(Clarks Hill - Strom Thurmond Lake Specific)
21 messages
Updated 2/9/2020 10:26:23 PM
Lakes Online Forum
83,638 messages
Updated 5/27/2024 2:56:51 AM
Lakes Online Forum
5,193 messages
Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM
(Clarks Hill - Strom Thurmond Lake Specific)
4 messages
Updated 3/7/2018 4:55:07 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,169 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM
Lakes Online Forum
4,260 messages
Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,976 messages
Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
| Name: |
Pier Pressure
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 2:02:25 PM
|
These posts were made near the end of a long string, and probaby everyone lost interest and no one rad them. Not really looking for comments, just want to make sure everyone has an opportunity to read...
LifeTime Laker Statement
I am going to jump in the fray here with some facts too Aussie. Enforcement is the key. Not studies or anything else. There are enough studies on wave action now to PROVE that the boats banned had little or no MORE impact on shore erosion than any other boat. A wave is the closest thing to perpetual motion that you will find on Earth. A wave looses virtually NO energy until acted upon by an out side force, i.e., land, other wave, wind, current, or even a boat (depending on ratio of boat to wave). For centuries sailors have told stories of rogue waves but were scoffed at. Even as late as the 70's and 80's computer simulations showed that a 100ft rogue was a 1 in 10,000 year event. Then came high powered sattelites that could actually record waves and in one 100 square mile area of the north atlantic four were recorded in a 10 day period. Waves are amazing!!
I say all that to make a point and that is the biggest problem with waves on LM is NOT boats, but the homeowners!! Why? It is simple, everyone wants a seawall so they pour a solid concrete wall, or build a solid wood wall. These walls serve as bumpers for waves. Every wave that hits one is bounced back into the lake, where it continues across the lake to be bounced back into the lake again, and again, and again. A boat can only create a wave ONCE, seawalls can bounce it around for the rest of the day!!
What is the answer? Simple, build different seawalls. APCO now pushes for riprap walls because they difuse more wave energy. They even require a layer of riprap along the bottom of solid walls because this helps difuse some of the energy also. Geostone walls are designed to difuse some energy also because the waves actually travel through the wall into the gravel behind them. It is real easy to sit back and blame the boats for the erosion, but the powers that be know what the real problem is. And then some ignorant folks like bob like to come along berate the folks at Karis Park for NOT having a seawall, and espuose the shoreline benifits of the boat ban. The reality is, it is just the oppisite. A natural shoreline is better for the lake than a solid seawall and boats cause less erosion than seawalls.
I know most of you are smart enough to understand this. PP has a post from yesterday where he speaks to waves also. I know he understands this concept. If I know it, then surely APCO knows it. So staying further away from a shoreline has little to no effect on decreasing erosion. building better seawalls, and getting boats on plane is the best prevention.
Maverick I saw you talking about pouring a concrete wall to replace your riprap. I would encourage you not to. I understand the hassle of washing riprap but I think you should look into having the riprap cinched down with chain link fence. I have seen this done. It works well and it would make a world of difference with that massive waterfront of yours. I can by no means tell you that you have too, or even that you should on my say so, but I think you should look into what I have said here. I think when you do, you will maybe have a diiferent outlook because I know you care about the lake.
It seems to me that if erosion is the real issue, the legislation should be on what type of seawall is permitted, not what is making the waves in the first place. As PP said, watch Kowliga Bay on a weekday afternoon with a 10 knot wind and very few boats, and then try to argue it is the boats that are causing the problem.
My response...
That was a very good post. Drive by (on the water) Wind Creek and see their shoreline erosion walls. They are angled with the "Natural" lay of the land"
One thing I would like to point out. Someone mentioned "Natural Shoreline". I get to see the natural shoreline of Martin on occasion, and unless you are use to 54 degree water at 80 plus feet deep, do not talk to me about "Natural Shoreline". Man made this lake, and it is completely unnatural to attempt to keep the shoreline "in check" to begin with.
Google the Mississippi river delta and look at the satelite pictures. Look at the Alabama River between Ft Touloue and Montgomery. There are many areas where the river use to flow that are now "Natural" lakes.
The Pacific Ocean in California has cliffs that erode at a certain rate each year.
These are "Natural Shorelines", and ALL are affected by NATURAL WAVE ACTION / HYDROLIC FORCE"
Lakes all throughout the U.S. are filling with silt from the feeder streams. The Colorado river has numerous fish species becoming extinct because by daming up the rivers they have changed the "Natural Shoreline", annual water temp and other factors.
I scuba dive in lake Martin. The erosion that I witness is constant from the current shoreline, through 80 feet depth. Waves only affect of the wave height x 2 (or the amplitude of the wave). So if you have a maximum 4 ft wave, you can only have a maximum affect of 8 feet vertical to the shoreline.
When dam was built they cut trees off at the surface. Everyone witnessed thie year that the original stumps are exposed. They are exposed at a constant rate, regardless of where they are on the lake and regardless of how much wave action the particular part of the lake is. The height of these stumps is constant from the current surface to the deepest points of the lake.
