I said that Hydrilla made a bass lake out of Amistad and it may have helped a others. The point I was making was that these lakes have the surface area and depth to handle this plant. I fish the hydrilla every time I go out there. But if Hydrilla got in a shallow small lake it would sock it in in no time. Hydrilla used to be in the Guadalupe River chain lakes below Canyon Lake. TPWD spent thousands spraying and treating and now it is all but gone. Watch the posts on here about some of the fish people are catching from Dunlap and McQueeney. It is possible to have nice fishing without having Hydrilla.

As far as Hydrilla dying off causing a DO problem, its a proven fact. Before you go saying its BS you should do your research. During the day oxygen is absorbed into water by several factors and one is photosynthises but of Phytoplankton not Hydrilla. And Phytoplankton does not photosynthize the way that normal plants do but I won't try to explain all that now. The point was that when it dies off it decays. Now lets just say that Hydrilla did add a significant amount of oxygen to the water; how much photosynthesizing would a dead plant do? 0. How much oxygen could a dead plant contribute? 0. The process of decay uses oxygen. Oxygen is used all night long by almost every life form in the water. DO is at its lowest levels in the early morning hours, just before the sun rises and photosynthesis begins. If a large mat of Hydrilla were decaying and that process was using oxygen on top of the normal amount required by the rest of the life forms in the water then the DO is over used and therefore there is not enough for everything. To put it into a visual that everybody can understand, think of the lake like a field of grass. Put 10 cows on 100 acres of grass and more than likely they will do fine. But since we are all so greedy and our cows are doing so great why not add 20 or so more cows, right? Now we have over taxed our field and we are going to have to do something for it. We either water and fertilize our grass or we get rid of some cows. If we don't they will starve and die and nature will regulate it for us. Cows will die off till the herd is at a number that the field can maintain. This anology works for dissolve oxygen in the water or for the forage base available, take your pick. The fact is that Hydrilla is not a problem in Amistad or Choke and it may never get that way. It was a problem in the Guadalupe chain lakes so now its gone. Who here can remember going past the 99 bridge on Choke in 2007. I was there in August 2007 and the only paths through there was the river channel. Now it wasn't Hydrilla and it wasn't giant salvania but what ever it was it was so thick a boat would not go through it and fishing there was limited to the edges of the river channel. Look at Caddo, giant salvania wasn't a problem there either until it was.

The problem with bass fishermen is that they always think that because they can go out and catch a limit of 5#ers they know what is best for the lake. Well you don't; leave that to TPWD. They are the ones with the degrees, they are the ones gathering the data, they are the ones that know best. And they have other interests (HOA's, skiers, etc) to think about other than just fishermen. Or maybe all you fishermen would like to start paying all the taxes, property tax, and TPWD salaries so that they would just see to your interests all of the time.

[quote=hiodon Left unchecked, hydrilla can mat up a lake much like giant salvinia. [/quote]


There is no way anyone should put hydrilla in the same sentence with giant salvinia. Salvinia has no benefit in any way to anything. Compared to Salvinia, hydrilla grows at a snails pace. Even with dense mats of hydrilla there are signs of life everywhere. I have had alot of experience with both and their effects are in no way related. Hydrilla could choke out a small shallow lake but the chances are slim on most bodies of water in the State. I used to fish alot on Lake Pinkston, a small lake that had alot of hydrilla coverage. There was no chance of complete coverage due to deep water close to the dam area. This lake had little recreational value besides fishing. Carp were introduced and the hydrilla and fishing suffered.

My lake is almost completely drained because of Giant Sylvania, and we�ve been told there is no set time that it might be refilled. It could be 1 or 2 years maybe more? This lake also has Hydrilla, and Gator Grass, which to be honest was never a problem. It did make for good fishing, but cold winters like this last one really knock it back .

I agree that giant salvania and hydrilla are two different monsters, but WHEN LEFT UNCHECKED, they both result in the lake being covered up. The lake being covered up results in decreased quality of the LMB population, oxygen sags that hurt fish communities, and limited boat access.

Regardless of the plant species that has taken over a lake, the end result will be the same.

Is Hydrilla the main grass in Fork? What are some other predominant grass species in that lake? just curious.

I see the point your trying to make but I still have alot issues with it. There are many lakes where hydrilla will never have a negative effect due to their size, water fluctuations and other factors even if left unchecked. Giant Salvinia has a negative impact on every body of water that it infects. It is way more effective than hydrilla at spreading and removing oxygen from the water. There is no denying that on many lakes, hydrilla has a positive impact on the fishery.


Toledo Bend has both Giant Salvinia and hydrilla.

First we go to matted hydrilla that has covered the part of a large cove. An angler is back there punching through the matted grass to the open water underneath attempting to trigger one of the many bass untilizing the mat for shade and concealment. If you grab a big wad of the matted grass you will see tons of small organisms that are living in the hydrilla. There are several ducks feeding on the invertebrates that live in the matted grass.

