Dunlap update from WCID...vibration identified in gate 2, need to remove pin and possibly several bearings which are very speciliazed parts. They will need to be removed, replaced, then retested...completion date unknown at this time

What are we talking here; 3 months and a million dollars?

There is a public ramp under IH 35 owned by the state. For what I have heard there are no plans to shut it down. I have fished all of the river lakes a lot over the years and hopefully will continue fishing them in years to come.

Parts are supposed to be on site today or Friday depending on who you listen to. Stop logs may go in for gate 2 to raise water level if they can't fix (being discussed now).

Just to be clear, the residents along the lake are paying for 100% of the dam replacement. No tax dollars are being used (which is BS).

I agree. I know several people who live along Placid, and the property owners are footing the bill. Makes the fact that McQueeney is "private" a bit more understandable. I would hate to see the same thing happen to Placid and/or Meadow Lake. Granted, they get the majority of the benefit, but still, free public access to something they literally paid for has to be a bit frustrating.

Apparently there isn't much appetite in state government to help out because these waterways are considered "recreational". GBRA is in no position to help either.

Just a totally crappy situation all the way down the Guadalupe.

We are all getting hosed. A 30+ year old can buy a $100k plus wake boat and run a 4' wake against my dock, my bulkhead, and now my dam for FREE. Don't misunderstand, I don't want Dunlap private but we do need the 35 ramp as a pay ramp for the dam. The lake wouldn't even be there if the residents didn't pay for it.

Placid folks are really getting shafted bad. Their tax rate can be $.80 to $1.07 per hundred just for the dam. That means a $700,000 home, which isn't much on lakefront, would cost an additional $7,490 per year over what they are already paying in property and school tax. It is really bad. I think it will effect home values on that lake quickly if it hasn't already.

[quote}

We are all getting hosed. A 30+ year old can buy a $100k plus wake boat and run a 4' wake against my dock, my bulkhead, and now my dam for FREE. Don't misunderstand, I don't want Dunlap private but we do need the 35 ramp as a pay ramp for the dam. The lake wouldn't even be there if the residents didn't pay for it.

Placid folks are really getting shafted bad. Their tax rate can be $.80 to $1.07 per hundred just for the dam. That means a $700,000 home, which isn't much on lakefront, would cost an additional $7,490 per year over what they are already paying in property and school tax. It is really bad. I think it will effect home values on that lake quickly if it hasn't already.
[/quote]


And this is a good example of why I question if there will be any "public" ramps. A county judge can order the closure of the IH-35 ramp.

Yup, the wake boats piss me off something fierce. And I don't even own property on the lake. On Placid they were not supposed to be allowed to run them with ballasts full, making wake, but there's no one to enforce that other than property owners shaking their fists and yelling from the shoreline (I floated some other ideas to friends on the lake, but those would likely land someone in jail...) Aside from the obvious damage they cause to bulkheads and docks, they're dangerous on those bodies of water IMO, and they create a potentially dangerous environment for other boaters.

I definitely think there needs to be a fee charged at ramp access. But it's not likely to even make a dent to cover the costs. You'd have to charge A LOT for it to make much difference IMO. and then you'd need to have staffed facilities to ensure compliance. Or you'd have a "pay station", but then you'd need someone to enforce that as well. That being said, it might be nice if the I-10 ramp was updated a bit, and some kind of access control was added; it can get a little "seedy" down there.

Really, the municipalities (that benefit from the increased tax base of property on the lakes) need to play a bigger role in funding this, but they just won't.

Thinking about this a little more, I wonder if the water control districts could "take over" the ramps? They could charge an annual "membership", collect ramp fees, etc. Something like the ramps on Calaveras? (Never been there, but would like to go)

There's probably very little appetite for that, at least in the short-term. They put forth a TON of effort just creating them to fix the dams, but I wonder if this could be something to consider for the longer term?

On Meadow, there's really only 2 "public" access points, one charges a membership, and the other charges $5 basically on the "honor system". I'm quite certain none of that money goes to the Meadow Lake's WCID ... yet. At least not directly.

The ramps under interstates are mandated by federal law. I believe that any navigable waterway under an interstate must have a ramp installed when the interstate is built. After that, the Texas Highway Department takes ownership. It turns into challenges trying to get so many parties to work together to get something done.

I highly doubt a county judge can close a ramp considering they are federally mandated.

I did not know that. Yeah, getting multiple agencies to work together for the common good is worse than pulling teeth.

I do think though, with a little creativity, additional funding streams could be found. But I can tell you as a volunteer for several different organizations, it's finding the people to make it happen that is the problem.

Guadalupe County judge closed the ramp under IH-10 in 2020.

I would love to read that federal mandate for boat ramps.
There is no ramp under IH-10 at Luling. In fact you have to follow IH-10 all the way to Lost River, east of Baytown before you will find a ramp on any of the rivers. Oh, sorry. The county closed the ramp on the Trinity. So I guess you have to go to Louisana to find a ramp on a river.

Please show me that statute for boat ramps under interstate bridges. You really need to check your facts.

Wow. I don't have to show you or check anything just because you are ready to argue. I really don't care if a county judge has the power or not. If they could, I doubt one would due to the political consequences of the action. It must be in your mind that a mystery county judge is even considering this. No one has even brought up attempting to make Dunlap private or closing the ramp. I think you are trying to pick a fight over nothing (or something you are imagining). Good luck with that. Troll away, I'm not biting.

On another note, the replacement parts got to the dam today and will be installed on Monday. They will then test the gates and hopefully raise them.