So, I submit as a hypothesis (observed/educated GUESS) that the lake erosion is not a factor of the surface wave action, but a result of top soil dissolving and simply being carried away over time.
One factor I submit it the fact that as the water was going down last year you could put your foot 2 to 4 foot deep into the mud (similar "Silt" observations made at 80 plus feet deep). There were pictures posted of a young boy almost waist deep in the "Silt". Once the sun hit this "Silt" and it dried it became hard enough once more to walk on. So, I suggest that the top soil is "dissolving", not being broken down by wave action.
Also, if you have ever walked the beach (actual beach, at the ocean) in a time of low tide after a storm you see the sand creates "shelves" as I call them. 3 to 6 foot drop offs caused by wave action. When the water is down in the winter, is a similar "shelf" created on Lake Martin? The answer is "No". When you go down to the average winter depth, can you see any "drop off" caused by boats or other wave action? The answer is no, there are not 2 distinct shorelines, and no one has to build a winter "Sea wall", because the only reason is to protect "Property". Mother Nature does not care how pretty your shoreline is, as she will arrange it as she pleases... I like the idea of natural lay of the land type erosion prevention techniques. Wonder why no one is marketing these?
|
| Name: |
Walter
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 3:19:08 PM
|
LTL has WAAAAY too much time on his hands
|
| Name: |
Walter
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 3:20:05 PM
|
so does PP...
|
| Name: |
farmboy
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 3:30:03 PM
|
Can I get a AMEN on that !
|
| Name: |
HOT ROD
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 3:34:49 PM
|
Lotta BS about waves in that post. LTL mentions studies; I'd love to see one. But I figure I'll just get insulted instead.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Turn off the MTV and XBox
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 4:31:19 PM
|
And watch a little Discovery Channel, History Channel, and TLC.
|
| Name: |
HOT ROD
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Right again.
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 4:57:03 PM
|
I asked for some sort of proof, but predicted an insult; I got the insult.
You might as well just admit that you're stretching the truth, LTL. Unless you're really just making stuff up because there is no truth to stretch.
|
| Name: |
ALSCN
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 5:14:05 PM
|
It's funny how everyone who has responded to this thread so far want to talk about how PP and LTL have nothing but time on their hands. Well I can tell you in one case, that is sooo far from the truth. But I am not here to take up for him.... but if any of you who wanted to trash talk what they are trying to tell you, instead of doing a little research, you can find it online. The Quote below even states how seawalls are rarely permitted, and why exactly would you think that is??? Maybe because they do more harm then good....
Quote from web:
Because of their potential for harming fish and wildlife habitats and other public rights, the construction of seawalls along a shoreline is rarely permitted. Vegetative erosion control is recommended for low to moderate energy sites; for high energy sites, other structural methods such as rock riprap may be appropriate. For more information on erosion control methods, please see Lakeshore and Streambank Erosion Control Information.
URL: shoreline erosion
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
More food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 5:31:04 PM
|
So what is stopping APCO from requiring that all new seawalls have wave dissipating characteristics? And why don't the Marine Police start placing more no wake zones in the lake and start writing more tickets for people speeding recklessly too close to shore?
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 5:35:31 PM
|
Interesting link. My how the lake would look different. Somehow I don't think those seawalls are what Russel has in mind for their million dollar houses.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Yes hot rod....
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 7:57:01 PM
|
... I made it all up. Do a little googling and prove me wrong. It should be easy enough that even you could do it, since I made it all up and all.....LMAO.
|
| Name: |
WishIwerethere
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 8:55:28 PM
|
Thank you for echoing ltl's thoughts. I know he's always got an opinion and I don't always agree, but I usually learn something new. As to some of the other comments about "ownership" on this lake and whether anyone has the right to speak up about certain topics it strikes me as pretty ridiculus as a comeback to LTL. And for the record, we are homeowners on the lake and have been for many, many years.
|
| Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 10:01:52 PM
|
I totally agree with you. I think all of us whether it be property owners or boaters on the Lake have the same privilege and joy of the Lake. We are all equal and neighbors in my view with a great blessing to hold close to our hearts.
I respect your opinon since I know you have a common interest. Where is your home on the Lake?
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
More food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/22/2008 11:59:49 PM
|
Part of the point is it doesn't matter how close to shore you are, the energy is the same if you pass 500ft away or 50 ft away. The wave made and energy created will be the same when both waves hit shore, if you take out all other variables.
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
More food for thought...
|
|
Date:
|
4/23/2008 8:48:36 AM
|
Ah, true. I got caught up in the debate over idle speed areas. The idle speed/no wake areas are really only useful for swimming areas, crowded areas around marinas, and narrow sloughs. Unfortunately we can see where this debate is going in the long run, towards more restrictions on boating.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
It's the slippery slope...
|
|
Date:
|
4/23/2008 9:11:48 AM
|
.... that I have been preaching about. FORGET personal responsibillity, we have to run to the 'nanny state' that our government has become to make more regulations to control our behavior.
|
|
|
New Post
Search
Clarks Hill - Strom Thurmond Lake Topics Forum
Reply
»
Georgia Lakes
»
Clarks Hill - Strom Thurmond Lake
Login
|
Home
