Save Lake LBJ gathers support
An anti-dredging group, Save Lake LBJ, has amassed 3,774 signatures as of Tuesday, Dec. 15, on a Change.org petition that voices their opposition to a sand dredging operation in Kingsland near the Comanche Rancheria subdivision.
The group fears that dredging would disrupt a fish habitat, mar the landscape, and affect water and air quality, and that trucks hauling sand and other materials would overburden local roads and make for hazardous driving conditions.
“It would destroy, absolutely destroy, the beauty and the fishing and the recreation around Kingsland and probably downriver and well into the body of Lake LBJ because of what’s being proposed,” said Save Lake LBJ spokesman Virgil Yanta. “This is a residential area. It’s next to gorgeous and pristine Hill Country ranch land.”
The semi-retired attorney and Kingland resident lives near the proposed operation but notes its impact would go far beyond the immediate area.
“The committee wants to educate and inform the landowners, residents, and (Llano County) commissioners and visitors in and around Lake LBJ just what a detriment this operation would be,” he said.
The proposed plant at County Road 309 near the Comanche Rancheria subdivision would move 100-120 truckloads of material per day on the rural road before taking Texas 71 into Llano. The operation would draw an estimated 425 tons of sand an hour out of the lake.
“Hundreds of trucks, big huge dump trucks in and out every day, turning into the ranch property to pick up the sand,” Yanta said. “(Residents) would not enjoy the noise, the stench of the big diesel engines operating the conveyor belts and processing equipments, because it’s going to be run by huge machinery that’s run by great big diesel engines. Just a cacophony all day long of big trucks.”
Collier Materials Vice President Kevin Collier has in the past said that the plant will be quieter and less dusty than the previously proposed Sandy Creek operation because it will use conveyor belts to transport materials from the river rather than driving trucks into the creek.
“There’s obviously a trade-off between landowners’ rights and the rights of everybody else,” Yanta said. “The problem is, if we lose sight of equanimity and just rubber stamp applications, you end up permanently scarring the earth and ruining the environment for the short-term gain of a few. So, where do we draw the line?”
6 thoughts on “Save Lake LBJ gathers support”
Just another “Not in my back yard” argument. Typical in today’s keyboard cowboy culture.
Come dredge Lake Marble Falls please! The floods have dropped excessive sediment making it very dangerous for recreational boaters.
Sediment in a creek around a lake is nothing new. Sediment having to be dredged out of a cove on the main lake takes place all the time unless you want to start growing an aquatic weed garden. That’s just another expense of living on a lake. So this idea that this operator is going to do anything but make a very small dent is hard to believe.
The main purpose of Lake LBJ is flood control but it has turned into one of the most economically productive recreational lakes in the state and Kingsland is just starting to enjoy some of that pie. In fact, the area around the proposed site is a prime spot to continue this growth trend. Due to the unique features of proximity to large population centers, natural beauty and lake level characteristics Lake LBJ is not “just another lake”.
With that in mind, I think I would encourage this operator to look elsewhere because to me, they just haven’t make any arguments that really hold sand.
(Nearly 20 year lake resident)
The problem with these Change.org petitions is anybody can sign them. 10 locals can sign and 1000 from washington, california etc can sign. How many signatures are from those who live nearby?
Obviously you don’t live near the area where this atrocity may occur! I do and it will affect my health, including my breathing!
Good lord, another NIMBY knee jerk reaction. Why not get the accumulated sediment OUT of the creek? Would the residents rather someone else put up with “huge diesel engines” running as long as it doesn’t disturb THEM? Either we start dredging lakes or we build more lakes. How will that upset the allmighty residents?
Comments are closed.