Lake Martin Topics: I disagree.

Lake Martin Topics

(Lake Martin Specific)

111,141 messages

Updated 4/24/2024 4:29:25 PM

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,600 messages

Updated 4/24/2024 10:58:24 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Lake Martin Fishing

(Lake Martin Specific)

4,169 messages

Updated 4/16/2024 3:16:57 AM

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Lake Martin SCUBA

(Lake Martin Specific)

169 messages

Updated 5/31/2023 1:39:35 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Welcome, Guest

Select View Mode: [ classic | beta | recent ]

	Name:	Pier Pressure -
	Subject:	I disagree.
	Date:	11/21/2006 1:52:34 AM

I would think that savelakemartin.com would have a specific agenda. Like that algae problem in Lake Jordan. Or like the issue with northern lakes having too much phosphorus. Or maybe spelling out undesired actions or pointing out unruly areas of the lake etc (by the way, this lake is tame compared to most others).

My point was it is painfully obvious that this page recently has been used as an anti cruiser forum. The people who post messages on that forum have general negative overtones about everything. Seems to me like a b1tchin post.

I agree that there are a couple items listed which discuss nature conservation, and that would be the type of things to make the page shine, in addition to putting more contrast to the background so it’s easier reading. Even advertising when lake cleanup day is could be beneficial reason to return to the site. The biggest problem is that the person who controls the page is not representative of the masses, and they seem a little one sided on the issues. Everyone gets their word in on the forum, but no representation on the main page.

I think if it were used as a melting pot for solutions to these issues then things could be resolved. It reminds me of ski resorts. When ski boarding become popular the skiers hated them. Then the resorts built skiboard parks and half-pipes and added rails to slide on etc. They catered to the boarders and set aside an area specific for them. It took 15 years for their culture to become accepted. This could be done at the lake (to a certain extent). Unoficially of course to be politically correct. I have made many suggestions that people begin to tie off on the other side of Acapulco Island (the narrower side with the bridge to nowhere). It makes more sense to me as its a better wind break, shallower water, and at the current time no development. The PWC riders could find areas which are less populated, and advertise these areas to other riders etc.

I agree 100% with you that you should not have other persons desires imposed on you. That is what is happening with these ridiculous laws.

I say within 10 years the entire shore will be developed to some extent. There will be boat over population, and everyone will be crying about it. Who is to say it is right or wrong? It’s easy for the current lake property owner to say they do not want that, but who gave them the right to develop? Just like it is easy for me to say I do not want boat over population. Someone gave me the right to be there, right? Who are we to take away the freedoms of others which were allowed to us?