Travis Lake

Post Reply
Dauntless
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 5:28 am

Travis Lake

Post by Dauntless »

Anybody have info on how fishing Travis is?
User avatar
Ron Mc
TKF 5000 Club
TKF 5000 Club
Posts: 5675
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:12 pm
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
Contact:

Re: Travis Lake

Post by Ron Mc »

Travis is a big lake, 65 mi long and 271 shoreline miles.
Here's a dozen or so threads on past fishing reports.
SWFinatic
Moderator
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 9:31 am

Re: Travis Lake

Post by SWFinatic »

I haven't fished Travis in a while. I know it's about 21 feet low right now. In the past I go there for catfish in the winter. Right now most of the places I fish only is either dry or has 10 feet of water which means I can see the bottom there on most days.
User avatar
Ron Mc
TKF 5000 Club
TKF 5000 Club
Posts: 5675
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:12 pm
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
Contact:

Re: Travis Lake

Post by Ron Mc »

SAWS and Austin Water need to build a desal plant at Indianola - 20 years ago.
SWFinatic
Moderator
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 9:31 am

Re: Travis Lake

Post by SWFinatic »

Ron Mc wrote:SAWS and Austin Water need to build a desal plant at Indianola - 20 years ago.
SAWS built one I want to say 4 or 5 years ago just south of San Antonio. AW looked into it but since LCRA is an agency of the state and sells water to Austin the desal topic went away fast.
User avatar
Ron Mc
TKF 5000 Club
TKF 5000 Club
Posts: 5675
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:12 pm
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
Contact:

Re: Travis Lake

Post by Ron Mc »

You're correct that SAWS has a brackish desalination plant at Elmendorf
https://sanantonioreport.org/inside-h2o ... ter-plant/
But we're going to find Austin and San Antonio needing a grid of desal from the coast or the next drought will destroy both the rivers and ANWR.
SWFinatic
Moderator
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 9:31 am

Re: Travis Lake

Post by SWFinatic »

Agree
User avatar
impulse
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:08 pm

Re: Travis Lake

Post by impulse »

As an alternative, I'd suggest we question the wisdom of growing a crop that requires 2400 gallons of water per pound, which sells for a little less than dollar on the export market. That's cotton, BTW. But it applies to a lot of the crops we have to irrigate in a climate like Texas. And beef. And... And...

We'd be better off buying the water from the farmers than installing desalination plants to make that same 2400 gallons of water for between $5 and $10. Then let the farmers raise trees or something else that soaks up CO2 (and that they don't need to irrigate). They'd probably make more money, too. Seems like cotton only nets the farmers $22 per acre.

https://www.farmprogress.com/cotton/cot ... 24-billion

Then, to add insult to injury, we export that cotton (and other water intensive commodities) to places like China. We may as well export the water, though that's generally illegal... And for a good reason.

Texas water laws made sense 100+ years ago when food was grown and eaten domestically (most of it- locally). Not so much now that we have multi-nationals that would export their grandmothers if they could get money for them. And not when $$$ development is being held up for lack of water.

Edit: BTW, I got on the site around 15:00 and saw there were only 2 topics with responses today. So I freely admit I'm doing a little trolling... Maybe drum up some friendly controversy.
User avatar
Ron Mc
TKF 5000 Club
TKF 5000 Club
Posts: 5675
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:12 pm
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
Contact:

Re: Travis Lake

Post by Ron Mc »

all well and good, but we have a resource to defend - groundwater and that includes the health of our bays.
Corpus Christi water is trying to build a desal plant - it's already been approved by TCEQ, which includes the bay watershed committee of academic scientists, but sierra club and CCA combined in protest to quash it to litigation.
CCA is shooting themselves in the foot, the rest of us, and more importantly, our rivers and bays.
This isn't esoteric, it's right now - the first positive step to the health of our rivers and bays being held up in court by a conservation organization.
In our capitalist nation, this industry has to get itself off the ground by paying for itself.

Since 2003, Corpus Christi has taken more water from the Nueces River than is needed for the health of the bay system - most of the time, they're taking all of it.
Minimum river discharges for bay health were outlined in EPA 1994 guidelines, which have been studied, agreed and adopted by TCEQ for each Texas watershed.
Corpus is contracted to keep taking water from the Nueces until 2040 - the Nueces is their sole source of water. Drive by Labonte Park and look at the Nueces River without flowing water.

In 1955, the Guadalupe river stopped at Spring Branch (25 miles above Canyon Lake where Trinity aquifer takes water from the river) - until the new millennium, that was the first time on historic record, the 1955 drought of record.
From 2005 to 2015, the Guadalupe stopped there in 7 of those years - these years did not constitute a new drought of record. The Guadalupe and ANWR bay health is next to dry up.
The Colorado and Lavaca Bay health will follow.

If you want to see where it will end up, study the mouth of the western Colorado River in the Gulf of California - once the largest mangrove estuary on Earth - it died in our lifetimes from southern CA taking their water from the Colorado.
Post Reply