at that extreme of a rate, then perhaps the soils in that spot are not the best for a pond and will need to be sealed with further expense. This all means more research for you to do.
Perhaps the guy before you had a low spot(swampy) there and put some fill in to dry it up. That may have happened 50, or 100 years ago. As regulations get tighter, these choices we make to do changes to our properties will be tougher. Protect yourself now with proper records in case you want to make more changes later(dredging it out again, expanding, etc.).
The cycle of life on earth...all ponds will become swamps, marshes, etc, possibly back to the point of being dry ground again. Dirt and everything else always wants to go to the lowest places. It's just a matter of time.
I think that if it's dug deep enough, it wouldn't be considered a swamp or a wetland. My pond doesn't really drain anywhere, nor does it have a dam. Nobody that I know even remotely considers it a swamp or a wetland.
Look at Cecil's ponds. Same with him. Holes dug in the ground and filled with water.
May just be my imagination, but looks like remains of a dam on the left of the picture. Use google earth and look at the oldest archived air photos to see what area looked like historically. FSA office might also have archive air photos. Might have been a pond there once upon a time.
Rick, one thing to consider that is not size related in the excavation bid. It cost's the same $$ to transport and remove heavy equipment to a site, and with todays tough legal permit environment, it ain't very cheap. I don't see it costing 6K, however. Ask what the operator charges "per hour" plus his transport costs, minimum job charges, etc. I wouldn't think a 1/10 acre pond would take more than 10 hours unless soil conditions, access and terrain are a real bugger....or, if extras like rock lining are involved. In Missouri. $100-$150/hr equipment rates are common depending on equipment size.