Further back in the cove Giant Salvinia has covered the creek that feeds into the lake and most of the back end of the cove. There are no signs of life whatsoever. The water has a dark lifeless tint. Ducks fly over it thinking it is dry ground, and even if they did stop there is nothing for them to eat. No fish, no turtles, nothing.

The two have nothing in common except they are listed together on some list. To include both of them in the same sentence and refer to both them as monsters really strikes a nerve with me. To lump them together way over estimates the negatives of hydrilla and under estimates the damage Giant Salvinia can do.

Plain and simple in the right lakes hydrilla is very beneficial ... very !


Giant salvinia is not, never, ever beneficial! In a shallow lake I could see hydrilla making water unfishable and a decrease in some marine life through its sheer density. But in most Texas waters it is a benefit to LMB populations ... period. That is because it is naturally controlled by water depth, water level fluctuations, and cold weather. I think here in E. Texas even clarity limits growth in many waters. Remember , TPWD says 40% coverage is optimal for LMB and the above Fla. study cites a 30% number. I'm pretty sure that it is rare that is exceeded on most Texas waters.


BTW .... I do pay TPWD salaries and pay taxes on many lakes (Corps lakes for example). Jusy saying!

Ray Roberts Hydrilla what fond memories !!!

I appreciate what you're saying, but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Hydrilla has yet to rear its ugly head in Texas and I suspect it's partly because of the control mechanisms that TPWD has implemented in addition to the factors you mentioned. Florida, on the other hand, has seen what hydrilla can do to a lake. After seeing those effects, they pioneered hydrilla management that filtered over to Texas. Fortunately, Texas didn't have to learn the hard way like Florida did.

On the giant salvinia front, Texas is getting in on the ground floor. Because of previous issues with other dominant, invasive aquatic plants (i.e. hydrilla), Texas is taking a proactive approach to knocking back giant salvinia. The hope is that giant salvinia won't ruin fisheries like hydrilla did in Florida and can in certain Texas impoundments.

Any yes, I agree that hydrilla in limited quantities is good for bass fishing and in no way is giant salvinia good

Yep, was thinking just the other day about some of the "good old days" of working Pop-R's over the edge of R-Bob's hydrilla at first light...

I guess Ill chime in on this... First I think that TPWD is doing a good job in the state but from what I've heard, most of the hydrilla being killed is done by the HOA and also by marina owners. As far as the hydrilla management being compared to Florida, in my opinion you really cant compare Florida lakes to Texas lakes. I have not been on Florida lakes but from what I understand they are mostly shallow bowl shaped lakes with very little structure which make great conditions for hydrilla. I think the majority of Texas lakes have enough structure and deep water to prevent hydrilla from reaching the 30-40%. Of all of the top lakes in Texas, only one does not have hydrilla.(falcon) Now, I dont know what TPWD does as far as hydrilla control in lakes such as Amistad, Ivie, Rayburn, Fork, etc. but all of those lakes seem to thrive. I guess my opinion on the whole thing if that you cannot regulate Texas lakes based on what has happend to Florida lakes. Thats like comparing apples to oranges.

And as far as the paying taxes comment that was made... That is the most rediculous remark made on here. We DO "paying all the taxes, property tax, and TPWD salaries". If you can tell me otherwise please do. I'm sure all of us "bass fishermen" would like a tax return from paying the taxes you said we dont pay.

Sam Rayburn has had a LOT of hydrilla in it for as long as I've been fishing...and it has never "taken over". I'll be down there this weekend, in fact, and I don't anticipate having any problem launching my boat or navigating the lake.

Nacogdoches has usually contained a lot of hydrilla, but it has never prevented it from being one of the most heavily used lakes for recreational boaters and jet fleas.

Sandlin..hydrilla. Not choked out or "taken over". Palestine has had hydrilla on the north end for years, but somehow it has never spread to the mid-lake area or south.

Don't believe everything you read or hear, or at least consider whether the source has a dog in the fight.

Huh? What lakes do you fish? We've been fishing hydrilla in East Texas for decades.

Someone asked the question earlier and I'll ask it again. We keep hearing these dire stories of hydrilla decimating fish populations because of depleted oxygen levels, but after DECADES of hydrilla presence in our waters can someone please point out a TEXAS public lake or reservoir...one at least 500 acres in size, and not someone's farm pond...and not a lake in Florida or somewhere else six states away...in which a fish kill can be attributed to excessive hydrilla presence?

Just one?

There's not much I can say that I haven't already. Everyone has opinions and everyone has opinions that they think are facts. I tend to put my trust in the experts and others think they are the experts. The fact of the matter is that hydrilla is here to stay, whether you (or I) like it or not. I trust that TPWD will control it when needed and we will continue to have the best bass fishing in the country.

My point is that hydrilla has been well managed and controlled in Texas, hence it hasn't raised its ugly head (wrecked a fishery). I don't believe there have been any lakes in Texas that have been wrecked because of hydrilla. However, I think that is because of the control measures that have been put in place. All I'm trying to say with all of my above posts is that hydrilla control is a good thing in my book.