Since Eagle Mountain Lake was at 'full pool' level?
Still 6' low, sure hope it continues to fill.........
I guess Bridgeport has not been full in years either.. ???
God Bless

Here you go bud.... Looks like 2012

Bridgeport looks like around 2010 but it never stays there for long


Eagle Mt Water Level History

Hard to read...LOL. I thought it was something like 2002.... Thanks for the link Gary
Lord it's going to be a longgggggggggggggg time before both EM and Bridgeport 'ever' fill to full pool, IMO
God Bless

There is an informative article on the front page of the Star Telegram today regarding lake levels concluding, in general, that lakes east of I-35 are in good shape, those to the west are still in trouble.

But, old guys and/or historians will likely remember that several then "newly" impounded lakes were given expectation dates regarding when they'd fill up based on average rain patterns and watershed data. The one that sticks in my mind is Lake Arlington where the length of time to fill up was calculated to be in the multiple year range; instead, it filled up in 6 months after some heavy rain events. And, I remember touring Joe Pool with the man who was responsible for its construction and I seem to recall that it filled much quicker than anticipated. There are several other examples.

So, it can happen very fast. The paper quoted one man as saying that sometimes hurricane rain events blowing up from the Texas Coast can drop a lot of sudden water.

*** Factoid Quiz - I have seen this for two lakes, the numbers vary a bit, but here generally in North Texas, do you know how much water, in inches, is expected to be lost owing to evaporation?

Brad

There is a reason why the landscape turns to cactus and mesquite trees when you get west of 35. Complaining about drought in a desert?

Not asking about water for lakes for Amarillo....but areas around Ft Worth. These are NOT desert areas
Not trying to be 'sharp' with you, just asking about areas around me (Ft Worth) that usually have plenty of water.
God Bless

What is going on with Bridgeport? I've been watching the lake levels site for the last several months and it looks like Bridgeport never goes up no matter how much rain falls in North Central Texas. Are they drawing it down or intentionally keeping it low?

The Panhandle is getting hammered with heavy rain, at least heavy for them. They're under flash flood warnings. If that system moves east the Metroplex and areas north and west could get another good soaker between now and tomorrow. With the creeks already flowing another heavy rain might top off some of the lakes that aren't already full.

I'm hoping and praying for you on Eagle Mountain, Lee.

I thought Bridgeport was let go low for maintenance,..i thought once I read it was even being drained for that.

No one took the "bait" on my quiz but in reviewing data for two east Texas lakes, Lake Athens and a small private lake, Callender, the expected annual loss to evaporation is between 49 and 54 inches. I can't recall which number belongs to which lake. To this, one would add the amount drawn out of the lakes for water supply, then on the input side you look at expected annual rain, watershed, and creek/river input.

So, around the Canton/Tyler/Athens area, the annual rain fall is around 43" per year, so lakes almost recover all evaporation from rainfall alone. Add to that water from springs, rivers and creeks and watershed and you can see why east Texas lakes fill up quicker, suffer less drought issues.

I believe I heard Honey Hole's Bill Wilcox mention that at least one east Texas lake he fished on a show actually pulled the lake down 3 or so feet in anticipation of spring rain events.


In Fort Worth, we have about, on average, 10" less rainfall. So, we have large deficits to overcome just to make up for evaporation. Fort Worth draws water from Richland Chambers and Cedar Creek lakes to make up for water shortages.

I think one of the reason some of our Fort Worth and more western lakes are filling up, Lake Arlington comes to mind, is we have so much development compared to east Texas, all of that concrete eliminates water wicking up in the soils before it runs off in the watershed into the reservoirs.

Palo Pinto Lake at around 12% full pool last I looked? I recall reading that it is essentially all watershed, not fed by any rivers or creeks of any size. I won't bother to look up its annual rainfall but my guess is it is at least 5" less than Fort Worth as you move out in the direction of Abilene. If it is 29" then it has to make up at least 21", likely more because it is drier and hotter out there, and it gets no help from a river system. Just watershed more or less.

Tbat is a recipe for disaster.

Why in the world we can build pipelines for oil to move it all around the country and not major water lines, I don't know. There are areas, for example around the Mississippi River that flood almost every year at great expense to everyone. It would seem to me they could also "draw" their water down in front of spring floods and make room for the new water, sell it to Texas and other more arid areas.

Brad

The water pipeline has been brought up many times, the main reasons i can figure are

A) Water is not as profitable as Oil
B) The size needed

Thinking along those lines, you would need MASSIVE pipelines and pumps to make a dent in a Mississippi flood. And that would be a great expense.

The people that need to look at that expense should be FEMA and insurance agencies. Instead of looking at as a "Profit", they should look at it as a way to lessen "Loss", but know one is going to do that unfortunately,

bingo

Good points, for sure. But, watch the dynamics change if California (and Texas) don't catch a break very soon.

This would certainly fall under into a "public works" category.

I wonder if as in a siphon, if all of the air was out of the pipes, that is, smaller pumps topping off the lines, that the water could be moved by gravity?

A Manhattan Project that someone needs to sit down and figure out very soon.

Brad

Lee,

Where I can get details on your infamous Tbend trip?

Like Brad said about the filling rates on new "eastern" lakes. A local guy told me today that in 1961 Lake Tawakoni dam was closed for the first time and they said the massive lake would take 3 years to fill.

He said they had some heavy rain events that year and it was full in one year. The Sabine River runs thru the lake.

Bruce/All,

Just to follow up a bit on the "math" of lake water, this is another reason why there are few, some say no, natural lakes in Texas: evaporation rates exceed rain recharging capacity.

Not so much so in, say, Minnesota for a glaring contrast where natural lakes are abundant.

So, we "impound" lakes by damming up river/tributary systems in geographically desirable locations with good surrounding drainable topographic features for large watersheds to supplement rain. Then, we pray.

If not for dams and the technology to build very large ones and properly manage them, Texas would have a population of about 1/10th what we now have I'd guess.

A large majority of our lakes are really just swollen rivers. Take a look at Lake Granbury for one of many classic examples of rather long stringy lakes, flooded portions of rivers.

Texas will keep building new reservoirs as it grows.

I wonder about California with its political system, fighting over every leading edge progressive issue one can think of all the while drying out. There it sits with a bulging population almost totally parched, doing little about what is an existential threat to the state. Go figure, but off they go with endless referenda, unfunded mandates . . . and green lawns for now. A re-tread governor seems to finally be paying attention. It may be too late for the lawns.

We have way more bass in Texas now than we had just after WW2. More places for them to live.

Brad