| Name: |
copperline
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/13/2006 3:20:14 PM
|
For a long time I have wished that the lake's level could stabilize, or at least drop less than it does each year... reasoning that this would allow me to keep my boats in longer and enjoy the lake more. But something occured to me that might change my mind, and I'd like to get everyone's thoughts on it.
If the lake level didn't drop each year, wouldn't it become more polluted over time? With so many septic systems, so much chemical run off from yards & agriculture, so many 4 cycle engines depositing various things into the water... does the annual "flushing" keep the total pollutant level down?
Any knowledgable (or just arm-chair) hydrologists or environmental engineers out there with an opinion to share on this one?
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/13/2006 3:37:41 PM
|
Your assumption is that the lake would stagnate, but the fact is billions and billions of new water flow into and out of the lake each year. If you lower the level by ten feet in the fall and back up in the spring the net flow change is zero for the year. Only God can affect the annual throughput year upon year -- unless the lake is permanently lowered by APCo.
|
| Name: |
JIM
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/13/2006 6:29:42 PM
|
I think it is 2 cycles that polute,not 4. The Lake is not for recreation, it is for flood control and generate electric power. Recreation is a low proitiory. So if you are only 2 ft. below full pooldon`t complain.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/13/2006 8:45:55 PM
|
Fortunately, Lake Martin is not used as the toilet bowl like Lanier. We don't have to periodically flush.
|
| Name: |
SandyCreekman
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The lake most certainly...
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 10:19:28 AM
|
is for recreation as well as the functional aspects of producing power. I'd bet the recreational side now has more economic impact than any power that is generated. When you consider all the multi-million dollar homes, the large numbers of boats being sold and repaired, restaurants around the lake, construction industry, and property taxes realized, it's enormous. The concerns from the recreational side most certainly have to be considered, even though we all know why the lake was built and that power generation must go on.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Nice fantasy but....
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 12:46:36 PM
|
.... nothign close to reality!!
Once again I will repeat that those of use that are FORTUNATE enough to own property on Beautiful Lake Martin ( of any other for that matter) or so low on the totem pole of consideration as to be insignificant.
When recreation IS considered it is considered as to how the GENERAL PUBLIC benefits, NOT property owners.
Have any of you EVER seen s facillity built exclusively for property owners? How many exist for the PUBLIC?
|
| Name: |
SandyCreekman
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The Lake as changed...
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 1:17:25 PM
|
This is not fantasy --it's reality. You don't think that the homeowners paying 2, 3 and 4 million (and more) for homes don't have a lot of political clout? Money talks and may have loads of connections. A million dollar home on the Lake as become commonplace. Lots of these folks buying homes have poltical connections. Think dealerships selling boats for $50k and 100k don't have politial clout --think again.
|
| Name: |
BigFoot
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Nice fantasy but....
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 1:19:33 PM
|
..but the General Public includes all property owners.......I am a property owner but often use and appreciate public facilities on the lake....
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You finally got something
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 1:25:22 PM
|
right. As individuals property owners are low on the totem pole and almost insignificant. But there is strength in numbers. As members of a homeowners association or as members of a lake group such as Lake Watch, CALM, or LMRA a property owner has considerably more significance.
The homeowners groups and lake groups on the Black Warrior and Coosa rivers were very involved in the six year relicensing effort that was recently concluded there. Much of their input found its way onto the license application that was sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. If anyone is interested they can find the history of that relicensing project by going to the Southern Company or Alabama Power Company websites.
Lifetime Laker, don't rain on everybody else's parade. If you want to continue to be insignificant do it privately.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The issue here is....
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 2:12:11 PM
|
.... I don't hold myself in any higher regard than the general public. I was fortunate enough to make a good decision several years ago and have reaped the benifits of it. I don't, however, think that just because I own lakefront property that I have any more claim to the lake than ANYBODY ELSE.
I haven't forgotten where I came from. True, the millionaires may have some political clout, on the local level. But fortunately, the decisions regarding the lake are made not by local politicos but federal beuaractrats.
The problem with the "lake groups" is that they don't really have the best interest of the lake in mind, but their own self interests.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lifetime...
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 3:16:51 PM
|
name someone who doesn't have their own self interest as number one.
If the APCo had only it's self interest in mind the lake wouldn't have ANY water in it--hydro is almost free electricity, the feds keep them in line--which is your point. But, Smith lake is down 11' and it's hydro and from what I've seen they've gotten more rain than we have--who's interest let that lake go down that far--sure wasn't the property owners or boaters. Go figure!!
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
That reitterates my point....
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 5:35:32 PM
|
You are right about everyone having their own self interests at heart. I can assure you that there are millionaires on Smith lake also.....lol.
And poor Logan Martin, out of its banks nearly every spring. And Elmer Harris lives there, and he has a dam named after him... Harris Dam... Lake Wedowee. I think he has retired in the past few years, but he is former President of APCO. So I think that if having connections would change the way things are run on any given lake, he would not allow Logan Martin to flood, yet it DOES!! Go figure!!
I just get a little miffed when folks start to look down on other folks. We aren't any better jsut because we have/had enough money and forsight to buy on this lake. As my name implies, I have been coming here all my life. The first 11 years were camping at Wind Creek, and those that camp/picnic there now have as much right to be here as I do. A lot of them have a greater appreciation for the lake than some of us fulltimers, which is evidenced by what they are willing to do to spend a day/week/month here.
