Water management Plans for the City of Austin residents and surrounding cities (Lago Vista: neighborhood)

[Schnaiy]

In another thread, a link to the DELTA group was posted - they have some interesting information, particularly in respect for the need for a water management plan; mandatory water conservation etc.

I recall within the last year, that LCRA had increased the daily water uptake to provide farmers in the West of Texas (?) with much more water during the drought (I hesitate to say it was a huge increase of I think an extra half million gallons per day). Farmers do need water for their crops, or they fail.

But now due to the continuing drought, millions of households face future water supply problems. How can the system be improved for the long term. It's certainly getting to a breaking point. Then there's the question about maintaining not only the quantity but the quality of water.

The DELTA group are encouraging people to lobby for a water management plan that will sustain future needs (I do not know if this group represents any special group interests - it is not declared on their website, but I didn't see any objection to farmers being supplied with water there was emphasis on education for residential use but I think more water is probably drawn from Lake Travis for commercial purposes. If I'm correct about that (anyone know for sure?) then why are commercial interests not being asked to find other ways to irrigate their land and alternative sources rather than overburdening Lake Travis. Thoughts anyone?

[love roses]

We don't get our water from Lake Travis (Just thought I'd mention that since I'm in a surrounding town). But, we are on restrictions to a degree, but no tighter than it's ever been since we've been here. I've often wondered the same thing though. That was a problem in Denver too. They had a really bad drought for a while when we we were there, and most people had to stop watering but City Park and many of the Golf Courses always had the sprinklers running.

[Schnaiy]

LoveRoses I know our City of Lago Vista uses effluent waste in the sprinkler system on the city owned golf course - it solved an environmental problem for them how to dispose of the city effluent. I thought it was a good idea and an example of recycling.

[CptnRn]

I came across that DELTA group website also, and suspect that businesses who benefit directly from recreation activities on the lake are behind it.

It is hard to appreciate it for anyone who has not seen the lakes get this low before, but this happens from time to time and it really is just temporary thing. And Lake Travis is currently only at its third lowest all time elevation. It has been worse on two previous occasions and it recovered. There is normally far more water in the reservoirs then we need. We are in the second year of a bad drought, but there is no reason to think this will continue or that we can expect a long term shortage of water in the Colorado River Basin.

LCRA: Energy. Water. Community Services

Lake Travis is now at its third-lowest all-time elevation, the result of an almost two-year severe drought that has produced record hot temperatures and restricted rain and inflows into the Highland Lakes.

Even so, LCRA officials say the Highland Lakes chain still has enough water to meet the critical needs of its municipal, power generation, and industrial customers if there is a repeat of the Drought of Record of the 1940s and ´50s.

Austin's biggest worry regarding its water supply is lack of water treatment capacity. The existing water treatment plants are approaching the end of their useful lifes, and refurbishing one or both of them will require shutting down substantial parts of those plants, with no alternative water supplies available.

Discussion - and Austin's thirst - continues (http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/08/10/0810wtp4_edit.html - broken link)

When the new plant was first proposed, three water treatment plants were supplying Austin water customers. Since then, one of the plants has been decommissioned, leaving the Ullrich plant (built in 1969 and expanded three times since) and the Davis plant (built in 1954 and expanded three times since) to meet demand.

Estimates of the life span of a water plant vary, but 50 years is a reasonable gauge. That means deciding on whether to keep the Ullrich and Davis plants pumping are worth the costs of maintenance and repair.

Even if conservation efforts obviate the need for Water Treatment Plant No. 4, an Austin council would face a decision on replacing or significantly upgrading one or both of the aging facilities — and pretty quickly.

We are going to have to build a new plant and refurbish one or both of the existing plants in the foreseeable future, or we won't have adequate water supplies. There is absolutely no way that we can conserve enough water to accommodate the growth in the area. We would have to do something drastic like forbid all water use for landscape watering and swimming pools before we could come anywhere close to that, and it would only be for a short period of time.

[Schnaiy]

CaptnRn - thanks for the news updates. I can't reveal my source, but it is from one who knows the water quality is a current problem - I'm pretty sure the public can request public disclosure of current water quality testing (you may be horrified to find out the results)! Somewhere on another thread last week, people were asking about Austin water. Best advice - filter your water!

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Schnaiy

In another thread, a link to the DELTA group was posted - they have some interesting information, particularly in respect for the need for a water management plan; mandatory water conservation etc.

I recall within the last year, that LCRA had increased the daily water uptake to provide farmers in the West of Texas (?) with much more water during the drought (I hesitate to say it was a huge increase of I think an extra half million gallons per day). Farmers do need water for their crops, or they fail.

But now due to the continuing drought, millions of households face future water supply problems. How can the system be improved for the long term. It's certainly getting to a breaking point. Then there's the question about maintaining not only the quantity but the quality of water.

The DELTA group are encouraging people to lobby for a water management plan that will sustain future needs (I do not know if this group represents any special group interests - it is not declared on their website, but I didn't see any objection to farmers being supplied with water there was emphasis on education for residential use but I think more water is probably drawn from Lake Travis for commercial purposes. If I'm correct about that (anyone know for sure?) then why are commercial interests not being asked to find other ways to irrigate their land and alternative sources rather than overburdening Lake Travis. Thoughts anyone?

They basically represent people who live on the lake. Primarily those who are impacted by the new water treatment plant that will put pipes through their neighborhood.