Bottom line... the Corps of Engineers thru the Federal Electric Energy Commission will rule the day. Little Ben can buy all the local and state politcos he wants, it want change a thing.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
LifeTime.......
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 7:21:23 PM
|
During the time I've been on the forum I've heard a lot of people bad mouth the Russell's, Ben, etc., but I gotta tell ya, if they decided to dump a bunch of property to developers all users of this lake are screwed. They have been extremely responsible with their developments and the restraint they show for not overdeveloping. Some of the comments are envy or jealousy I'm sure, but I don't care if they make a billion bucks--just do it responsibly and we're all better off.
|
| Name: |
BigFoot
-
|
|
| Subject: |
LifeTime.......
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 8:16:51 PM
|
Well said, Osms..........I couldn't agree more!
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
LifeTime.......
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 8:36:25 PM
|
I agree. i don't care how much money he makes, or anybody else for that matter. As to how responsible he has been, that could be debated. I am just tired of Russell Lands having the mindset of controling the lake. They don't and never will. He was smart. He bought LOTS of lake property when it was practically worthless. As I have pointed out before, back when he was buying it up, the draw down was 30 feet per year and this was an undesirable lake by most standards. Now, if what I have read and heard is true, he is opposed to a lesser drawdown because he owns most of the deep water property. I don't know and don't care what his opinion is.
You seem to think that 'dumping' a lot of property would screw us all. How? By stopping the 25% per year increases? If that is the only reason you are here then you are here for the wrong reasons anyway. It has been nice for me to see my net worth grow, but I am here for a love of lake life and this lake in particular. Most of my favorite memories in life relate to this lake.
I am not 'bashing' anyone, nor am I jealous or envious. I just love the lake and have not forgotten where I came from, which is a hard working blue collar family.
|
| Name: |
Osms
-
|
|
| Subject: |
LifeTime......dumping.
|
|
Date:
|
8/14/2006 8:47:03 PM
|
Take a look at Blue Creek. That may be the only part of the lake never controlled by Russell or APCO--see what you get. I'm not talking about appreciation of land; I'm talking about enjoyable use of the lake, when I talk about responsible development.
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Back to being incorrect
|
|
Date:
|
8/15/2006 8:11:18 AM
|
Lifetime Laker, you have been poorly informed by the people you know, what you've read, and what you've heard. Ben Russell is NOT opposed to a lesser drawdown. The Lake Martin Resource Association (LMRA) is on record for supporting a lesser winter drawdown. Who do you think founded and remains the lead dog at LMRA?
I'm sure that you are a good guy and well-intentioned but it serves no useful purpose for you to repeat hearsay. By no means are you the only person on this forum or on this lake who does so. It rankles me whenever I hear the uninformed and misinformed unintentionally spread misinformation.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And if Carnac says it....
|
|
Date:
|
8/15/2006 8:42:46 AM
|
... it is the same as coming from the 'burning bush'.
I quote myself--
"Now, if what I have read and heard is true, he is opposed to a lesser drawdown because he owns most of the deep water property. I don't know and don't care what his opinion is."
How is that spreading misinformation? Have you looked up the meaning of the word 'IF' lately?
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not from the burning bush
|
|
Date:
|
8/15/2006 9:12:16 AM
|
but from a formal presentation at which I was present. It doesn't matter that you said "if". What sticks in the minds of the viewers is not that two letter word but the gist of the information that follows "if". And it's like the attorney who says something while the jury is seated. When the judge says "the jury will disregard" the damage remains.
Exactly what are you accomplishing when you suggest that people not get involved because it really doesn't matter (in your closed mind) what they say? You must be a Borg. Their mantra, "Resistance is futile".
|
| Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/16/2006 6:16:07 AM
|
Excuse me, but does anybody remember the orginal question? Could it be that the draw-down is good for the ecology of the lake?
|
| Name: |
Carnac
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Your contact re ecology
|
|
Date:
|
8/16/2006 8:23:47 AM
|
is Dick Bronson of Lake Martin Lake Watch. He is in the phone book (Dadeville section). All that you'll get here is a wide array of opinions. By the way, Lake Watch is also in favor of a lesser winter drawdown so you can safely assume that Dick has come to an informed decision.
|
| Name: |
SandyCreekman
-
|
|
| Subject: |
agree with you 100%***
|
|
Date:
|
8/16/2006 6:52:31 PM
|
nm
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The drawdown has ONE...
|
|
Date:
|
8/17/2006 1:48:15 PM
|
...reason for being. That is FLOOD CONTORL in the spring.
|
| Name: |
Feb
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lake Level
|
|
Date:
|
8/17/2006 10:19:28 PM
|
I can not intelligently debate the issue since I yet to enjoy the pleasure of the Lake during the low tide so to speak. I do know control of the water level probably prevents a lot of us from having to pay flood insurance. I also know a lot of property owners who prefer the water drop to facilitate installation, maintenance and repairs to structures like docks, seawalls and boat houses. There are also those who like to clear and clean the exposed bottom of normally submerged objects for safer and more enjoyable summer swimming and play area for kids and adults.
|
|
New Post
Search
Logan Martin Lake Topics Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Logan Martin Lake
Login
|
Home
